I’m working on an AI-assisted music composition and criticism tool (giant project, may or may not pan out). It covers audio (samples, levels, etc), theory (harmony, rhythm), genre (classical, Motown), song intent, etc.
Working on the melody model, I asked Claude to thread it through those dimensions, both for composition and analysis. It’s a tough problem because there are heuristics but not rules for melody, so you have to come at it in layers: pitch and dynamics for analysis, intent -> genre -> harmony for composition.
Lots of research and brainstorming, and I like that Claude will start implementing a plan we decided on, then say “hey wait this isn’t making sense” and pivot or change scope in sensible ways. For instance (btw its recent obsession with “honesty” is driving me batty, so that’s a good counter example right there):
> The honest fix: distinguishing shaped-from-aimless is genuinely profile-relative (it needs the declared intent) — so v1 should not verdict it. v1 classifies only what’s genre-safe to call without intent (static vs active), reports all the facts that feed the shaped/random judgment (step/leap, reversal, contour, alphabet), and defers the shaped-vs-random verdict to profile-relative phase 2b. This is the same honesty as performance deferring declared-profile grading to 2b — and it’s more deferred for melody because melody is more genre-relative than feel. Let me revise the lens accordingly.
Working on the melody model, I asked Claude to thread it through those dimensions, both for composition and analysis. It’s a tough problem because there are heuristics but not rules for melody, so you have to come at it in layers: pitch and dynamics for analysis, intent -> genre -> harmony for composition.
Lots of research and brainstorming, and I like that Claude will start implementing a plan we decided on, then say “hey wait this isn’t making sense” and pivot or change scope in sensible ways. For instance (btw its recent obsession with “honesty” is driving me batty, so that’s a good counter example right there):
> The honest fix: distinguishing shaped-from-aimless is genuinely profile-relative (it needs the declared intent) — so v1 should not verdict it. v1 classifies only what’s genre-safe to call without intent (static vs active), reports all the facts that feed the shaped/random judgment (step/leap, reversal, contour, alphabet), and defers the shaped-vs-random verdict to profile-relative phase 2b. This is the same honesty as performance deferring declared-profile grading to 2b — and it’s more deferred for melody because melody is more genre-relative than feel. Let me revise the lens accordingly.