Skip to content

Research prompt

Title
Text-to-symbolic-to-audio music system: Udio-style UX with a Magenta-style core

1. Context and assumption

Assume an Udio-like product is secretly built on a Magenta-like symbolic core:

  • Text prompts and optional audio references are mapped to latent semantics.
  • A symbolic composition module (Magenta-style) generates multi-track MIDI.
  • A bank of virtual instruments and production modules renders this MIDI into full audio tracks.

Study this architecture as if you were designing it from scratch.

2. Objectives

  1. Define how a text-to-symbolic-to-audio pipeline would work end to end.
  2. Compare this pipeline against pure audio-generation systems.
  3. Identify where symbolic control provides capabilities that Udio-style systems currently lack.
  4. Produce 1–3 detailed, buildable architectural designs.
  5. Highlight riskiest assumptions and first experiments before any large build.

3. Scope and constraints

  • Focus on symbolic → audio composition for full tracks (not just loops).
  • Target user types:
  • Non-musicians using text prompts only.
  • Musicians / producers who can provide MIDI, stems, or motifs (e.g., Stillith).
  • All proposed components (models, datasets, tools) must be compatible with commercial use.
  • Architectural drawings and documentation must not depend on non-commercial-only assets or licenses.

4. Research questions

4.1 Representation and conditioning

  1. What symbolic representations best bridge text prompts and Magenta-style models?
  2. Notes, chords, sections, tempo maps, meter, structure graphs.
  3. How can text and optional audio references be encoded into control signals for:
  4. Melody, harmony, rhythm, groove, form, orchestration.
  5. How should style be represented?
  6. Genre tags, mood embeddings, reference-track embeddings, or learned “style codes.”

4.2 Symbolic composition module (Magenta-like core)

  1. How would Magenta-style models (RNN/Transformer/VAE) be composed into a multi-track system?
  2. Separate models per role (melody, harmony, drums, bass, textures)?
  3. Or a single multi-track model with role tokens?
  4. How do continuation, interpolation, and variation work under text conditioning?
  5. Text + seed MIDI → continuation.
  6. Two text+MIDI states → structural interpolation.
  7. How to enforce global structure?
  8. Intro/verse/chorus/bridge labeling.
  9. Section-level constraints (energy curves, density, register).

4.3 Instrument and production layer

  1. What protocol maps symbolic output to virtual instruments?
  2. MIDI, control change, articulation tags, higher-level “performance directives”.
  3. How does the production layer add:
  4. Timbre selection, sound design, FX chains, spatialization, mixing?
  5. Should the production layer be:
  6. Classical synth/sampler + rule-based mixing,
  7. Audio-diffusion conditioned on symbolic “score”,
  8. Or a hybrid (symbolic → rough audio → refinement model)?
  9. How does latency impact feasibility for:
  10. Offline generation of tracks,
  11. Near-real-time auditioning or live performance?

4.4 UX and controllability

  1. How can symbolic levers be exposed without overwhelming non-musicians?
  2. Prompt-language patterns (“slow ¾, sparse piano, no drums”).
  3. Simple sliders/toggles for structure (length, complexity, repetition).
  4. What advanced controls can be exposed to power users?
  5. Upload MIDI motifs.
  6. Lock/unlock specific sections or parts.
  7. Regenerate only drums, only harmony, etc.
  8. How do edits propagate?
  9. User edits a bar in MIDI. How does the system recompute the rest without destroying good material?
  10. Integration with existing tools:
  11. DAW workflows (export MIDI, stems, full mix).
  12. Live tools (loopers, controllers).

4.5 Data, training, and personalization

  1. What datasets are needed for:
  2. Symbolic composition (MIDI / scores).
  3. Style conditioning (aligned text–music pairs).
  4. Production modeling (audio with symbolic metadata).
  5. How to ensure all datasets and pretrained models are compatible with commercial exploitation?
  6. Licensing constraints, provenance tracking, dataset curation criteria.
  7. How can the system learn from a specific artist’s catalog (e.g., Stillith) without overfitting or copying?
  8. Style adaptation, embedding fine-tuning, or per-user style layers.

4.6 Evaluation

  1. What metrics measure success at each layer?
  2. Symbolic quality: tonal consistency, phrase structure, repetition balance.
  3. Audio quality: fidelity, mix balance, absence of artifacts.
  4. UX: perceived control, satisfaction, time-to-usable-track.
  5. How to run human evaluations that distinguish:
  6. “Nice audio” vs “musically coherent and controllable”?
  7. What benchmarks or comparison baselines against existing tools (pure Udio-style, pure Magenta-style)?
  1. How to design logging, transparency, and opt-out for training on user data?
  2. How to minimize IP risks (melody overlap, plagiarism-like outputs)?
  3. How to document and enforce that architectural designs and suggested components are free of non-commercial-only dependencies, ensuring potential commercial deployment.

4.8 System-level considerations

  1. How does the system scale with:
  2. Concurrent users,
  3. Long-form tracks (5–10 minutes)?
  4. What caching or reuse strategies make “iterate on my track” cheap and fast?
  5. How to version models so that users can reproduce older tracks and avoid silent behavior changes?

5. Methods

  1. Literature and system review
  2. Symbolic music models (Magenta and successors).
  3. Text-conditioned music/audio models.

  4. Hybrid symbolic+audio architectures.

  5. Decomposition and modeling

  6. Decompose into modules:
    • Text/audio encoder
    • Symbolic planner
    • Performance renderer
    • Audio production engine
    • UX/control surface

  7. For each module: identify inputs, outputs, interfaces, and alternatives.

  8. Prototype experiments (paper and small-scale)

  9. Simple text → chord progression + melody → basic synth demo.
  10. Test text-controlled structural patterns (e.g., “ABABCB form”).

  11. Compare symbolic-first vs audio-first pipelines on the same prompt.

  12. User-centric probes

  13. Design hypothetical UX flows for:
    • Non-musician “song in a sentence”.
    • Artist with a motif, wanting multiple variations.
  14. Gather qualitative expectations: control, ownership, repeatability.

6. Mandatory synthesis and deliverables

At the end of the research, you must:

  1. Produce 1–3 end-to-end architectural designs, each including:
  2. High-level block diagrams of the full pipeline, from prompt to final audio.
  3. Clear module boundaries and data flows (text, latent embeddings, symbolic scores, audio).
  4. Indication of where Magenta-like components sit and how they are orchestrated.

  5. Explicit statement that all components and training data are assumed compatible with commercial exploitation (no non-commercial-only dependencies).

  6. For each architecture, list the riskiest assumptions, for example:

  7. “Text can reliably control section-level form through a single embedding.”
  8. “Symbolic → audio conditioning will preserve structure without artifacts.”

  9. “Users will accept limited direct symbolic editing in a text-first UX.”

  10. Define a minimal experiment plan per architecture:

  11. For each risky assumption, specify the smallest experiment or prototype that can validate or invalidate it.
  12. Prioritize experiments by impact and cost.

  13. Identify clear success/failure criteria.

  14. Summarize trade-offs across architectures:

  15. Control vs complexity.
  16. Quality vs latency.
  17. Research effort vs product impact.

Only after this synthesis and risk-first experiment plan should any real implementation be considered.