The evaluation of music understanding in Large Audio-Language Models (LALMs) requires a rigorously defined benchmark that truly tests whether models can perceive and interpret music, a standard that current data methodologies frequently fail to meet.This paper introduces a meticulously structured approach to music evaluation, proposing a new dataset of 320 hand-written questions curated and validated by experts with musical training, arguing that such focused, manual curation is superior for probing complex audio comprehension.To demonstrate the use of the dataset, we benchmark six state-of-the-art LALMs and additionally test their robustness to uni-modal shortcuts.

In this work, we explore the use and reliability of Large Language Models (LLMs) in musicology. From a discussion with experts and students, we assess the current acceptance and concerns regarding this, nowadays ubiquitous, technology. We aim to go one step further, proposing a semi-automatic method to create an initial benchmark using retrieval-augmented generation models and multiple-choice question generation, validated by human experts. Our evaluation on 400 human-validated questions shows that current vanilla LLMs are less reliable than retrieval augmented generation from music dictionaries. This paper suggests that the potential of LLMs in musicology requires musicology driven research that can specialized LLMs by including accurate and reliable domain knowledge.