Pitch Analysis - A fun tool to investigate Shruti in CM

[cmlover]

VG
You seem to have totally misunderstood the spirit of my posting since I have the highest respect for our seers. The spiirit of the upanishad is 'enquiry' and not taking anything (including brahmam) for granted. My crticism is about parrotting the 'sutras' without looking at the 'truth'. Didn't vaLLuvar codify
epporuL yaar yaar vaay kETpinum
apporuL meipporuL kANpathaRivu

[vgvindan]

cml,
In view of your clarification, kindly pardon me if what I said hurt you.

[cmlover]

Here is MS FFT plot for the whole gamut of the first svara which is:
G, PGR GRSDSR G,


I have calibrated in 100Hz rulings.
and here is Ms Shruti for guidance. I have ascertained her aadaara shruti in this case is 5.5 kaTTai (G#)


From the first note you may observe that her G3 is ranging from ~450Hz to 630Hz which is from R1 to P. The audio also confirms the drawl. What is the name for such 'gamakams' ? The generic term is 'orikai'. Isn't it?
Also here is the audio for anyone who wants to listen
http://www.mediafire.com/?dnktvz1r15h

[cmlover]

..and here is the MS gaandhaaram, the best that I could model on the computer.
http://www.mediafire.com/?fs1xchg9n2u
I know it sounds terrible; but what do you hear?

[vasanthakokilam]

CML: Thanks a whole lot for doing the plot of that wonderful sequence.

Let us look at the last G

>that her G3 is ranging from ~450Hz to 630Hz which is from R1 to P.

I do not think you can say that for sure by looking at the frequencies vertically. There is limited polyphony involved, as Arun ( and I ) had mentioned before. So when there is a thick vertical bar, do not make any conclusions on that.

But by looking at the overall trend of the wave form, it looks like that Gamaka is produced by G D P G R executed in one beautiful unbroken curve. I tried it on my flute, I just can not get it if I play this sequence, but approximate it with very limited effect with a R G R

[cmlover]

Even if it is G D P G R , then is it not smearing the gaandharam all over the purvanga svaras. Is that the idea of gamaka?
Once an equally famous musician commented that :
"it may be sweet but it is not classical "

[vasanthakokilam]

Whatever that musician meant....

It sounds highly classical to me and I love it. I guess it does not matter personally beyond that.

BTW, that is a sneak-pronouncement on the artist based on the FFT I do not want to go there given all the limitations of FFT we have discussed several times. All I wanted to see is how the FFT represented that gamakam and I got that.

Thanks for the graph. Much appreciated. I will look at it in detail later on and learn whatever I can from it.

[vasanthakokilam]

CML, please continue with your analysis.

If you are looking for methodology, let us try to get the FFT calibrated first in the broad sense. So do the graph for a bit of music ( CM, HM or WM ) with a single vocal line ( no polyphony of any sort as much as possible ) and let us see how clean the FFT graph is. We can then build from that. Thanks.

[cmlover]

I was just taking a breather. Will continue but need the feedback from you, Arun/Suji/... who would all be getting back soon. I wonder whether Arun can clarify (if he is reading this) as to whether SRGS is valid in Kedaram since it violates Arun's rule!

[vijay]

Wow that's a lot of analysis! I am frankly quite lost but hopefully someone can do a quick summary for the benefit of techno-idiots like me once some conclusions come out...

[Suji Ram]

I was just taking a breather. Will continue but need the feedback from you, Arun/Suji/... who would all be getting back soon. I wonder whether Arun can clarify (if he is reading this) as to whether SRGS is valid in Kedaram since it violates Arun's rule!

I am very much back....
A lot of posts on the forum since I left (good, bad and ugly )

As for SRGS in kEdAram it adds a special beauty to the rAga. Atleast in the kriti I learn(ing)t recently I see a lot of it. Will post it when(?)I can play it well.
I think we discussed srgs/kEdAram somewhere else. Sometimes rules can be broken I guess..

[arunk]

I am back too - got too busy towards the end - social calls turned to be more busy than kutcheri hopping. And i could not hook up with coolji again because of that.

SRG - kedaram - yes it was discussed in the dabbler's thread. Once can view it as against rules, only if one establishes a pure scalar structure to kedaram. Books certainly stick to the smgm (or even sgm?) in arohanam and fail to mention srgs - and thus are bit loose. It would be better if it is always highlighted that kedaram largely sticks to that aro/avaro but has some legitimate exceptions like srgs.

Arun

[arunk]

cmlover - I tried analyzing both samples and while to our ears what the singers are singing is very clear, the signals themselves are noisy. The first one is definitely filtered to attenuate lower frequencies. The MSS one is pretty bad - excessive hum and hiss and also voice seems echo/reverb-laden. Also it is possible that the violin is following her in the background throughout - even though our ears can "tune it out" to the computer all will be visible. This can introduce polyphony - i.e. more frequency components other than the one you would be interested in (i.e. the vocal).

Anyway, I told my friend Pitchappa (also affectionately called Pitchai by his friends) about our experiments and problems with poor signals and he has pitched in to help. He has a diploma (a part-time, via postal service) in bathroom singing - a very degree offered by some London Univ. He says it is as prestigious as F.R.C, but is called F.F.T. Anyway, he has put his skills to use trying to mimic the first sample. I have uploaded it here: http://www.mediafire.com/?59xvnd9y4cd (the original followed by pitchappa's). If you analyze the whole file, I think you will see that for the latter half the FFT results should be promising - atleast there should not be as much noise

Now of course there is no guarantee that he has reproduced the original faithfully and if he is keeping proper pitch. But dont tell him that as then his F.F.T degree can get revoked and he has to resort to pitchai to make a living . At the least, this sample is just to show how important the clarity of the original signal is for good FFT results.

PS: If you want I can post the pitch graph for the sample done via my pitch analyzer. It fails miserably for the first half, but does excellent for pitchappa's portion.


Arun

[cmlover]

Thanks vijay
Do visit us here from time to time and add your insight and valuable comments.

Suji/Arun
Great to see you are back hale and hearty without concert fatigue! We can continue at leisure our dabbler discussions with vigour. A trip to motherland is nostalgic and it takes quite some time to get back to work

Thanks Arun for the clip from Sri Pitchappa and I will work on it as an amateur. The audio is quite good without distracting sounds and his help is appreciated. I trust you had a good but hectic time and the little one survived the heat and mosquitoes ofChennai without any events

Many happy Pongal greetings to you all!

[cmlover]

Folks
Here is the FFT of the clip provided by Pichappa calibrated at 50Hz. I notice his pitch is 1.5 KaTTai in comparison with the 2.5 of the original


For convenience here are the shruti details

sa ri1 ri2/ga1 ri3/ga2 ga3 ma1 ma2 pa da1
139 147 156 165 175 186 197 208 221

Are the gamakam excursions resaonable?

[arunk]

Here is the FFT of the clip provided by Pichappa calibrated at 50Hz. I notice his pitch is 1.5 KaTTai in comparison with the 2.5 of the original

How did you figure this? Pitchappa (pl. note the correct spelling ) is sort of pitchufying his thalai at this conclusion. He says that while he may be bad, he did not know that he was this bad and he was trying his best to mimic the original and thus expected his shruthi to be fairly close to the original and not one whole kattai apart as you imply here.

Arun

PS: The fourth swara/syllable is sa and the figure shows that it has partials slightly less than 160, slightly less than 320, less than 480 and less than 640. Isnt this similar to the original? (and hence my earlier comment about shruthi being around 160).

[Suji Ram]

CML, This is much better. The singer seems to sing PGRSRG,R,DSRG and the plot more or less matches that ( though it is really hard to tell with other frequencies overlapped ). If you can, please do the following.

I tried playing along with the singer and I get PGRSRG,R,DSRG too.
However Pitchai is probably singing the last G as M...atleast to my ears

[vasanthakokilam]

Nice work Arun Pitchappa!!

1) At the lowest octave, I can follow along the FFT graph quite clearly. I now know what you mean by the sruthi being at 160.

2) Is it normal to have the upper partials to be more smeared than the base?

[vasanthakokilam]

Suji, if you go by the frequency graph, PitchappArun is quite on target on Ga, just below 200.

[arunk]

2) Is it normal to have the upper partials to be more smeared than the base?

Although not 100% sure these are some of the characteristics of real world, organic signal sources. Just like you will not find a 100% straight line, 100% circle in nature, you are not going to find a exactly harmonic signal. So the first harmonic may be 0.99f or 2.00065f rather than 2.0f. While this does play a part here, I am not sure it is the sole reason for the smearing of the higher partials. Also I am not sure one can generalize and say upper partials will generally be smeared. It depends on the signal - say a different voice may exhibit a different characteristic.

Arun

[cmlover]

Arun
My profound apologies. Perhaps I was too sleepy Ignore the previous post!
Here is the pitch hitogram for both who are at 2.5 kaTTai but there may be subtle differences in their basic shadjam.



Again here is the comparative FFT plot



We can clearly see the differences in signature which may not all be due to the background music! But they do sound practically the same to the ears. Pitchappa has done an excellent job indeed!

Now what can we conclude about mohanam from these? Is the 'smear' acceptable?
Good! Our team is back on Track!

[vasanthakokilam]

CML, only thing we can conclude is what Arun wrote before which I quote "At the least, this sample is just to show how important the clarity of the original signal is for good FFT results.". I think this exercise brings out that point very well. I have been consistently maintaining that we should not be drawing conclusions on artists' shruti suddham from this and this exercise convinces me even more. We can use it as a broad measure.

Arun, if the original artist's pitch is also in the 160Hz octave, how come we do not see much FFT activity in that region for the most part? We see more of a vertical smear in the first partial zone than any horizontal progression of frequencies. But the second partial zone has some stuff, though it is hard to read that with all the smear.

CML: Are you still convinced that the bar graph tool is valid for analzying such recorded music? Atleast in this case, Pitchappa's FFT graph is clear enough but the bar graph does not seem to correspond fully to what we see in the FFT. It shows there is small R, Ma and small D in the sample. If it is really small % we can ignore that, but it shows small Ri to be at a higher % than S itself. But it shows correctly with R and G to be at high percentage and that is consistent with the signal. So it has some value. I am asking this since you started this thread by making judgements on the music based on the bar graph.

[vasanthakokilam]

And I request Pitchappa to render as closely as possible the MS Bavayami Mohanam G that we analyzed earlier and see what the gamaka pattern looks like in CML's graphs.

[arunk]

Arun, if the original artist's pitch is also in the 160Hz octave, how come we do not see much FFT activity in that region for the most part? We see more of a vertical smear in the first partial zone than any horizontal progression of frequencies. But the second partial zone has some stuff, though it is hard to read that with all the smear.

I believe it can be a combination of two things:
1. lower frequencies may be attenuated. You can sort of make this out as the signal itself sounds like as if treble is a bit high (or it doesnt have too much low-mid/bass in it)
2. The timbre of the singer's voice is such that the amplitude of the fundamental is not as high as the partials. So under even some attenuation of #1 above takes the fundamental out.

Arun

[arunk]

And I request Pitchappa to render as closely as possible the MS Bavayami Mohanam G that we analyzed earlier and see what the gamaka pattern looks like in CML's graphs.

I will ask him .

There are also a couple of more possible reasons for some of questions cmlover is raising - one of them was mentioned in arvindh's analysis too. I will state them a bit later when I have more time.

[arunk]

Here it goes: http://www.mediafire.com/?fddhyphat9o

Pitchappa wasn't that happy with the result - he thinks as the shruthi is a bit high, his comfort level was not that high, and hence he may have been patchy with the pitch (e.g. g-r in p-g-r). Besides he asked - how can one ever hope to imitate a golden voice?

Arun

[cmlover]

and here is the comparative FFT graph


He seems to have done a very good job except that his shruti appears (to my ears) a tad lower. But the gamakams look pretty close.
Arun!
This Pitchappa is a very valuable resource for us. Please convey our indebtedness to him as we willl be grateful for his continued assistance.

Suji

Could you try it on the violin!

[cmlover]

On second thought it appears his shruti matches MS (G#) and the audio difference is due to the timbre and noise in the MS recording!

[vasanthakokilam]

If we do not have a policy against multiple ids, we could have asked pitchappa to join us here.

Very good job, pitchappa. Now, what is the verdict on how to execute that gamakam?

[cmlover]

That first 'Ga' is going from 160Hz to ~330Hz
i.e., E3 to E4 which is one whole octave. I am not aware of a term for a gamakm spanning a whole octave. Await Arun's wise words

[vasanthakokilam]

It looks like it started at lower Da went to Ga stayed there a bit and then went to P ( or D ) and then came down to R or S or D.

Going from D to G is very common in Mohanam as a gamakam. Also the transition to G D P and then to G, This one seems to combine both of these sequences in one smooth contour.

The last G, though sounds similar to the first one looks to be a simpler contour. Start at R, go through G to P then come back through G and settle on just touching R.

[uday_shankar]

It looks like it started at lower Da went to Ga stayed there a bit

That's just noise .

Here's why:

1. On listening to the audio, immediately one can aurally estimate that the lowest frequency generated by his voice at the beginning of the recording is in the range of Ga or ~262 Hz.
2. Physical systems, least of all human voices, don't readily generate subharmonics. They occur very occassionally in loudspeakers, powergrids, etc..
3. Therefore we have to look for other sources for the lower frequencies at the beginning.
4. In the recording, there's a very low intensity tape recorder noise or some other noise (~171Hz) between 6.2 and 6.4 seconds before his voice starts. This would correspond to vk's "lower Da" (F3). This should be rejected and for good measure, an equal 0.2 second window starting at 6.4 seconds should be rejected. This means, the valid information starts only at 6.6 seconds (and the graph indicates the expected Ga ~262 Hz at that point).

On a general note, I find the title of this thread objectionable and grandiose. I know and greatly respect my friend cmloverji. I know he's a fine man who doesn't have a malicious bone in his body...his overactive intellect needs stimulation and inspiration through provocation .

However, this is a very difficult subject. To mathematically characterize a qualitative feeling like shruti-shuddam from a moving melody is really hard. It needs very deep understanding of the music as well as the analytical techniques. In addition myriad details such as the quality of the signal, the limitations of the analytical techniques, tools, tradeoffs, etc.. must be thoroughly understood. I grant all this can be gained over the course of time with diligence.

I have no problem with this whole exercise, fun should definitely be had. But the perception for those who are on the fringe of music and/or signal processing (or for that matter any klind of math) might be that somehow something profound has been mathematically "proven". This is far from the case. It is not a straightforward problem to assess, qualitatively or quantitatively, the shruti-shuddam of two tampura strings tuned to the same pitch !!!

Better to leave the serious conclusions to serious researchers who do this for a living and label this whole thing with a "WARNING: JUST FOR FUN! DON"T TAKE SERIOUSLY UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE". Even for fun, I would recommend a thorough reading of Arvindh's papers on pitch-tracking techniques.

[cmlover]

Thanks Uday
for your well-meaning comments. You have read my mind in that I want to stimulate scientific interest in aspects of CM which folks simply take for granted or simply parrot from exotic manuals. We need to be objective and math is one tool that renders objective conclusions though by no means infallible. We need objective standards for terms that we commonly parley in CM rather than simply stating that it must be done like SSI, KVN etc., For example take the definition of 'nOkku' which states that 'it is a gamakam in which a higher notee in ascent is touched first before the required note is reached'. Now how high can one go; does it depend on the raga, is it dependent on the singer's prowess or more impotantly when is a nokku not a nokku.... You see my point that we need tighter objective definitions of terms in CM than a simple wavee of the hand.

I started this thread to make people think objectively as I always like stimulating Arun and the cutting edge comments of VK as well as you and the practical curiosity of Suji along with the sagacious interpositions from Ramakriya as well as many others who are not necessarily tradition-bound and are willing to think 'Free'. It would indeed be nice if Arvindh decides to come down from his pedestal to share with common folks (or is it 'dabblers' ?) his vast techincal expertise in clear simple terms.

Thank you again for the participation!

[arunk]

I agree with Uday on the technical points as well as the other. Cmlover - I think you should rename the thread - the title implies indictment or intend to indictment without enough understanding of the topic at hand. I wanted to mention this earlier but my association with Pitchappa distracted me from such

The first ga - is ga/paga, where the first slide is a forceful, sharp one, and the second one is a slower one "back to equilibrium kind of one , The last one - is r/pg (from r as a way of maintaining continuity from the earlier swara i.e. ri).

BTW, here i an image that illustrates why you want to ignore the portions Uday mentions:




Basically anytime at the start of the attack phase (thus sharp variations in pitch), as well as at the end and approaching silence (except for ambient noise), FFT results will throw stuff that need to be discarded. A sliding window is used and again it "presumes" (or works best in terms of estimation) if the signal within a window, is harmonic and of constant pitch.

Arun

[Suji Ram]

Suji

Could you try it on the violin!

CML,
I'll do it sometime this week. It is taking time to get back to normal life here.

Life without internet for 3 weeks seemed so good-almost went so very slow. It was like applying brakes to the ever fast life here. I am still going at that pace now.

[cmlover]

Beautiful!
That clarifies the controversy in MS gamakam. Thanks to you Arun as well as Uday.
By the by I did change the title of this thread

Arun

Can you simulate the Ga in your gamaka software and post the MIDI file so that I can play with it.?For some reason I am unable to work with the Window's version of yours.

[cmlover]

Suji
Just take your time. Also promise once you are OK you will share your experiences in the motherland. Did you meet with many of our rasika members?

[Suji Ram]

Suji
Just take your time. Also promise once you are OK you will share your experiences in the motherland. Did you meet with many of our rasika members?

I have written down my experience in my personal blog. I will invite you all once I am done, including pictures. My visit to Chennai was just too short to plan a meeting with rasikas. I might have criss-crossed them in the concerts I attended. Just spoke to Coolkarni over phone.

[cmlover]

Waiting with pleasure!

[arunk]

Here it goes (the midi file contaning first ga): http://www.mediafire.com/?6dzlgqttgtb . I used guitar as the instrument

Note: you can play around with the gamaka software at http:/arunk.freepgs.com/gcreate . This one is fairly easy create - you can try to mimic the above shape.

And thanks for changing the title of the thread! This one reads much better, and also is a much fairer description of the discussion.

Arun

[cmlover]

Thanks.
What a difference human voice makes!

[cmlover]

..and here is my version of 'Ga' using Arun's software (using Flute ). It is 'G P G' of course!
http://www.mediafire.com/?0qv9itllmnp

[vasanthakokilam]

Thanks everyone. That is quite an education. BTW, don't you think the midi generated versions sounds like what Sri. Chitti Babu in his Kuyil pAttu?

Arun, your scatter plot of time vs frequency is quite illuminative. That seems to be the best representation of the gamakam we have seen so far ( without all the clutter of the full FFT spectrum ).

CML, Thanks for the title change. I like that as well. Now we have a freer hand

BTW, is GPG type gamakam for G common in Mohanam? Asking because this particular execution by MS sounds quite unique.

Uday, if you play the GPG gamakam on your flute, how closely does it come to the MSS version. I tried it and it does not sound close to the MSS effect. I did not get the smooth curvature right, I think. I can use some tips from you on this. Thanks.

[arunk]

Arun, your scatter plot of time vs frequency is quite illuminative. That seems to be the best representation of the gamakam we have seen so far ( without all the clutter of the full FFT spectrum ).

Thanks. As you may know it is simply an extra level of "interpretation" of the FFT spectrum. For each time slot you have a spectrum of various frequency values and the amplitudes. The peaks in the spectrum are used to deduce the pitch - this is not always easy to do with high accuracy all the time - but easier for clear signals particularly in the steady portion of voices. If the signal has many noise components or even polyphony, this quickly gets to a level of diffiocult that is very hard to near impossible -so most algorithms miss more often than hit in those cases.

Arun

[uday_shankar]

vk,

The GPG gamakam is readily possible if you're unafraid to bend your head forward to reduce pitch temporarily and then restore the normal blowing angle. Some flute-playing schools forbid ever changing the angle of blow, but in my opinion you can never make some gamakas speak correctly without doing that.

So here's how it goes:

1. Close first seven holes completely (if the flute is calibrated right, you get slighly less than M1 but not quite G3).
2. Bend head forward to blow into flute to get G3.
3. Blow and simulataneiously raise your head and traverse from G3 to P (5 holes closed, normal blowing angle) in the desired kaalapramanam.
4. Mirror this action and get back to G3.

Now for the RPG gamaka, even if you're willing to bend your head, it is not possible to get this on the flute without a break. Unless... !!!

Ok, here goes:

1. The lowest note you can get with 7 holes closed AND bending forward may be G2 that too with a loss of clarity.
2. However, if you're willing to temporarily change your fingering, i.e., use all four fingers on the left hand, then you can close all 8 holes, bend forward and get R2.
3. Now traverse to P and back to G3 (per fingering in the previous maneuver).
4. This maneuver is absolutely not worth it, but may score a meaningless point in an argument.

I'll record a clip of both when I get time.

[vasanthakokilam]

Thanks very much Uday. Good explanation. I understand the theory and reasoning behind it. I will try it it later on. Looking forward to your clip. Thx.

Just for experimentation, if I am willing to move the 'Sa' to another position, which one would be good to execute this gamakam with much more ease and what will that transition be. I tried by moving 'P' to the position of G ( 3 semitones down ), 'Sa' will be at the usual madhra 'D' position. Then GPG is executed with the usual (small R, G, small R ) positions. Does that sound right? It sort of worked but I am not satisfied yet. Is there any other such movement that can help in this experimentation?

[uday_shankar]

Ok vk. Here goes. I deliberately did not attempt the altered fingering because it is impractical and would only be a "veembu". So the last ga has an unavoidable break (R-P-G).

http://www.mediafire.com/?fe21tpszlax

As for your other questions about different holes for Sa and their limitations, I'll make a detailed post when I get time.

[cmlover]

VK
I thought the following chrystal clear FFT of Uday will help you to capture the gamakam and the svaras precisely! Let us hear you execute it!

[vasanthakokilam]

Thanks Uday very much. That sounds very nice. I will try that myself later on. My initial attempts were not that tuneful!!

Thanks CML for the FFT. Very clean indeed.

[arunk]

Guys (dabblers),

I have found a wonderful free software that does audio analysis including some impressive pitch analysis. I think this is the best one I have seen and it is free. It is called Sonic Visualiser. You can download it at http://www.sonicvisualiser.org/ . It runs on windows, PC and the mac. The basic program downloadable there seems to have basic spectrum analysis etc. For pitch analysis, you need to download what they call Vamp Plugins. They are available for download from http://www.vamp-plugins.org/download.html . I have tried the second one on the list Vamp Aubio Plugins and I must say its pitch detection is impressive and puts my amateur detector to shame (not surprising as these are based fully on proper scientific research, while mine is amateur dabbling based on others' research).

Here are some basic instructions for getting a feel for pitch detection (you can do a lot more but I will leave that for you to explore and find out):

Installing Sonic Visualiser (windows):
1. Download the zip file from http://www.sonicvisualiser.org/download.html
2. Unzip.
3. Even though technically after this you are ready to go, for pitch estimation etc you need to install plugins. For this you should first create a directory called Vamp Plugins under C:Program Files (i.e. C:Program FilesVamp Plugins)
4. Install plugins (see below)

Installing Plugins (windows)
1. Download the plugins (e.g. aubio) from http://www.vamp-plugins.org/download.html . They are in zip format.
2. Unzip
3. Now copy the dll file and the cat file (e.g. vamp-audio.dll and vamp-audio.cat for aubio) to C:Program FilesVamp Plugins


Running Sonic Visualiser and doing pitch detection (windows):
1. Run the sonic-visualiser.exe program that came with the zip file for the program. You can of course create a shortcut for it on the desktop/startmenu for convenience.
2. Assuming you installed the aubio plugin correctly, under Transform->Analysis By Maker you should see a menu called Paul Brossier (the person who came up with the pitch detection stuff as part of his Phd thesis).
3. Select File->Import Audio File and import an audio file (wav, mp3 etc.)
4. To run pitch detection on the waveform, select Transform->Analysis By Category->Aubio Pitch Detector.
5. A dialog should come up. The Pitch Detection Function option allows you to select a pitch detector among five different ones. I found YIN and YIN with FFT to be best among the few signals I tried. I think YIN with FFT is their "best" and it is also much faster than YIN (YIN can get slow on large signals).
6. The Processing parameters etc. (under Advanced) are low level stuff. I didnt find a need to change them
7. Click ok and it should add the pitch contour. By default the plot type is Conneced Points - i find just Points (or even Curve) is better. Also if you find that the entire curve appears scrunched at the bottom, try chaning Scale to Log/i]. The reason for this is because some estimates came with very large pitch values and thus skewed the overall scale of the y-axis.

Let me know how it goes! I have tried it on windows and the mac, and found to be great.

PS: BTW, I have already "ported" my pitch detection alogorithm as a VAMP Plugin, which will allow you tio run it as well (you can view it simultaneously against aubio - which is when I found that for many signals it kicks my pitch-detector's butt!). I am doing some finishing touches. Once done, I will make it available for download for anyone interested.'

PPS: In case it is not clear, I am not associated with the makers of the software. But I am very glad I ran into it. I have been looking for something like this to integrate my detector into for a long time.

Arun