Thanks for the info 
This is the kind of feedback we’ve all been asking for. If you keep authors informed there will be less frustration and bad blood. Keep it up. 400,000 items a month?! Goodness gracious!!
1 Like
On that note; one of our planned initiatives is actually significantly improving our Quality <-> Author comms. We’d already started on some of the foundations for it, but needed to reschedule it in the roadmap for higher priority stuff (like increased review capacity). The whole team and I are really looking forward to working on that one. 
6 Likes
Thank you Jarel for the information. This update is very much appreciated. Good to hear that you and team are marching well to your plan. I wish you good luck towards accomplishing your goals for the year.
Re: AJ. Three weeks is a crazy long time for files to sit in a queue in the audio business in general, and it just continues to grow. Knowing now that June is the target for fixing the problem, when can we expect to see it begin trending in that direction? Are their incremental goal deadlines to help gets us back to a reasonable turnaround time?
Also on the idea of outsourcing review tasks to reputable community members. We have done that before and it worked great! I remember reviewing myself for a short while (nearly six years ago) when the team needed help. It sped things up during crunches, introduced Envato to the most qualified and engaged community members and also elevated several of us to forum moderators, etc along the way. From this side of the fence at least it seemed like a really great decision and part of why community became such a profoundly powerful component of AJ overall.
I personally wonder if all the recent changes, and resulting unrest, as been (in part) because of AJ trending away from community involvement in general. There is most certainly a big difference in how AJ authors are being considered when compared to the rest of the marketplaces and this seems very un-Envato-like.
1 Like
Thanks for the update.
Great questions and feedback, OhmLab.
-
We’d prefer to avoid providing specifics on shorter-term incremental goals / steps with regards to review resourcing as it often sets expectations that may not be held to due to the number of variables that can rapidly change the situation / available options. So having said that (ie. I’ll provide some insights, but please bear in mind it often changes), we have several short-term options in motion that we expect will provide a fairly substantial jump in reviewing capacity (some temporary while we work toward the longer term goals). We’re anticipating at least some of these options to come into play within the coming weeks. That won’t suddenly drop review turnaround by a large margin, but should mitigate additional delay and hopefully reduce it slightly.
-
Community members will be welcome to apply for reviewing jobs, but we won’t be pursuing community review for the time being. It was a lot easier doing things like that 6+ years ago than it is today (for all good reasons that were implemented to improve our ability to better deliver to our community), so it would need further work to potentially enable that again—all normal in a growing and changing community and business.
-
Could you perhaps shoot me a direct message with some more info. on why you see AJ authors being considered differently from the other marketplaces? This certainly isn’t the perspective of the Quality team so I’d love to better understand what you’re seeing, etc. Thanks!
I think this point is very important. I have 3 years old songs that were soft rejected by the reviewers in that time. Those times reviewers allowed and informed me to make the necessary changes in the song to fix it and then it ended up being a good selling item.
Nowadays if something easily fixable in a song is wrong goes directly to the bin by a hard reject
Anyway thank you for the big changes to come and to Envato in general
1 Like
Just to expand on Urbazon’s suggestion of only uploading 4K, and then there is the option for buyers to download/buy 4K or 1080p… allow me to take you on a journey of imagination:
There’s 61,469 UHD items on the site, lets say everyone also uploaded HD versions of them as well. That means that it took 6,607 hours to review those HD files. I’m basing that on your team of sixty reviewing 400,000 items a month.
The minimum wage in Australia is $16.87 an hour… so those 6,607 hours equates to $111,460.
Food for thought.
That’s not taking into account the time spent by authors uploading the files, rendering different sizes, storage costs for authors, storage costs for Envato etc etc.
1 Like
Can’t wait for Envato to get the AudioJungle times down, it must be really tough for the reviews to go through the volume of music they do though but a 7-10 day review time would be awesome!
Excellent news, Envato Thanks!!!
Nice feedback, thank you. But waiting until then is a bit harsh, something has to be changed now. Its already 17 days. If this continues we will have to wait for the first review well until then 
1 Like
Great news I think you guys need hiring 100 reviewers more 
1 Like
Thank God
Good news…! Thank you, Envato …)
But there are so many bad quality items are still approving… I think you have to tighten quality control of music tracks, and not approve the tracks below average at least…
Thanks for information! Hope that changes will have an effect ASAP
+1 Why aren’t you doing this already? It’s kind of frustrating that we won’t see a better reviewing stream until June-July. This has been an issue for quite a while, and it’s only been getting worse - we all know that. I bet there’s a handful of authors who would jump at the notion of being paid to help out and make ThemeForest’s reviewing system better again (I know I would).
As others have mentioned, waiting 3+ weeks on an initial review means that you’ve let the reviewing situation get way out of hand. I don’t see why you wouldn’t have had this issue resolved by now, making everyone happier and more money faster.
4 Likes
i think envato should introduce author and reviewer chat feature for soft rejected items to reduce queue because if an author needs further information or suggestion about soft rejected item he/she have to resubmit that item as it is in most cases or he have to submit a ticket to discuss with review which is also lengthy process. so with chat session time can be saved for both review team and author
I would have thought that would increase the queue rather than reduce it. I could be wrong.
I think replying to a chat message is less time consuming than reviewing item without changes when author resubmit item as it is just to get more information