HumMusQA: A Human-written Music Understanding QA Benchmark Dataset

Recent work on music question answering (Music-QA) has primarily focused on single-track understanding, where models answer questions about an individual audio clip using its tags, captions, or metadata. However, listeners often describe music in comparative terms, and existing benchmarks do not systematically evaluate reasoning across multiple tracks. Building on the Jamendo-QA dataset, we introduce Jamendo-MT-QA, a dataset and benchmark for multi-track comparative question answering. From Creative Commons-licensed tracks on Jamendo, we construct 36,519 comparative QA items over 12,173 track pairs, with each pair yielding three question types: yes/no, short-answer, and sentence-level questions. We describe an LLM-assisted pipeline for generating and filtering comparative questions, and benchmark representative audio-language models using both automatic metrics and LLM-as-a-Judge evaluation.

Music represents a cornerstone of human culture, existing digitally across diverse modalities, including audio, symbolic encodings (e.g., MIDI, MusicXML), and sheet music. Despite the advancement of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs), current music benchmarks face three major limitations. First, large static benchmarks are resource-intensive to evaluate, and it remains unclear how their results transfer to diverse kinds of music beyond those included in the benchmark. Second, benchmarks claiming to measure "music understanding" often fail to require music perception. Third, they do not support systematic performance comparisons across musical modalities. To overcome these issues, we introduce the Music I Care About Meta-Benchmark (MusICA-MetaBench), a framework that automatically derives on-demand benchmarks directly from user-provided data. By leveraging structured symbolic representations (e.g., MusicXML) and our pre-defined question templates, we build multiple-choice question-answer pairs that probe music perception competencies, aligned with music pedagogy, across audio, music notation images, and symbolic files. We demonstrate our framework with the ChoraleBricks dataset, and experimentally determine benchmark sizes that ensure statistically reliable model comparisons for this setup. By comparing against text-only and white-noise baselines, we show our questions do measure music perception. Ultimately, MusICA-MetaBench represents a significant advancement in the cross-modal assessment of music perception for MLLMs. By proposing a dataset-specific benchmarking paradigm, it enables efficient on-demand evaluation of music perception capabilities.

Recent advances in large audio language models (LALMs) have primarily been assessed using a multiple-choice question answering (MCQA) framework. However, subtle changes, such as shifting the order of choices, result in substantially different results. Existing MCQA frameworks do not account for this variability and report a single accuracy number per benchmark or category. We dive into the MCQA evaluation framework and conduct a systematic study spanning three benchmarks (MMAU, MMAR and MMSU) and four models: Audio Flamingo 2, Audio Flamingo 3, Qwen2.5-Omni-7B-Instruct, and Kimi-Audio-7B-Instruct. Our findings indicate that models are sensitive not only to the ordering of choices, but also to the paraphrasing of the question and the choices. Finally, we propose a simpler evaluation protocol and metric that account for subtle variations and provide a more detailed evaluation report of LALMs within the MCQA framework.