First 3 tracks got rejected. Just curious what are the mistakes and how to improve after this.

Hi there , i tried to upload this particular tracks to envato market, and got rejected.
3 tracks are here

Let me guess , they wrote that not-commerce ?


This item does not meet the general commercial quality standard required to be accepted on AudioJungle, unfortunately.

I checked some of the music in envato market, and noticed that my mixes are kinda low in volume and overall quality of the mix is a bit different. Maybe thats a case.
The sad part is i have no clue how to fix that. What reference tracks should i use ? Cause my tracks are a bit weird in terms of instrumentation.
Maybe there is an universal method that everyone uses when mixing for envato market?

Hey! I really like your tracks!

1 Like

Thanks man! =)

Honestly, I began to lose the fact that there is Commerce , because I uploaded a lot of different tracks and they simply rejected !
As WolfSound wrote Sooo coOOOol track but it was rejected !
My opinion is that we need to impress the reviewer , not to be bias !

Hello Fujosej, at first glance it does look like there was a review system exception error, on at least one of those submissions, so you can expect a note from the support team shortly, who’ve now been notified.

1 Like

It looks like you have reviewers a solid mistake! I have not taken a row 18! Tracks. This is normal? Ay!

“Maybe there is an universal method that everyone uses when mixing for envato market?”

I believe the method is “slam it into a limiter as hard as you possibly can” :smile:

Such reports are often looked into as team consistency maintenance exercises. The opportunity is generally welcome because it helps to minimize the errors with ongoing training whenever required.

Exceptionally here, all 18 rejections were revisited and it was concluded by consensus that they were fairly processed. It’s always a difficult reality when content is in the borderline spectrum, relative to itself.

Respectfully we must all strive to be honest with ourselves. The submissions were not objectively “bad” on their own but for the largest part there were observably distinct mixing and arrangement issues relative to the AJ categories they were submitted to, which prevented the acceptance by the reviewers’ current evaluation standards.

Time, practice, and especially “failure” will always make better artists and craftsmen, so we certainly would not encourage you to give up on any of your musical aspirations and endeavours, wherever those may take you.


Of course, I doubt that you have revisited all the rejected tracks. It
is not logical. In any case, if it is so, then I have not received any
additional information anyway, in order to further make tracks that
would satisfy your requirements. Common words and no specifics. From this I conclude that this is a regular omission of letters of rejection. I can give many examples of the received tracks with a terrible mix and gross mistakes in the construction of the melody. On these facts, I can judge bias in the selection of tracks. I would also be happy if I was told where it is described what is a “commercial track”, its distinctive features and standards. This information is not found anywhere on the resource, but nevertheless the reviewers constantly refer to this.
Thank you!

All of your Rejections were observed on your Hidden Items page. Every single one. We tried to find even one arguable exception error, because our mistakes help our team improve too. However no further information is warranted in such cases as such, as you yourself are responsible for the relative quality of your own content and not anyone else at this time. This is the way the reality is, admittedly or not.

For the record there is general information here

And if you wish to read an older article describing the reality of inconsistency or “apparent bias” in the review, it has been said that many have found this page to be helpful in understanding the library’s and their own position.

Good day to you and good luck!

Nothing else I did not expect to see. This has already been read a few months ago. Do you think it helped me? Obviously not! Refusals confirm this. Why do I find your words illogical? For example, you wrote that some tracks have problems with mixing. Can not this be fixed with soft reject? It is not difficult to correct errors of information. But in fact the problem is not this? Is not it? Yes,
I guess some tracks in the arrangement do not quite fit the site’s
style, I’m learning, as well as others, but the further I go into this,
the more I realize that I’m doing something radically wrong. And my soul cry is directed at this. Who else but how can you specifically specify what is wrong? No one. Because if you write about your subjectivity, then even more subjectivity in our judgments. And
when I was asked what was wrong with the track, they answered that it
was strange that they did not accept it, could I believe those who I

Similar to the algorithm of the script, don’t you think? :joy: Very bad idea to use “the machine” in art.

It is also “a mistake”?