Ear Test Scoresheet

Ear-test score sheet

Rob's verdict (2026-09-23): "the best way so far we've had to score tests like this". Use it instead of asking for free-text impressions of a folder of WAVs.

What it gives you:

• Every render plays inside the page, straight from disk (WAV is fine).
• Scores 1-5 on named criteria, a Keep / Borderline / Over the line verdict, a notes box per render, and a pick per group (the "last good rung").
• A chart per group that averages the criteria into two lines, one for what you're pushing for (likeness) and one for what breaks (quality), plotted by rung.
• Rows for renders that don't exist yet say "Rendering…" and fill in on their own when the file appears, so Rob can start while the rest render.
• Scores save to scores.json beside the page, which is how you read them.

Files in this folder:

• template.html — the page (local file; the default).
• make-scoresheet.mjs — writes index.html from a study.json.
• template-artifact.html — the claude.ai-hosted variant, only for when Rob can't open files on this machine (see the end).

Running a test

1. Lay out the study folder

Put renders under _experiments/_LISTENING/<date>-<study>/ (the listening-hub convention), e.g. round1/<group>/NN-<label>.wav. The page lives at the top of that folder and refers to tracks by relative path.

2. Write study.json and generate the page

{
  "id": "yue2-decoder-long-2026-09-23",
  "title": "YuE2 Decoder Ladder",
  "intro": "Play each render, score it 1–5 on each criterion. Scores save as you go.",
  "criteria": [
    {"key": "voice", "name": "Voice", "desc": "the singer sounds like the artist", "series": "likeness"},
    {"key": "writing", "name": "Songwriting", "desc": "melodies, hooks and structure feel like theirs", "series": "likeness"},
    {"key": "sound", "name": "Sound", "desc": "guitar, drum and production tone match the album", "series": "likeness"},
    {"key": "diction", "name": "Diction", "desc": "every word intelligible, nothing garbled", "series": "quality"},
    {"key": "audio", "name": "Audio", "desc": "clean: no hiss, phasing, crackle or clipping", "series": "quality"},
    {"key": "coherence", "name": "Coherence", "desc": "holds together, no loops, ends properly", "series": "quality"}
  ],
  "series": {"likeness": {"name": "Likeness", "color": "var(--accent)"},
             "quality":  {"name": "Quality",  "color": "var(--warn)"}},
  "roundNames": {"1": "Round 1 · decoder sweep"},
  "axis": {"1": "Decoder step"},
  "pickLabel": "Last good rung",
  "tracks": [
    {"id": "r1-rbf-01", "round": 1, "group": "rbf_whyrockhard", "order": 1,
     "label": "Base", "sublabel": "no adapter", "reference": true, "file": "round1/rbf_whyrockhard/01-base.wav"},
    {"id": "r1-rbf-02", "round": 1, "group": "rbf_whyrockhard", "order": 2,
     "label": "Decoder 300", "sublabel": "planner frozen at 240", "x": 300, "file": "round1/rbf_whyrockhard/02-nar300.wav"}
  ]
}

node .claude/skills/ear-test-scoresheet/make-scoresheet.mjs <study-folder>/study.json

• group becomes a tab; x is the chart position; order sorts rows.
• The six criteria above (three per series) are the proven set: about 40 s of scoring per render. Keep two series, "pushing for" and "what breaks".
• reference: true marks a control (base model, no adapter): scorable, but off the chart and out of the picker. Always include one; it anchors the scale.
• List every planned render up front, rendered or not. To add a round later, append tracks and re-run the generator. Scores are keyed by track id, so they survive.

3. Hand it to Rob

Give him the path to index.html. On first use he clicks Save scores to a file… and saves scores.json next to the page. After that every change writes to it; the browser remembers the file and asks once per session to reconnect. Scores are also kept in the browser either way. Browsers without file saving (Firefox) get Export scores instead: he exports and drops scores.json in the folder.

4. Read the results

scores.json: {scores: {<track id>: {<criterion>: 1-5, verdict?, note?}}, picks: {"r<round>-<group>": {lastGood, note}}}.

Scores alone are enough. On the first study Rob skipped verdicts and picks and the criteria still answered the question. Average each series per rung, lay the groups side by side, and read the trend, not single rungs.

What the first study taught (read before interpreting)

• Renders are not reproducible from the seed. The same checkpoints and seed through /api/generate gave different songs of different lengths. Every rung is a fresh take, so plan two renders per rung when a decision rests on it.
• Rob's scoring noise is about ±1 per criterion. Measured by putting the same combination in two rounds without saying so. Treat a difference under ~0.5 on a series average as noise. A single low rung between two good ones is noise, not a line.
• Keep automated metrics off the page. They bias the ear. Compare them afterwards; the forced-aligner diction score correlated only 0.37 with Rob's diction scores.
• Note boxes carry the surprises ("there are no vocals in this track"). Read every note.