Effective vocal coaching connects performance issues with corrective advice, but recordings paired with expert diagnoses and advice are scarce. Online singing communities provide a potential source of supervision, but observations and advice are scattered across unstructured comments. We introduce PitchIn, audio-language models for natural-language vocal coaching, and the PeerCoach Dataset: 14,445 instruction examples covering Focused QA, Overall Feedback, and Recognition QA. We compare target combinations on Qwen2.5-Omni and train PitchIn on Focused QA and Overall Feedback using Qwen2.5-Omni and MOSS-Music. On VocalCoachBench, the proportion of requested diagnosis-correction pairs matching an expert issue with valid advice rises from 21.3% to 61.0% for Qwen2.5-Omni and from 31.4% to 51.2% for MOSS-Music. Direct training on source comments yields only 19.8% for Qwen2.5-Omni. For Qwen, Focused QA alone reaches 65.6%, but adding Overall Feedback improves alignment with expert reviews and human preference. Both models improve expert-review alignment over pretrained baselines and are significantly preferred for usefulness (92.0% and 67.3%, respectively). Demo examples are available at https://hayeonbang.github.io/PitchIn.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Overview of PitchIn. Community singing recordings and feedback are used to construct Focused QA, Overall Feedback, and auxiliary Recognition QA targets for audio–language model adaptation.
Type
Sources
Examples
Hours
Focused QA (FQA)
6,979
10,919
114.2
Overall Feedback (OF)
1,719
1,719
28.5
Real-Feedback MCQ (RQ)
393
411
6.2
Synthetic-Defect MCQ (RQ)
466
1,396
18.2
Total
7,042
14,445
133.1
Table 1: PeerCoach Dataset size by target type. Sources count unique recordings; hours sum durations of unique input files, including transformed audio. Totals are deduplicated across types.
Natural Overall
VCB Open-ended
VCB Structured
Reference Alignment
Repetition
Diagnosis
Correction
E2E
Ranking
Top-3
Segment
Model
B-U
SS
SPICE
Self-B4 ↓
S.Hit
Hit
Valid
Direct
Score
m-F1@3
Match
Qwen2.5-Omni
Pretrained
2.2
51.2
6.3
85.4
3.1
63.4
31.8
21.3
68.7
4.4
31.1
30.9
Raw Comments
3.0
54.3
5.4 †
72.2
2.1
42.2 †
31.3
19.8
71.0
58.4 †
30.0
32.4
PitchIn-Q
14.6 †
71.2 †
10.3 †
77.3
6.8 †
48.1 †
98.2 †
61.0 †
64.6
62.0 †
32.3
34.0
Table 2: Results for PitchIn and comparison models (scores ×100 ). Higher is better except for Self-B4. Shaded rows identify the two PitchIn models. Bold scores mark the best displayed value within the Qwen and MOSS groups, including ties. † indicates a significant difference from the corresponding pretrained baseline after joint Holm correction over 88 tests ( p<0.05 ).
Figure 2: Human preferences for usefulness and recording fit. Ours denotes PitchIn-Q and PitchIn-M.
Recent audio-language models are increasingly evaluated on recognizing, describing, and reasoning about audio, but expert-facing applications require a different capability: producing feedback that identifies problems and suggests corrective actions grounded in the input. We introduce VocalCoachBench, a benchmark for evaluating audio-language models on expert vocal coaching feedback for singing. VocalCoachBench contains 515 recordings annotated by 18 professional vocal trainers, yielding 1,056 expert submissions and 12,051 atomic coaching claims. It comprises a same-song subset for controlled comparison and a diverse-song subset for segment-grounded feedback across varied songs and recording conditions. To accommodate the open-ended nature of expert feedback, VocalCoachBench sep- arates deterministic structured targets from claim-based assessment of free-form diagnosis and corrective guidance. Human annotation analysis shows that expert agreement varies strongly with label granularity, motivating hierarchical structured metrics and claim-based evaluation of open-ended feedback. Experiments with 12 recent audio-language models reveal a consistent gap: while models can compare performances and identify broad issue domains in free-form feedback, Top-3 fine-grained issue-label identification remains below label-prior baselines and strict diagnosis alignment stays below 7%. To our knowledge, VocalCoachBench pro- vides the first public testbed for evaluating audio-grounded expert feedback for singing, moving audio-language evaluation beyond description toward analytic feedback.
Mixing requires not only applying processing but also assessing the resulting mix. Audio-language models can provide conversa- tional mixing advice, but existing evaluations do not separately test whether they can judge specific mixing issues. Since professional supervision for such judgments is scarce, we construct a curriculum of 11 vocal-mix issues at multiple severity levels and use it to train MixJudge, a language-queryable audio critic. MixJudge shows its ability to retrieve mixing issues, distinguish opposite issues, and order the severity of an issue. Moreover, its judgments transfer to menu selection: given a set of processing candidates, MixJudge often favors versions acoustically closer to a held-out professional version, demonstrating how explicit mixing judgment can support comparison and downstream mixing decisions.
Kuan-Hsun Ho, Yuan-Chiao Cheng, Yen-Tung Yeh +1
Independent Researcher · Music Informatics Group, Georgia Institute of Technology · Music and AI Lab, National Taiwan University +1
Existing singing voice synthesis systems often require predefined durations, explicit duration prediction, or time-aligned acoustic guidance, which limits their compatibility with practical composition workflows. We propose VocalRender, a score-native system that directly synthesizes singing from lyrics, pitches, symbolic note values, and tempo. It uses an interleaved lyric--note representation and an autoregressive diffusion model to generate continuous acoustic latents while predicting the output length, eliminating the need for explicit duration prediction. Trained on a 2,300-hour singing dataset, VocalRender achieves strong intelligibility, strong melody control, and high speaker similarity across both in-domain and out-of-domain benchmarks. Notably, it outperforms the strongest baseline by 0.42 points in naturalness CMOS, demonstrating the effectiveness of our proposed score-native architecture.
Yukun Chen, Tianrui Wang, Zhaoxi Mu +2
Xi’an Jiaotong University · Nanyang Technological University · Ant Group +1