In addition to being the happy developer of WavePlayer, a plugin for WordPress that has just turned 1000-license old and has already earned me the Author Level 5 badge, I have been composing, producing, orchestrating, conducting and mixing music for the past 20 years. Ironically, coding is not my main job but something I do for fun in my spare time, even though, here on Envato, I seem to be more successful as a programmer rather than as a composer!
I have been trying to navigate myself through the AudioJungle guidelines so that I better understand what is the exact target we have to follow in order to be fully in line with what the reviewers are judging worthy. I also spent much time searching for further information on this forum. My experience as a composer gives me a good understanding of what “commercial quality standard” means and, most importantly, how music can be created to help editors easily complete the job without too many hassles. And I also totally get the fact that AudioJungle is interested in keeping its library up to its quality standard (although, every now and then, I come across tracks that are shockingly amateurish).
Nevertheless, the line between “commercial quality standard” and “cloned music, as long as it follows the standard” can be very blurry. The risk is that a library could soon become crowded with tracks that are not too dissimilar from each other and, most importantly, don’t showcase a strong personality. Particularly, the authors who have just started producing music for AudioJungle might play safe by “mimicking” what is already in the library, rather than fully express themselves.
Of course, I believe there should be plenty of room for composers to express themselves without leaving the reign of a commercially suitable music track. That is the reason why I feel like the canned responses we receive when we get a track hard-rejected should include a much broader and more specific list of details. I am not saying that the reviewer should give us a lengthy magazine-like review on our tracks and I understand that Envato is trying to keep the reviewing times as short as possible. At the same time, I feel that just saying that a track does not meet the general commercial quality standard required to be accepted on AudioJungle is not enough and leave us, authors, completely in the dark about the very reason why a track was rejected. Maybe a dropdown list in their review control panel allowing them to select one or more reasons why they believe the track is not up to the standard could be a solution, pretty much like the ones we use when we submit a ticket to the Support.
Even simply providing a single word for each issue that, in their opinion, was affecting the track would be so helpful. Much more than receiving a generic and unhelpful canned response. A short detail, maybe taken from a list of the most popular issues, such as “writing/composition”, “sample quality”, “mix/mastering”. Something that would give us a clue and help us fix the issue on the next submission.
All that being said, and apologizing for the lengthy post, I would like to have your opinion on the possible reasons why the following track got rejected. The version you are going to listen to is the longest one but I had also included in the package shorter cuts, down to 60 seconds.
All the best and Happy New Year!