Reform of Traditional Music Teaching Methods and Cultivation of Students’ Musical Creativity on Digital Platforms
, , , y
03 feb 2025
Acerca de este artículo
Publicado en línea: 03 feb 2025
Recibido: 21 sept 2024
Aceptado: 08 ene 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/amns-2025-0026
Palabras clave
© 2025 Qingru Zhang et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 4.
After the comprehensive achievement of music
| Class | Mean | SD | t | P | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before | After | Before | After | |||
| Class A | 57.10 | 78.94 | 6.13 | 7.98 | -2.809 | 0.004 |
| Class a | 56.94 | 79.64 | 6.38 | 6.36 | -2.660 | 0.001 |
| Class B | 56.02 | 62.38 | 8.18 | 8.20 | -1.860 | 0.059 |
| Class b | 54.87 | 65.94 | 8.12 | 6.41 | -2.922 | 0.051 |
Different methods are evaluated in the DSD100 validation set
| Method | Bass (dB) | Drums (dB) | Other (dB) | Vocals (dB) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NCRPCAi | 1.61 | 4.05 | 2.33 | 5.19 |
| EFN | 1.71 | 4.08 | 2.39 | 5.36 |
| SHN-4 | 1.8 | 4.13 | 2.45 | 5.43 |
| PSHN | 2.08 | 4.44 | 2.59 | 5.50 |
| Att-Ret+Coh | 2.24 | 4.45 | 2.64 | 5.45 |
| CLSA | 2.23 | 4.49 | 2.75 | 5.43 |
Sample class analysis
| Class | Girls | Boys | Total number | Average performance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Class A | 36 | 29 | 65 | 57.10 |
| Class a | 34 | 26 | 60 | 56.94 |
| Class B | 32 | 34 | 66 | 56.02 |
| Class b | 28 | 35 | 63 | 54.87 |
Different methods of separation performance indicators on MIR-1K
| Method | Vocal (dB) | Accompaniments (dB) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GNSDR | GSIR | GSAR | GNSDR | GSIR | GSAR | |
| NCRPCAi | 6.58 | 10.48 | 10.45 | 6.94 | 12.48 | 8.32 |
| EFN | 8.54 | 13.62 | 10.85 | — | — | — |
| SHN-4 | 8.64 | 14.25 | 11.59 | 9.52 | 13.78 | 12.27 |
| PSHN | 9.51 | 14.88 | 11.81 | 9.56 | 13.96 | 12.48 |
| Att-Ret+Coh | 9.87 | 15.6 | 12.32 | 9.65 | 13.97 | 12.85 |
| CLSA | 10.72 | 15.66 | 12.66 | 9.58 | 14.09 | 12.88 |