Experimental synthetic birdsong:

Musical automata as dynamical systems

David M. Michael
University of Sussex, Brighton UK
d.m.michael@sussex.ac.uk,
http://www.hksintl.com/birdsong

Abstract. This paper is intended to form the basis for a dynamical

systems approach to musical automata (or generative music systems).
Because the songbirds vocalization and neural mechanisms have been
so extensively studied, it makes an ideal model system. Presented herein
are control experiments and dynamical analysis of a nonlinear oscillator model of the avian syrinx, which will serve as the actuator for the
proposed musical automata.

Introduction

This paper is both a proposal and an initial experiment en route to a dynamical systems approach to autonomously generated music. Currently affecting
many recent efforts in generative music is the structure/novelty problem, which
appears in any purely symbolic system [8]. To overcome this issue, it is proposed that a generative music system be based on situated, embodied dynamics,
following similar moves in the disciplines that now contribute to a dynamical
systems framework for understanding life, cognition, and adaptive behaviour [3,
5, 12, 20].
In particular, this paper explores the songbird and its musical actuator, the
syrinx, as a possible agent template for this system concluding with an evaluation
of how this research might be extended to realize an embodied physical agent.
The songbird is an ideal model system on which to explore this approach to
generative music because the songbirds vocalizations and neural mechanisms
for song learning and control are extraordinarily well studied, providing a wealth
of data for our modeling efforts.
To begin creating a sensory-motor loop for generative music systems, efforts
were concentrated on the modeling and dynamical analysis of the syrinx, whose
structural dynamics will both constrain and inform the production of musical
sonic forms. The labial masses responsible for sound production in the syrinx
are modeled using modified nonlinear oscillators after the work of Garner, Laje,
Mindlin and colleagues [18, 22, 23]. In addition to the realistic reproduction of
birdsong, the syrinx oscillator acts as an appropriate actuator for the proposed
autonomous musician. Manipulation of the models parameters can affect rich,
non-discrete sonic dynamics including a continuum of frequencies, rhythms, and

150

Time (ms)

100

50

0
2

20
1

0
1

20

40

Fig. 1. Advances in basket weaving. Phase dynamics of the syrinx oscillator showing
stable limit cycles and point attactors.

tonal characteristics commonly associated with music such as portamento, vibrato, and tonal stacks (chords). Any potential control system will need to be
able to learn to control the dynamics of the oscillator, rather than predefined
musical entities.
To control the syrinx oscillator parameters, simple sine waves are used as
a stand-in for what will ultimately be output from an artificial neural network
controller. The oscillations are rough approximations of the neuromuscular gestures produced by the nucleus robustus archistriatalis (RA) which coordinate
the movements of syringeal muscles. In addition to mimicking the neuromuscular dynamics of syrinx, it is with specific interest to the author that potential
control systems possess dynamics which will explore the parameter space of the
syrinx oscillator model.
Before further description of the model and the experiments are discussed,
we will look at the motivations for this project, which are rooted in a shared
desire for improved autonomous behaviour in generative music systems.

Toward musical automata as dynamical systems

A major issue afflicting current approaches to autonomous generative music

systems has been identified as the structure/novelty tradeoff [31] whereby an
increase in the rules defining the generative process (and thus the musical structure) results in decreased novelty of sonic output and ultimately to predictable
pieces. Conversely, as the rules of musical structure are loosened (or specified

by proxy1 ), the sonic novelty increases often at the detriment of musicality. So

while a pre-programmed, expert knowledge of music theory guarantees musical results, it also guarantees that the system will not create anything novel or
unexpected. In fact, it is acknowledged by many researchers that recent efforts
in autonomously generated music are decidedly unmusical [31]. Miranda sums
the shared malaise of this situation perfectly: Can we possibly discover what is
needed to improve these systems? [26].
The structure/novelty trade-off in generative music systems is indicative of
a larger issue, one that was identified by W. Ross Ashby as Descartes dictum:
how can a designer build a device which outperforms the designers specifications? [8, 2]. As Ashby noted, in order to outperform its initial specification, a
device must be informationally open and capable of interacting with the world
independently of its designer. The lesson of dynamics extends beyond only an
devices interaction with its environment and into a devices internal operation
as well. Dynamics have been proposed to overcome limitations of the internal
use of symbols and pre-programmed representation which has been convincingly
argued are inadequate for the creation of adaptive novel behaviours in a system [7]. Traditional approaches to artificial intelligence (AI)2 seem to confirm
this limitation [6], leading researchers toward a more dynamic and embodied
approach to the modeling of the properties of living systems.
Much of the work in autonomous generative music systems, past and present,
has been based on AI techniques and in many ways can be seen as an extension
of the AI field in general. When generative music originally adopted the techniques of symbolic AI, it subsequently inherited the structure/novelty problem.
Indeed, when asked in an interview if a body3 would be critical in an artificial
composer of music, Marvin Minsky, co-founder of MITs AI Lab, responded by
saying, I dont think that this will be important [4]. So while researchers in the
fields of adaptive behaviour, artificial life, and autonomous robotics (together
characterized as new AI) have looked to dynamics as a break-out strategy to address Descartes dictum - a strategy originally formulated by the cyberneticists,
predating classical AI - research in autonomous generative music still overwhelmingly deals with closed, purely symbolic systems.
This is not to say that work in generative music has been practicing only classical AI for the last twenty years. Indeed many researchers have incorporated the
evolutionary [31] and agent-based approaches [10] associated with new AI, but
the systems still heavily rely on expert knowledge, such as the pre-programming
of musical notes and the symbolic manipulation of musical relationships. Furthermore, these systems are not connected to the environment and have no sense
1

This is the mapping of algorithm to musical phenomena [26]. It can also sometimes
be seen as the sonification of arbitrary algorithms.
Also characterized as classical AI, Good Old Fashioned AI (GOFAI), or symbolic
AI, this approach to AI focused almost purely on symbolic systems, often with the
intent that they would be connected to the world at some point in the future
Referring to the tenet of embodiment in new AI.

of the world or their impact on it. In a way, it has missed the most important
point. Music, like all behaviour, is an embodied activity.
The work described herein builds on the conviction that embodiment (the
ability for a system to sense and act on the world) is a necessary consideration in the automation of the compositional process as well as the creation of
autonomous artificial composers able to produce novel and appropriate musical
works. From a dynamical and embodied perspective, autonomous adaptive music can be generated without the pre-specification of music theory. Furthermore,
the musical behaviour is inherent in the dynamics of the brain-body system.
Eventually, musical context (also important for musicality) can be learned by
an embodied, situated musical automata through its interaction with the sonic
environment.
Extending the credo of new AI, the first steps toward creating an artificial
composer with human level proficiency may lie in the study of simpler qualitatively examples of musical behaviour from the biological world. For this, the most
familiar and well studied of biological musicians has been chosen as a model; the
songbird. It is beyond the scope of this paper to build the entire device, rather
it is intended to provide an account of how musical structures can arise from the
dynamics of the embodiment alone.

The songbird as autonomous instrument

This research on synthetic birdsong comes from a very long tradition. As

it turns out, the songbird has been the subject of automatic music4 for thousands of years. In addition to being the subject of self-playing hydro-mechanical
constructions [33] and musical clockwork automata (such as Drozs famous mechanical singing birds), the songbird has also been used in the flesh, trained to
sing popular tunes of the period, a practice known as bird fancying [1].
Bird fancying involves live songbirds, kept as captive musicians and trained
to sing modified tunes at the delight of human audiences. Interestingly, the
practice of bird fancying revealed some key insights into bird learning, song
development and behaviour long before modern science was was to pry apart
(literally) the neural and physiological mechanisms of the songbird [1].
In this historical context, we can view the efforts here as more closely resembling a bird fancying paradigm of musical automata than the purely computational systems of generative music.

Birdsong structure and dynamics

What kind of music can we expect from an autonomous instrument modeled

on the songbird? In this section, we examine the acoustical structure of natural birdsong. Spectrographic analysis will show us what types of sounds natural
birds can make and how these sounds are structured. This will ultimately lead
us toward the best choice of models to serve as musical actuators in our system
4

Automatic music concerns the automatic playback of pre-specified tunes.

10000

Freq (Hz)

8000

6000

4000

2000

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1
1.2
Time (ms)

1.4

1.6

1.8

Fig. 2. Spectrogram of the song of the White-crowned Sparrow (sound courtesy of the
Macaulay Library of Natural Sounds).

as well as give us a foundation in which to compare our modeled results with

that of the biological phenomena.
4.1

Song structures

The structure of birdsong is quite diverse. The frequency range of songs is

typically small, with fundamental frequencies in the range of 2 to 6 kHz. Structurally, the song can be divided into hierarchical levels consisting of elements
or notes as elementary building units. Several elements are combined to make
up syllables which last from a few to a few hundred milliseconds. Syllables, in
turn, are combined to form longer phrases which often repeat. Many phrases are
combined to form the song. Phrases and songs are often subject to individual
and regional variation [9].
The structure of any synthetic reproduction of birdsong will necessarily be
based on the natural song hierarchy as it is assumed that the form of the bird
and its vocal and neural mechanisms are selected for by evolution (most likely
by means of sexual selection [11, 27]) to be conducive to song in this form.
Though the reader is likely to be intimately familiar with the quality of many
birds songs, for this paper, it will be helpful to quantify the spectral content
of the sounds in a way that will allow for systematic investigation of natural
and synthesized song. A look at the spectral content and structure of natural
birdsong will show what can be expected sonically from a model.
The standard representation of spectral content is the spectrogram, as shown
in Figure 2. By examining the spectrogram, one can see the syllables and phrases
of the song structure. It is also the spectrogram which can reveal many of the
nonlinear dynamics as will be discussed.

4.2

Nonlinear dynamics in birdsong

Typical song has been shown to have components which can be purely tonal,
harmonic, inharmonic, and even contain complex and coupled amplitude and
frequency modulations. More specifically, spectrograms of birdsong contain the
fingerprints of nonlinear dynamics [13]. Under spectrographic analysis, specific nonlinear dynamical signatures can be observed such as frequency doublings or sudden jumps (as shown in Figure 2), transitions between harmonic
and inharmonic frequency stacks and even deterministic chaos (which appear as
spectrographic noise).
These dynamics are reproducible with a class of dynamical system called
nonlinear oscillators. Nonlinear oscillators have been used frequently to model
biological sound production and can roughly approximate the motion of the
membranous structures found in the windpipe of vertebrates. In the songbird,
the anatomical feature that contains these vibratory structures is the syrinx.
While filtering by the trachea and beak also play roles in sound quality, the
syrinx is responsible for much, if not all of the sound source.

The syrinx: anatomy and models

The quality and structure of vocalizations in the songbird are obviously intimately related to the physical and neural structures of the bird. Fortunately for
our purposes, few in the animal kingdom have enjoyed as much intensive study
as the songbird. Many hundreds of studies have been carried out on localizing
the muscles, membranes and neural pathways which contribute to song production. For the current paper, we are most interested in the structures involved in
sound generation, the syrinx.
5.1

Syrinx physical anatomy

The avian vocal organ responsible for the physical production of sound is the
syrinx. Though there are a wide variety of syrinx morphologies, they all share
some basic structures relevant to the production of sound.
The syrinx is located at the junction of the bronchi, projecting from the lungs,
and the trachea. It is composed of cartilaginous and membranous structures as
well as a series of specialized muscles. The inaccessibility of the syrinx due to its
size and place in the bird have historically made studies difficult.
The classical model [17] attributes the sound production based on morphological observations to vibrations in the syringeal medial tympaniform membrane
(MTM) in each bronchi which vibrate through the Bernoulli effect [14]. Recently
though, direct endoscopic observations of the syrinx during sound production by
Goller and Larsen [19], show that at least in those species studied, sound is generated by connective tissues called the medial and lateral labia, located at the
cranial end of each bronchus [30]. Surgical disruption of the MTM was not shown

Anatomy and funce syrinx. A Dorsal

n excised zebra finch
e trachea is at the top
wo bronchi are at the
he musculature inseveral bronchial and
ngs to provide control
ocalizations. B Schew of the photograph in
g the location of the
mpaniform membrane
nd the medial labium
the zebra finch, the
in the anterior part
mbrane is partially
insertion of the
scle onto the ML. C
drawing of one full
a 700-Hz oscillation
TM and the ML,
rom stroboscopic imvitro oscillations of
finch syrinx. Note the
motion of the MTM
uring the opening and
ases of the motion

Fig. 3. The syrinx. The actual structure, removed and cleaned, reprinted from [15]
(left). Major anatomical features, slightly modified and reprinted from [29] (right).

to have significant effect of the sound produced by the syrinx.

5.2

Syrinx oscillator models

The experiments by Goller and Larsen [19], having convincingly shown the
labia as the sound source in the syrinx through direct videography and MTM
destruction, has inspired the development of oscillating models of bird sound
production. Because of the evidence that syrinx labia function in a way which is
to the human
vocal The
folds (also in [19]), one of the first oscillator models to
d (Greenewalt 1968; similar
Setterwall
1901).
be
produced
by
Fee
et
al.
[16]
on a classic
model of human
Materials
and two-mass
methods
s clearly involved in sound-producing oscilla-was based
vocal fold oscillation by Ishizaka and Flanigan (1972). This model was further
demonstrated in a number
early etinal.vitro
taken up of
by Mergell
[24].
Preparation of the syrinx
Miskimen 1951; Ruppell The
1933),
andin until
re- and
strength
the Ishizaka
Flanigan based models is the ability to
account
for transitions
to chaotic
and finches
period doubling
as observed
as identified as the sound
producing
element
of vibrations
Male zebra
(T. guttata,
>100 in
days old) and male canaries
vivo
[16].
To
its
detriment
is
the
models
complexity.
Not
only
are
the
equations
x. The importance of the MTM in sound gen- (S. canaria American singer, >1 year old) were obtained from a
describing the system complex, thislocal
complexity
translates
intoBird
prohibitive
breeder
(Canary
Farm,comOld Bridge, N.J., USA) and
has been called into question
by the observation
putational and coding demands, making
them
impractical
for
use
as
phonator
housed
in
small
groups
in
cages
in
a
general aviary on a 12 h:12 h
situ destruction of the (sound
MTMsource)
has insurprisingly
the proposed larger
projects.cycle. The birds were decapitated and the syrinx was
day-night
ct on the vocalizations in More
zebra
finchGardner,
and carrecently,
Laje, Mindlin
collegues [18,
22, 23]1have
been
removedand
(including
roughly
cm of
trachea and 5 mm of both
developing
variants
of
a
model
originally
introduced
by
Titze,
thereby
extending
Goller and Larsen 1997). However, strobed bronchi) and placed in saline. The syrinx was pinned in a Sylgardtheir previous work on human vocallined
oscillations
[21]. They
claim thetissue
Titze was removed to allow opdish
and excess
connective
of oscillations in an in vitro
syrinx preparation tofold
model is one of the simplest modelstical
account
for
the
transfer
of
kinetic
energy
access to the medial tympaniform membrane and the medial
onstrated that the ML, together
with
the MTM,
to vocal fold
oscillations.
As simple
as the Either
Titze model
is, Garner
al were
labium.
the right
or leftethalf
of the syrinx was selected for
wave-like vibrations locked
to the
able to arrive
at angenerated
even simpler equation
for
a
nonlinear
oscillator
which
can was severed posterior to
measurement; the contralateral bronchus
produce
periodic
in Canaries, and extended to Sparrows.
Fee et al. 1998), suggesting
thatthethe
ML dynamics
and theobserved
the third
bronchial ring.
With simple sweeps of two control parameters representing the stiffness of the

unction to some extent as a unit in syringeal

ons. The role of the structural inhomogeneity in
llatory membrane thus remains unclear. For
y, in this paper the term medial vibratory
ne (MVM) will be used to refer to the composite
MTM structure.
mber of models of sound generation have been
d for the generation of mechanical oscillations in
nx (Brackenbury 1979; Casey and Gaunt 1985;

The syrinx was positioned as shown in Fig. 2; the trachea was

cut to a length of 2 mm and was attached to the base plate over the
acoustic port (!1 mm diameter) using cyano-acrylate glue. The
intact bronchus was attached to a static pressure sensor (model
SCX-01, Sensym, Milpitas, Calif., USA). For sound pressure calibration, a probe microphone (model ER-7C Etymotic Research)
was inserted into the severed bronchus and positioned in the
tracheal lumen within !1 mm of the pessulus. The syrinx was
embedded in agarose (Sigma Type III-A), with only the medial
membranes exposed. Measurements were usually begun within
30 min of decapitation and carried out for 12 h. The exposed

oscillator and the bronchial pressure, they could mimic the song of the Chingolo
Sparrow (Zonotrichia Capensis).
The strength of the Titze-based model is its utter simplicity which makes
dynamical analysis, implementation, and integration into other systems easier.
Unfortunately though, this model initially seems incapable of producing chaotic
dynamics [23] without some further modification. Another drawback may be a
lack of biologically supportable parameter values, though this is not something
of great concern for our current purposes. Though highly simplified, these basic
models can provide insights into how a simplified system operates, and can be
controlled.
Body abstraction and sensory-motor simplification is central in the study
of adaptive behaviour of which this paper is a part, and can be seen in many
works viewing the body as a state-dependent agent with simple actuators (such
as Beers minimally cognitive agents [5], among countless others). Similarly, the
object of actuation in our study is ultimately a nonlinear oscillator, based on
the songbirds syrinx. By understanding the syrinx oscillators dynamics, we not
only get a picture of how our autonomous instrument will sound, but we are
also better prepared to analyze how a control system exploits these dynamics in
sound production.

6
6.1

Dynamics of the syrinx oscillator

Syrinx as nonlinear oscillator

The syrinx oscillator model chosen for these experiments is the one developed
by Garner, Laje, Mindlin and colleagues which appears in [22], extended from
the original model proposed in [18]. It was chosen on the basis of simplicity,
controllability, and computational efficiency, as well as its ability to accurately
produce the sounds of songbirds.
The syrinx oscillator is basically a second-order ordinary differential equation
(ODE) of the following form.
x = y,

(1)

y = kx cx2 y + by f0 ,

(2)

where c is the linear dissipation constant representing density of the material,

f0 is the force of syringial muscle contraction, b is the bronchial air pressure,
and k is the labial tension. A diagram of how these parameters relate to the
idealized syrinx is shown in Figure 4. Parameters are not directly related to
specific muscles in the syrinx, but rather model the concerted efforts of the
muscles in the region leading to phonation and its control.
It is interesting to note that Equations 1 and 2 are basically a slight perturbation of the van der Pol oscillator [22]. The syrinx oscillator and the van der
Pol oscillator are representative of a broad class of nonlinear dynamical systems,

Fig. 4. The idealized syrinx. Shows the relation of parameters in the syrinx oscillator,
reprinted from [22].

generally referred to as nonlinear oscillators. More specifically they are relaxation oscillators.
6.2

Relaxation oscillators

Relaxation oscillators are dynamical systems which exhibit stable limit cycles and have been successfully used to model biological phenomena that have
self-sustained oscillations such as the heartbeat and neurons [28]. In fact, a large
variety of periodic biological phenomena can be characterized by relaxation oscillations [32].
Limit cycles are isolated closed trajectories in the phase space (one variable
plotted against another) of a nonlinear system. As Strogatz notes, limit cycles
are inherently nonlinear phenomena (p.196) and the amplitude and frequency
of the system are ultimately dependent upon initial conditions and the structure of the system itself. Unlike linear oscillators where any disturbance to the
amplitude will persist in the system forever, nonlinear oscillators are resistant
to perturbations, returning to the preferred limit cycle for a given set of parameters [28]. For a more exhaustive treatment, the reader is referred to [32] and [28].
6.3

Dynamics specific to the syrinx oscillator

The syrinx oscillator has dynamics which are curiously different from the
standard van der Pol, as much as its relaxation oscillation is mirrored. The b
term in the syrinx oscillator leads to a Hopf bifurcation [22] of the system at
b = 0. For negative values of b, representing reverse in pressure and an inhalation
by the bird, the phase space of the system moves towards a fixed point attractor.
Practically, this means that there is a loss of oscillatory behavior, and an ultimate
loss of phonation. As can be seen in Figure 5, the shape of the limit cycle toward

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.2

0.5

1.5
time

time

2.5

time

0
x

time

Fig. 5. Dynamics of the syrinx oscillator. (left column) Graph of y(t) for +b showing
relaxation oscillations and phase portrait of (x, y) for solutions to Equations 1 and 2
starting from (x, y) = (0.01, 0.01). (right column) Graph of y(t) for b showing a more
sinusoidal waveform leading to a point attractor for Equations 1 and 2 starting from
(x, x)
= (0.01, 0.01).

ynamical Hypothesis in Cognitive Science

namical Hypothesis in Cognitive Science

the point attractor is also quite different, more resembling a pure sine wave. This
sinusoidal waveshape appears as b moves toward 0.
High values for f 0 and c also result in loss of phonation, but for different
quantitative reasons. If c is too high all kinetic energy is lost to the medium/labia,
that is, the material is too dense. If f 0 is too high, the model labia are completely
closed, limiting airflow and thus oscillation of the membrane.
The value k, which represents labial stiffness as caused by the musculature,
effects the frequency of the oscillations. As expected, high values of k results in
high frequency oscillations and visa versa.
In order to faithfully reproduce birdsong, all parameters b and k cannot be
left at a single setting and are best served as functions of time. The original work
on the syrinx oscillator was able to reproduce many features of birdsong using
smooth oscillatory sweeps of the control parameters b and k (and later f 0 for
abrupt phonation control) using a pair of coupled oscillators tracing ellipses in
b, k phase space. These periodic sweeps have since been experimentally verified
[25], though they are not the result of coupled oscillators.
Studies have shown that the neuromuscular response of the syringeal muscles follow oscillatory trajectories in response to stimulation from RA projection
neurons [30]. For the proceeding simulations, simple uncoupled sine wave oscillators were used for the continuous control parameters (b, k) on the syrinx model,
thereby approximating the actions of the RA. This method follows the work
presented in [23, 18]. An understanding of how the oscillatory dynamics of the
syringeal muscles influence the sound will be of great use in defining a control
system and its range of operation.

Gelder
entGeldoferPhilosophy
yentofofMelPhiblooursophyne
VIy ofCMel3052bourAustneralia
@arVIiCel.3052
unimelAustb.erdu.aliaau
elar.iitesl..uuninimmelelbb..eedu.du.aau/u~tgelder
el.its.unimelb.edu.au/~tgelder

Fig. 6. Bifurcation of the syrinx oscillator. This image modified from the original which
appears in (Laje et al. 2002) [22].

It should also be noted here, but will also be pointed out in the simulation
results, that the frequency of control parameter sweeps should be much lower
than the frequency of oscillations induced in the system as a whole.

7
7.1

Synthetic birdsong: simulation methods and results

Experimental setup

For this paper, numerical integration, visualization, and sonification of the

syrinx oscillator was done in MATLAB software by MathWorks. Simulations
often took as long as 3 minutes render time per second of audio produced.
Using the parameter values for b, k, c, and f 0 established in [22] it was difficult if not impossible to get the appropriate responses from the system. These
values were replaced with value ranges that produced appropriate results over
many trials. This discrepancy could have been due to the methods of integration
used (ode45() in MATLAB) as well as from the extraction of values from the
solutions that were necessary to reformat them to a form whose amplitude could
be transferred to the audio range [-1 1], sampled at 44100 times per second,
resulting in a 22.050 KHz signal.
Parameter values for the model that worked well were as follows: b in the
range of [-1 8], k in the range [0 600] ( 10:1 b), c in the range [0 50] ( 5:1 b),
f 0 in the range [0 40] ( 5:1 b). These values for the model make it irreconcilable with experimental data beyond the shape and behaviour of the vibratory
mechanisms. For the experiments, both c and f 0 were kept at fixed values and
parameters b and k were driven with sine waves as previously mentioned.

10000

8000

8000

Frequency

Frequency

10000

6000

6000

4000

4000

2000

2000

0.5

1
Time

1.5

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5
Time

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

Fig. 7. Natural and synthetic songs. Spectrogram of the song of the Rufous-sided
Towhee (top) and spectrogram of a synthesized birdsong (bottom) where b is varied by
a low frequency sine wave and k is varied using a combination of a sine driven, adaptive
van der Pol at t < 500ms, and a sine wave thereafter. Syllable and phrase similarity is
readily apparent.

7.2

Results

The range of musical dynamics that could be achieved with the syrinx oscillator was quite surprising and upon examination, makes sense within the context
of the model as previously discussed. The spectrograms in figures 7 and 8 reveal
several of the interesting dynamical features of this oscillator. These phase dynamics are better observed in the 3-dimentional traces in Figures 1 and 9 showing
the predicted movement of the system at the bifurcation point from sharp stable
limit cycles to smoother cycles which quickly lead to point attractors.
It is the shape of the limit cycles which ultimately result in the harmonic
stacks and their ratios in sound space which collapse as b nears the bifurcation
point of the system (b = 0). This can be clearly seen in Figure 8, which are
representative of the main findings of these experiments. Swept values for the
b parameter, representing broncial pressure, resulted in a smooth transition of
the harmonic stacks, increasing the space between harmonics as the value of
b increased. Additionally, as b turns negative, phonation ceases, as predicted,
only to resume again when b turns positive. High top values in the range of b
resulted in increased steepness of the slide of harmonic stacks. The frequency of b
ultimately characterizes the starts and stops of phonation in the synthetic song.
It is this parameter that is essential in the creation of rhythms for structuring
syllables and phrases.
The value of the k parameter had noticeable effect on the frequency of the
oscillator and a broad range was necessary to ensure phonation in the frequency
range characteristic of the organism it models. Though further experimentation

30
20

10
0
!10
!20
!30

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

time
4

x 10

Frequency

1.5

0.5

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

Time
1

0.5
0
!0.5
!1
0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

time

Fig. 9. Experimental synthetic birdsong. Syrinx models oscillations (top), spectrogram

showing thesynthetic
frequency content
(middle),Syrinx
and plot models
of unscaledoscillations
control parameters
for
Fig. 8. Experimental
birdsong.
(top),
spectrogram
variables k and b, using by simple sine waves. Email the author for sound sample.
showing the frequency content (middle), and plot of unscaled control parameters for
variables k and b, using simple sine waves.

is necessary, this model was intially unable to produce period doubling, a feature
commonly observed in birdsong.
One additional consideration was left out of these experiments, and that is
the low pass filtering effects of the trachea and beak. In other experiments modeling birdsong, great lengths have been taken to make mathematical tube models
of the trachea and beak resulting in much more natural sounding synthetic song.
However, for the purposes of our applications as described previously, this should
not be an issue. Instantiation of this model as sound generator in physical body
will allow for a trachea and beak that require not math, that is, a real tube can
affixed to filter the sound output from the model.

150

100

50

Fig. 9. Close-up of syrinx oscillator x, y phase dynamics in Figure 1 with time plotted
on the vertical axis.

Conclusions and future research

2

0
30

20

The syrinx oscillator seems to be quite capable of providing a basis for the
production of musical material. Through the manipulation of parameters in this
simple dynamical system, we were able to experimentally synthesize many of the
components of musical sound. The bifurcation of the system at b = 0 results in
the generation of rhythm as well as having an affect on the timbre of the sound.
Sweeping of the k parameter allows for access to frequencies in a sufficient range
for varied melodic content. The results of the present experiment suggest that
this model can provide a rich canvas to work with en route to musical automata.
Moreover, these experiments suggest that the dynamics of a system can indeed
give rise to potentially musical material without musical specifications per se.
The relative ease and success of the present implementation and analysis
owes much to the numerous obsessive studies and simulations of the avian vocal
organ, as well as to the birds sacrificed [19] in order to recreate them. Though
the models can effectively imitate simple song phrases, they still seem a far cry
from the complex structures found in species such as Luscinia Megarhynchos (the
Nightengale), though it is assumed that the structures are a neural phenomena
and do not require a drastic rework of the physical model.
Now that the body of the proposed musical automata has been chosen, a
suitable neural controller can be investigated. Fortunately, there is a wealth
of information concerning the neural mechanisms and pathways involved in the
10

10

20

30

40

1.5
1
0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5

control and production of birdsong. In fact, the learning of songs and mechanisms
of vocalization in humans and songbird share some striking parallels. As with
human speech, songbirds must learn their songs from tutors. This convergent
evolution has made the oscine an extraordinarily well studied order of birds,
much of it centered around illuminating possible mechanisms of human speech
acquisition and learning.
Combining what is known about the behavioural neurobiology of birdsong
with techniques of simulated learning and artificial neural networks, the prospects
for a complete model seem encouraging. Future research aims to combine what
is known of songbird neural architectures with the model syrinx to produce a
device that is able to sense and respond to the world, hopefully outperforming its
designers specifications (which should be little more than the dynamic structure
of the system).
For many researchers, songbird vocalization and learning models allow for the
testing of hypotheses concerning how birdsongs are learned and produced, based
on experimental evidence with living specimens. To the author, birdsong models
represent an opportunity to explore new possibilities of autonomously generated,
adaptive music using these models as self-playing instruments, in much the same
way that eighteenth century bird fancyers used living birds but whose physical
realization is wholly non-organic and more akin to clockwork musical automata.

Acknowledgments
This paper is dedicated to Marilyn Anne Losco Michael. Thanks to Sarah
Angliss for her research and turning me on to the The Bird Fancyers Delight, Alice Eldridge for discussions on nonlinear oscillators, the nightengales in Sheffield
and the Royal Pavilion in Brighton, Dr. Max Michael III, Fernando Almeida e
Costa and Eduardo Izquierdo-Torres who organized the activaite.d workshop,
and finally thanks to two anonymous reviewers for the helpful comments and
references.

References
1. Sarah Angliss. Flights of fancy? thoughts on the ancient practice of teaching
songbirds anthropogenic tunes. 2005.
2. W. Ross Ashby. Can a mechanical chess-player outplay its designer? British
Journal for the Philosophy of Science, pages 4457, 1952.
3. W. Ross Ashby. Design for a Brain, 2nd Edition. Chapman & Hall Ltd., 1960.
4. Mira Balaban, Kemal Ebcioglu, and Otto Laske. Understanding Music with AI.
AAAI Press/MIT Press, 1992.
5. Randall Beer. A dynamical systems perspective on agent-environment interaction.
Artificial Intelligence, (72):173215, 1993.
6. Rodney Brooks. Intelligence without reason. In Luc Steels and Rodney Brooks,
editors, The Artificial Life Route to Artificial Intelligence, chapter 2, pages 2581.
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates 1995, 1991.

7. Claudia Carello, M. T. Turvey, Peter N. Kugler, and Robert E. Shaw. Inadequacies

of the computer metaphor. In M.S. Gazzaniga, editor, Handbook of Cognitive
Neurosciences, pages 229248. Plenum, New York, 1984.
8. Peter Cariani. Emergence and artificial life. In Christopher G. Langton, Charles
Taylor, J. Doyne Farmer, and Steen Rasmussen, editors, Artificial Life II, pages
775797. Addison-Wesley, Redwood City, CA, 1992.
9. Clive K. Catchpole and Peter J. B. Slater. Bird Song : Biological Themes and
Variations. Cambridge University Press, 1995.
10. Palle Dahlstedt and Mats G. Nordahl. Living melodies: Coevolution of sonic communication. Leonardo, 34(3):243248, 2001.
11. Charles Darwin. On the Origin of Species. Harvard University Press, 1859,
reprinted 2003.
12. Fernando Almeida e Costa and Eduardo Izquierdo-Torres. activate.d reading
group.
13. Coen P.H. Elemans. How do birds sing? PhD thesis, Wageningen University and
Research Centre, 2004.
14. Seppo Fagerlund. Acoustics and physical models of bird sounds. 2003.
15. Michale S. Fee. Measurement of the linear and nonlinear mechanical properties
of the oscine syrinx: Implications for function. J Comp Physiol A, (188):829839,
2002.
16. Michale S. Fee, Boris Shraiman, Bijan Pesaran, and Partha P Mitra. The role of
nonlinear dynamics of the syrinx in the vocalizations of a singbird. Nature, 395,
September 3 1998.
17. N. H. Fletcher. Bird song - a quantitative model. Journal of Theoretical Biology,
135:455481, 1988.
18. Tim Gardner, G Gecchi, and M Magnasco. Simple motor gestures for birdsongs.
Physical Review Letters, 87(20), November 12 2001.
19. F. Goller and O. N. Larson. A new mechanism of sound generation in songbirds.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 94:1478714791, December
1997.
20. Inman Harvey, Ezequiel Di Paolo, Elio Tuci, Rachel Wood, and Matt Quinn. Evolutionary robotics: A new scientific tool for studying cognition. Artificial Life,
2005.
21. Rodrigo Laje, Timothy J. Gardner, and Gabrial B. Mindlin. Continuous model for
vocal fold oscillations to study the effect of feedback. Physical Review E, 64.
22. Rodrigo Laje, Timothy J. Gardner, and Gabrial B. Mindlin. Neuromuscular control
of vocalizations in birdsong: A model. Physical Review E, 65, 2002.
23. Rodrigo Laje and Gabriel B. Mindlin. Diversity within a birdsong. Physical Review
Letters, 89(28), 2002.
24. Patrick Mergell, W Tecumseh Fitch, and Hanspeter Herzel. Modeling the role of
nonhuman vocal membranes in phonation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of
America, 1999.
25. G. B. Mindlin, T. J. Gardner, F. Goller, and R. Suthers. Experimental support
for a model of birdsong production. Physical Review E, 68, 2003.
26. Eduardo Reck Miranda. Emergent sound repertoires in virtual societies. Computer
Music Journal, 26(2):7790, 2002.
27. W A Searcy and M Andersson. Sexual selection and the evolution of song. Annual
Review of Ecology and Systematics, 17(November):507533, 1986.
28. Steven H. Strogatz. Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos. Westview Press, 1994.
29. Roderick A. Suthers. Vocal mechanisms in birds and bats: a comparative view.
Annals of the Brazilian Academy of Sciences, 2004.

30. Rodrick A. Suthers and Daniel Margoliash. Motor control of birdsong. Current
Opinion in Neurobiology, 12, 2002.
31. Peter M. Todd and Gregory M. Werner. Frankensteinian methods for evolutionary
music composition. In N Griffith and P. M. Todd, editors, Musical Networks:
Parallel distributed perception and performance. 1998.
32. DeLiang Wang. Wiley Encyclopedia of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, volume 18, pages 396405. Wiley and Sons, 1999.
33. Bennet Woodcroft. The Pneumatics of Hero of Alexandria. Taylor Walton and
Maberly, 1851.