Hi
Rejection is the most pragmatic, didactic and educational thing here on AJ.
So, I am here for being rejected. Lol…
Joking aside (but it’s right what I said about rejection), we don’t work for art here, but markets. Even so, the AJ supports artistic works and even feature them. This is enough good for me at the moment.
I really understand what Slavesnski told us. But as I mentioned, this is the world of markets that rules everything.
SoundFix saidYes.
+1
kristopherfisheraudio said+2SoundFix saidYes.
+1
ADG3studios saidslavenski saidI just say that the best way is to put the song who is in technical way good for selling and then audience and byers will decided,dont choose the songs by the things “I like " music or " I dont like” music.This is not ok for me.Regards
The first rule a reviewer learns is not to decide by " I Like" Or " I don’t like".
The first rule is, Is this music track’s production, composition, arrangement, altogether ready and fitting for use in a professional commercial application setting. Most, if not all other sites don’t even give authors a chance to improve their work if it is not deemed suitable, and yet audiojungle reviewers give feedback on how to make a track with an objective commercial weakness stand a chance to be improved for general commercial ends, to get better results, on average.
Perhaps it would be easier if we, like other sites, said only YES or NO, and nothing else. But AudioJungle doesn’t do that. That’s all there is to it at the end of the day.
It’s never personal, and if reviewer mistakes happen, if something is soft rejected that should be hard rejected, it sometimes means a decision has to be overturned, unfortunately. That’s why soft-rejections may not always be accepted if they are resubmitted, if they’re not improved enough. It’s not a guarantee, rather an opportunity to consider the work again, and that’s pretty rare for lower cost stock audio libraries.
If Audiojungle immediately accepted all submissions that are definitely artistic but less commercial ready, it would be a lot harder for buyers to access generally suitable content, and that would mean less purchases for everyone.
We will never be able to please everybody, but wish to thank those that have taken our suggestions constructively, and have felt encouraged to embrace suggestions to increase commercial utility in their submissions, rather than insist we work by personal preference.
Respect to everyone.
+1
I was rejected not once)) but that’s what I call - process of finding yourself in ROYALTY-FREE music, and the AJ stuff’s critic just helps me. And if you wanna be an extraordinary musician with your unrepeatable style, you better try to distribute your music for free, become famous and make a millions of dollars by making a live performances etc…
To be fair this is sad, We sent through a perfectly well recorded soundtrack that has already been sold as on hold music and it was rejected because of the track production which was mixed on a £40k mixing desk.
And worst about it all i didn’t even receive any feedback 
SHINDIMUSIC saidTo be fair this is sad, We sent through a perfectly well recorded soundtrack that has already been sold as on hold music and it was rejected because of the track production which was mixed on a £40k mixing desk.
And worst about it all i didn’t even receive any feedback
Don’t stress about it yet. Upload your song on soundcloud or somewhere where other authors could give you feedback - eventually you’ll change a few things and send it again. 
I think AJ reviewers are getting better at deciding. There is a huge amount of tracks can be found in AJ which are not going to sell. Some of them are great tracks but not usable, some of them are really in a bad shape.
We have to understand that this is not a place to expose our artistic skills ( I am not trying to say that commercial tracks are trash, they can be really stylish ). We can not expect the reviewers to approve every track that we upload. Actually I wish they refuse more tracks because it’s really hard to find something useful in this insanely huge jungle.
I am sure that your track is great but just try to keep it simple. Build your music on simple, catchy, repetitive lines. Never let the listener to lost his/her way through the track. Mix it well. That’s all.
Guys, this thread is 9 months old. :S
Yes it is wroted 9 Month ago,but I am still thinking that Audio Jungle is not so good web,and I really dont understand people who working for Audio Jungle,they reject the music from the people so easy.What you want from here?Master production of 1.000 euro for song?Well if I have this kind of money I never going to be here on Audio Jungle.So SHINDI MUSIC,is wright about everything they say,and I dont really know how people earn money here.
Don’t get me wrong i appreciate the reviewers must pick quality content but their comments were very patronising to a company that has previously sold the said music before on several occasions to 3rd party customers who picked it off their own accord. So for reviewer to say “This submission does not meet our commercial composition/arrangement standard, unfortunately.” Isn’t correct as we’ve already converted sales and issued our own licences for the said piece which has all the attributes of a recording that can be used as a viable product. We have been providing music independently & very well over the past 2 years from a state of the art recording facility. So we are not totally taking it personally but when someone is telling you No for something that you’ve already proven as a Yes (commercial value) then you have to question to the review process and it would be helpful if Envato would help AJ authors better understand your production specification better than the existing knowledge base as there appears to be indifference.
SHINDIMUSIC saidDon’t get me wrong i appreciate the reviewers must pick quality content but their comments were very patronising to a company that has previously sold the said music before on several occasions to 3rd party customers who picked it off their own accord. So for reviewer to say “This submission does not meet our commercial composition/arrangement standard, unfortunately.” Isn’t correct as we’ve already converted sales and issued our own licences for the said piece which has all the attributes of a recording that can be used as a viable product. We have been providing music independently & very well over the past 2 years from a state of the art recording facility. So we are not totally taking it personally but when someone is telling you No for something that you’ve already proven as a Yes (commercial value) then you have to question to the review process and it would be helpful if Envato would help AJ authors better understand your production specification better than the existing knowledge base as there appears to be indifference.
Do you have the track in question uploaded so we can listen to it? Authors who have been here a long time - such as myself - might be able to point out what the reviewers didn’t like.
Just because someone has purchased your project previously doesn’t mean it is ‘commercial’, it just means a value was applied to it and you sold it commercially, there is a subtle difference. Audiojungle are looking for tracks that have mass market appeal, that’s what is defined as ‘commercial’ to them. So, yes, you could have recorded an orchestra, on a Neve mixing console, with the best mics, preamps, etc… had it mixed by John Kurlander, mastered by Bob Katz, but if the composition itself sounds like Xenakis, it still isn’t going to get accepted on Audiojungle. Generally, the music that is sold here, is simple but HIGHLY focused music produced to a very high standard. The corporate stuff is theoretically simple, but it’s very well made and catchy. Almost all of the best selling orchestral tracks have simple ideas executed very well, no complicated arrangements/orchestrations with contrabassoons playing the melody.
Additionally, I’m not implying that your track is too complex as I haven’t heard it, just trying to point out what AJ are looking for. Remember when they say ‘this submission does not meet our commercial composition/arrangement standard’, the emphasis is on our. It’s simply what Audiojungle defines as ‘something that will sell’. They are neither right or wrong about it, but it’s their marketplace and they are clearly targetting simple, focused tracks over experimental works. Experimental works do get accepted here, but usually it’s because they bring something of value into a very niche category, or a category where experimentation can thrive (Cinematic/Horror, for example).
So yeah, throw up the track on Soundcloud and we might be able to help
Your comments are fair but this is were the conversation ends for us as my purpose was to highlight a process that should have some attention around it for clarity, not public forum critique or speculation about our product. At the decline stage it could also be clearer. “Our” doesn’t mean anything in terms of skilled individuals providing products to a specification.
do not worry you so buddy! that’s no reason to get upset) get a grip and do even better) I do not doubt that you good composer) good luck to you.
We really can’t expect AJ alone to be our road to success. If we just bank on one avenue, then we are risking too much. Try submitting in different sites (as someone mentioned earlier). AJ reviewers cannot be expected to pander to our every wish --although I wish it were that way sometime lol. We cannot expect them to take us anywhere. It’s our responsibility to adapt to the markets (on any site) and just keep learning and moving forward.
SHINDIMUSIC saidYour comments are fair but this is were the conversation ends for us as my purpose was to highlight a process that should have some attention around it for clarity, not public forum critique or speculation about our product. At the decline stage it could also be clearer. “Our” doesn’t mean anything in terms of skilled individuals providing products to a specification.
If that’s the case, then I would suggest taking a listen to what gets approved (especially the new files) and look for consistency between them.
It’s on the author to understand / interpret what Audiojungle’s ‘commercial’ standards are. It’s not something that everyone agrees with and I’m sure it annoys many authors here, but that’s the way it has always been.
On hard rejected tracks, Audiojungle never gives an explanation, only on soft-rejected tracks. If they had to give a written explanation on the hard-rejected tracks, they would have a huge backlog of stuff to get through. Again, the onus is on the author to figure out what is commercially viable to Audiojungle and there are enough tracks on the marketplace that you can figure that out for yourself.
So yes, maybe there could be more clarity, but the number of authors mentioning the lack of clarity in the ‘commercial requirements’ is a very small amount, compared to the number of authors that are getting tracks approved on a daily basis.
Finally, honestly, I don’t know why you you don’t want to upload your track. So what if your track gets critiqued? The authors here are a helpful bunch (see the ‘Item Discussion’ subforum) and we can probably help you get your track approved and then you can move onto the next one.
If you don’t want ‘public’ forum speculation, then message an author privately and ask them the same thing. We’re a helpful bunch.
No-one likes getting their music critiqued. A lot of composers here have done a lot of big budget projects, and do Audiojungle as well as supplemental income, and there are hoops they must jump through just like everyone else. It might seem patronizing, but honestly, is it really any different then when you are working for a director, etc…? They all ask for changes, and this place isn’t really any different. You just do it and move on, that’s the business.
If you don’t like this methodology and are too attached to the track to be willing to make any changes to it (or have other authors make recommendations to get it approved) then I’d suggest that Audiojungle isn’t the marketplace for you and - as audioaftermath points out - try some other stock sites.
slavenski saidI start this new thread to see the opinion of other people here,is it possible that Audio Jungle can give these kind of comment to know what is really comercial or not?
Yes.
slavenski saidAnd how it is possible to reject the song from someone only because 25 sek of the song?I am composer,and I am making songs by my own,and it is very strange to be rejcted because of 25 sek of song.
Because that 25 seconds may be rubbish or change the mood of the song in an unusual way, consequently limiting the songs usability and appeal as a stock track.
This is not very clear
I think Audiojungle wants to say: Files in Top - Commercial
Hey, guys. Just wanted to say something about rejections: there is no even 1 royalty free music site that I was working with or / and “closed” boutique libraries that gives you some explanation when you submit your files, their answer is “Yes” or “No”.
No one has to explain why music is accepted or rejected. It is composer’s responsibility to figure out why.
soundroll saidHey, guys. Just wanted to say something about rejections: there is no even 1 royalty free music site that I was working with or / and “closed” boutique libraries that gives you some explanation when you submit your files, their answer is “Yes” or “No”.
No one has to explain why music is accepted or rejected. It is composer’s responsibility to figure out why.
+1
There are many very good replies in this thread; this has been an interesting reading.
I just wanted to point out that a rejection is not a good feeling. I might have some base thoughts myself sometimes after a rejection… but that does not last for long.
Eventually, I just realize that a rejection on AudioJungle does not mean that the track goes to the bin. It only means that the track does not belong to this marketplace, it might have a future somewhere else.
Cheers and have a good day everyone!