4.6 Article

Singing Voice Detection in Opera Recordings: A Case Study on Robustness and Generalization

期刊

ELECTRONICS
卷 10, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/electronics10101214

关键词

singing voice detection; opera; supervised learning; music processing; music information retrieval

资金

  1. German Research Foundation [DFG MU 2686/7-2, MU 2686/11-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper examines two state-of-the-art singing voice detection methods in opera recordings and investigates their robustness in challenging opera scenarios. The experiments demonstrate that both systems can effectively detect singing voice even when trained on small datasets.
Automatically detecting the presence of singing in music audio recordings is a central task within music information retrieval. While modern machine-learning systems produce high-quality results on this task, the reported experiments are usually limited to popular music and the trained systems often overfit to confounding factors. In this paper, we aim to gain a deeper understanding of such machine-learning methods and investigate their robustness in a challenging opera scenario. To this end, we compare two state-of-the-art methods for singing voice detection based on supervised learning: A traditional approach relying on hand-crafted features with a random forest classifier, as well as a deep-learning approach relying on convolutional neural networks. To evaluate these algorithms, we make use of a cross-version dataset comprising 16 recorded performances (versions) of Richard Wagner's four-opera cycle Der Ring des Nibelungen. This scenario allows us to systematically investigate generalization to unseen versions, musical works, or both. In particular, we study the trained systems' robustness depending on the acoustic and musical variety, as well as the overall size of the training dataset. Our experiments show that both systems can robustly detect singing voice in opera recordings even when trained on relatively small datasets with little variety.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据