Hi all.
Can we please talk about getting feedback from Audio Jungle on hard and soft rejects? When I get an item rejected, I have to come on the forum and ask everybody why they think my track might have been rejected. So maybe 4 or 5 or more kind people take the time to listen to my track and give me some good advice but sometimes nobody knows for sure (unless it’s totally obvious). I think it would be easy and much more efficient for the person who rejects the track to give me a clear reason as to why they rejected it. I just feel sometimes that I am wasting peoples time by asking for advice. If you add up all the time it takes for 5 people to listen to my track and give me feedback compared to the time that it would take the reviewer to give me comments after they already listened to it…surely it makes more sense to get feedback from the reviewer. At least I would have a clear and correct answer.
I’m really trying to improve my mixes and arrangements but having no feedback from the reviewers doesn’t help me get anywhere fast…
Just a thought. Does anyone else feel the same?
It was answered for many times already. They have no time for specific replies and the main thing it’s not their job as the market is not an educational platform.
If I remember long ago someone suggested to make for reviewers the automatic set of a few most ruable reasons for reject. For example about ten or so, like:
__equalization mistakes;
__dynamic mistakes;
__fake sampling;
__low usability;
__lack of arrangement;
__monotoneus;
__Rhyithmic issues (overquantized or out of beat)
__… etc…
It would take less than second for reviewers to press one of these buttons to send the exact prepared answer. But it would make the reject reason way-way more narrow to understand for author.
It seems like a good idea. But I’m doubt the reviewers need that from their side.
I also voiced this method feedback from the reviewer. It would help if I know the cause of the “hard rejected” . Just because of misunderstanding of their mistakes, I continue to send music avoiding the same mistakes, and it spends much more time to queue and reviewers. just make the basic punkty and against them on the field for remarks of the reviewer.
Yes, right point. To give authors the direction to improve would probably decrease the amount of rejections and clean the queue from clogging by the same repeating faults. As now authors need to search blindly what is wrong.
Ah, it’s currently being discussed, sorry
Thanks for the replies and pointing out the other discussion on this. Maybe we should carry on this discussion on that thread? So if the reason for no feedback from reviewers is that they have no time then I can kind of understand but still think it would be better in the long run to get some accurate feedback from them.
I understand that it might take a little more time to give a reason for the rejection, but if I don’t know what is wrong with my track then I will keep sending track that are not appropriate, wasting there time and mine.
It’s just that they keep encouraging me to send more tracks and I don’t know what they want.
A lot of time will not take. this can be done while listening to work. for me the most important items are “quality” or “not commercial usefulness.” I need to know what to pay more attention when I create a new track.