A proper reply. Thank you very much. Now it’s my turn to take my time
I started to write some follow up questions but I think you’ve had enough ideas by now. Since I’m mainly a sound designer it’s good to know that you are in fact, and will be in the future, focusing mostly on music.
“The Sound of Nature” was great to see. I’m looking forward to more of those
Interesting discussion and strict answers Audiojungle is very interestic place with community and good communication, but indeed it’s easier to submit music than SFX . You are very selective and subjective in this matter. I’m not saying it’s wrong but: - Sometimes it costs too much time to prepare sound for loading and waiting for approval to find that you don’t need that sound or you think it won’t sell like most of foley things - 1$ price is really not interesting to make complex SFX so most contributors submit whooshes, dings and impacts. In plus that you have extended license much easier to purchase than elsewhere. - SFX needs volume to give profits, I was amazed that music has 7 times more clips than SFX . In this system rather any SFX only maker can earn serious $ without contributing other media or on other stocks.
That’s my 2 cents comparing to other sites I contribute. It’s good that Audiojungle is quite different but there is too narrow focus on SFX – they are rather special effects than sound effects. Thank you
fxprosound saidI agree with this one.
- Sometimes it costs too much time to prepare sound for loading and waiting for approval to find that you don’t need that sound or you think it won’t sell like most of foley things
It always puzzled me, how can reviewers know a certain sound (or any other file, for that matter) won’t sell, if there aren’t any similar examples already in the library? Or maybe they know something we don’t, like who are the primary target groups in AudioJungle marketing strategy?