Going through all of the old tracks sounds like a massive undertaking.
I’m sure all the new reviewers are just as good as the old reviewers, in terms of their musical abilities and skill. Perhaps the problem is that we are all human and when you inflate the number of personnel or people working on a something, you will inevitably shift the existing paradigm. After all, everyone brings their own ears, experience, and unique perspective. I believe that’s what’s happened here. Music is a very subjective thing – even mixing and mastering can become very controversial topics depending on who you are talking to – there is no “gold” standard when it comes to what sounds good; you guys (reviewers) can only try and match what the perceived “commercial standard” for this site is, and that standard is obviously changing, or has changed, either because of new sets of ears, internally, demand from authors, or other factors. I’m not saying that’s a bad thing, but I wouldn’t be surprised when people who thought they had the standards figured out are suddenly caught off guard, confused, become annoyed, or are even angered.
All we really have to go by as authors (in terms of examples for mixing/mastering/production) are the other tracks on this site. Most of these hard rejections are along the lines of “not quite meet commercial production (samples quality/mixing/mastering) standard,” sample quality aside, if it comes down to mixing/mastering, shouldn’t that be a soft rejection? Can’t you usually fix those types of issues? Admittedly, you can’t fix them in every case, but when you hear tracks that sound good from an engineering/mixing/production standpoint, and their rejection e-mail says otherwise (or at least that’s what the author says), it can be quite confusing, not just for the author but for anyone who hears the track.
I know you guys do the best you can, but I believe this will always be an inherently flawed system, with margins of error, and even if those margins of error are small and acceptable, they will invariably upset someone. I’m sure some members of the review team make more mistakes than others, just from a logistical standpoint the guy whose been doing this for several years and has processed thousands of tracks is going to be better than the guy who started last weak, even if the new guy is seasoned and experienced with music in general. I’m not trying to badmouth the reviewers – my hats off to you guys – I don’t think I could do it, just because music IS so subjective, and I definitely respect everyone who is a reviewe’, and their skill and the level they have achieved with their music, but it is and always will be far from a perfect system.
I DO THINK the mods should move/restrict all of the item discussions to the item discussion forum, otherwise I don’t see the point of that sub-forum. If people want to discuss hard rejections and the review process in a general sense, I think they should be able to do so, but everyone posting their specific rejected tracks on the main forum is starting to get a little out of hand. I think it’s become the “well he did it, now I’ll do it” sort of thing. It leads to discussions like this which are good, but I think if someone really feels wrong they should send an e-mail to the team.
Appreciate the response, you’ve always been one of the good ones, not to say there are bad ones, but well, you know, some people are more passionate than others…that’s any job, any field.
Pretty much the only way to get that “real” piano sound is to play it as best you can and not quantize everything, and to also have a killer library. Hell, I play piano and have gotten the “piano sounds too tight” critique before.
In this particular case, I think he’s probably talking about the bit towards the end with the chords; could just be your library, but the piano does sound a bit artificial there.
and yeah, those fast runs.
I say good luck, it’s always hard to transition from getting that paycheck to paying yourself, whether it be starting a business, music, whatever. If you take the perspective of, “what if, instead of spending all that time working a job I’d been producing music?” imagine how successful you’d be! You would have spent tens of thousands of hours doing something you love, and investing in residual, cumulative income, instead of a one time-payout. I think anytime you invest in yourself the gains aren’t always immediate but in the long run they can payoff.
My music is part time and probably always will be, but for the last few years I’ve also been trying to transition away from a paycheck towards living by my own means, and I’m confident with a lot of hard work it is possible. Quitting that (more than) full-time job and taking a pay cut so I have more free time to do what I want was the best decision I ever made. The hard part is kicking yourself in the ass enough, but with the internet and digital distribution it’s possible to make it in this new frontier.
8 sales in a few days is actually really good on AudioJungle!
Sometimes the metrics lean heavily towards the title. If you type, “inspired dream, inspirational dream, or inspiring dream” your track is the third track that pops up. I don’t think search results are weighted by trending because it’s probably too easy to inflate through forum posts, driving traffic from offsite, getting your friends to click, ect. I think most people probably just search for what they want and rank by sales anyway.
Or another thought; they have completely (or nearly) done away with soft rejections to speed up the review times and having to re-review tracks, would explain all the hard rejections.
They are rejected a lot of stuff these days, God know why. Your track does have a weird noise at 1:13, which might warrant a soft reject, but a hard reject no.
Possibly two things have happened; either they hired an overzealous reviewer (or two) who rejects 99% of tracks on their shifts, or the review team is being pushed to make snap-decisions. When I took a hiatus a few months back, the review time was around 7 days now it’s 16-24 hours, obviously something has changed in terms of the review process.
Seeing as how some of what’s getting approved doesn’t sound the “absolute best” (just my opinion) and there are SO MANY THREADS started by people with rejected tracks that sound fine – even posting in the main forums, they are obviously pissed!) – I’m going to chalk it up to inconsistency in the review team. Seems like a real crap-shoot these days in terms of what gets approved for sale. I hope they address this issue soon, and/or layout a DETAILED description of what they expect production wise. It used to be I could see where the review team was coming from with a hard rejected track – be it my own or someone else’s – now I have no clue and I don’t think I’m the only one who feels this way?
Maybe they HAVE implemented ridiculously high standards, which is fine, but I think in that case there is a huge lack of enforcement which is creating an unfair, highly-subjective playing field.
If the issue is that the review team is being pushed too hard, I’d prefer they go back to a week or more to review a track so they can take their time, rather than having all these great tracks flushed down the toilet.
Or possibly AudioJungle is reaching a critical-mass where they feel like they already have more than enough music or contributors, like some of the other stock music sites have. I guess all we can do is speculate until someone from Envato actually decides to weigh-in on this issue. Maybe we are all being paranoid, but I don’t think so, I think you can definitely feel this change, whatever it is.