I want to raise the issue on the approval process. Isn’t it would be a great idea to write a few words (3-5) on rejection reasons, for us, authors? Words from a reviewer, I mean. It takes 5 seconds, but benefits from those “tips” are endless:
The author knows what direction to move further and develop
Reviewer spends less time viewing the records - the authors will make less similar mistakes
Faster approval process
There will be more high quality tracks - more money for Envato
Sorry, if this question was mented here on forums.
Also, if it possible, can we hear some words from developers (approval judges - don’t know how to call them), if there any difficulties to do such a feature? (code, time, subjectivity of a reviewer, etc.)
We can be better if we help each other!
Hi, thanks for sharing your Ideas. I also think this could be endlessly helpful in lots of cases.
Recently I had a soft rejected song with vocals, and the letter told me that they can only accept the instrumental version of the song. And the standard reason was included for rejection the vocal version (it doesn’t meet Audiojungle quality standard and so on). So I left only instrumental version and resubmitted and wrote the message to the reviewers asking to tell me what exactly is wrong with vocals so I could improve it for my further submissions. Unfortunately nobody answers and the instrumental version was silently approved.
So this is very frustrating because such things left authors guessing in what direction to move further.
If I remember correctly they used to give slightly more detailed reasons on hard rejections, but they stopped doing it simply for time reasons. The AJ reviewers are already swamped with submissions as it it, and even though it may not seem like much to write out a more detailed response, when thousands of tracks are being rejected every week it can add up.
Not only does it take five seconds but it could be made even faster by having preset problem buttons that take one second to click, like
"Song is not equalized and mastered"
“Song is panned to one side”
"Song is too short."
I suggested something like that a while ago but of course no response from the staff.
A few words can be written in 10 seconds, while listening to track. Of course, it’s only my suggestion.
A set of buttons, as PixelLoveLLC said, makes things even easier.
Thanks for the submission, @SixideBeats
I’ve watched this webinar. It’s hard to listen to the speakers, even if english was my native language, which is not)
Nevertheless I’ve caught the idea of this video: if you got “hard rejected” - don’t get lost in your grief, listen to other successfull authors, work harder and learn stronger))
What I talk here about is an equilateral dialogue between authors and, umm, their employers. Don’t you think it’s a strange situation when you built a house, and then your construction customer says to you: “it’s bad, rebuild it or build another one”, and that’s all? Without an explanation or comments on what is wrong?
When you build your “house” for a month and then get “rejection mail” - it’s painful experience without any thoughts of what to do next. There was a time when I was going through for 3 months.
The webinar is very good, but it makes me feel that there were more soft rejections in the past than nowadays. What could be soft rejection earlier turned to hard rejection later. It’s a question of an influence level. Despite all discussions about inconsistency I agree that reviewers are not obliged to assign thousands of tasks to authors who have their own free will to compose and change their music at their discretion.
We are not students here and what stands behind a hard rejection (besides “Something wrong”) is " We respect your vision, but this is just not proper here in these conditions".
For example, tons of music I may like to listen, would be hard rejected, despite its CD releases and fame; something because of a narrow niche, something because of specific samples/mixing/mastering/arrangement…
Well, in a case of a hard rejection we don’t get a request to fully rework a composition. As I have seen in topics here, it’s just enough to find a weakness and work on it.
I agree that AJ was not intended to be a student sandbox. However, the thread here is not about teaching how to do, we are not asking to write what kind of instrument need to be used and what frequency need to be cured. One word - “equalization”, or maybe “arrangement” is just enough to move further. There was a situation when I submit two similar tracks (instruments, style, mixing) and one was approved, the second was hard rejected. I didn’t know what to do and just left rejected track laying on my HDD “as is”, untouched.
Another problem here I see is that if an author asks for a help here on forum - it’s almost a guesswork for my opinion, because nobody can tell for sure that THIS IS the problem as a reviewer considered from his point of view. So, you’re right, @NVolkov , that we don’t get a request to fully rework a composition, but in case of total “blindness” and uncertainty we are forced to do that.
What are these places of feedback for if not exactly to be a student sandbox? Getting feedback helps you learn, asking questions helps you learn, discussing music and equipment helps you learn, seeing what sells and what doesn’t helps you learn…
How could AJ make money if people never figured out how to make good music? AJ might as well be an apprenticeship in a college for making music. You work along the way part time and eventually you make enough to pay for rent or other expenses.
