Hi,
As mentionned in the title my latest item was hard rejected. I assume that it might be because of the flute vst towards the end. But please, let me know your thoughts !
Thanks in advance.
2 Likes
Hey, it’s a shame when tracks like this get rejected. I think it’s a really cool track and really well made.
One reason for rejection might be that it has too much character- it’s more like a band’s album track than a royalty free track. The ending for example, I bet the reviewer didn’t like the fade out back into acoustic guitar. Try going for a more conventional ending.
Also maybe the lead synth is just a little on the border of being too cheap sounding? If it were my track I would put that synth through an amp cab simulator to dirty it up a bit.
Just my thoughts, good luck!
5 Likes
Thanks for your answer. I’ll work on the synth and try to give it a nicer feel. I’ll work on the outro as well.
To me the part that has the most character is the break at 0’58 (some unconventional modulation + a 3/4 bar in the middle that might be a bit surprising).
It’s a bit dissapointing that they don’t give you a clue about what’s wrong with your song. All I can do know is try to guess, modify the track, re-submit it and wait another 14 days to see if it gets validated 
1 Like
That would definitely be a factor for rejection too. If a video editor is working to a tempo, then that bar would mess up the flow of the project.
Well thanks for the advice. I won’t do such things again !
AJ favour mostly commercial stuff. Put yourself in reviewer’s shoes and see where this track could be used:
promotional videos, commercials, advertisements, movie trailers, film scores, TV ads, YouTube videos, corporate presentations etc.
Then play any of above videos with sound OFF and play your track along.
Does it fit well? I yes, then possible reviewer had a bad day and just rejected it.
But if you feel that something is not right, this could be the answer to you question.
Yeah I might have taken the music writing a bit too far… thanks for the tip. But it’s easy for me to do something more commercial. What I’m wondering is if this track has been rejected due to a lack of quality in the production. This would concern
me a bit more.
Le 11 janv. 2019 17:56, soundlama via Envato Forums envato@discoursemail.com a Ă©crit :
There’s nothing obviously wrong with the production and it’s a really cool track. But it’s probably not right for the stock music market. If you focus on producing some tracks tailored a bit more to what is accepted and sells on AudioJungle I think you will do well.
I like your track. My initial impression is the same as @AlisterBunclark with regard to the lead synth. It might benefit from treating it with an amp sim or distortion plugin to add a little grit to it.
I don’t think the fade back to the acoustic at the end is helpful for video editors. Finishing with the acoustic is great, but I would have a distinct point where the electric stops dramatically and the acoustic finishes the track. I’m a video editor, so that works better for editing purposes from my point of view.
Perhaps for the sake of variety, when the main riff returns at 1:17, you might vary the kick pattern from what it does the first time the main riff appears earlier in the song.
Final minor thing to consider - I like your drums. My personal preference, especially on a guitar track like yours, would be to hear just a little bit more attack / transient from the kick drum.
I hope you’re able to get your track approved. It’s cool!
Thanks a lot, this is really helpful ! I’ll definitely work on all of these points.
As a video editor, what’s your opinion about the break at 0’58 ? As I mentionned before, some chords are weird on purpose, plus there’s 3/4 bar in the middle that might be a little unsettling. I’m curious to hear your thougts about that.
Hi @LoneCairn.
Everybody will have a different take on the break at :58. Personally, I think it adds to the song and enhances it. I can see where someone could make the argument that it could reduce the song’s overall usability because of the variation. For me, it works. The videos I edit don’t require the music stay at any one particular tempo - but I do want the music to have a good feel to it, so if your track were rhythmically sloppy or out of time (which it isn’t) that would be a problem.
I know you intended for the chords in the break to be weird on purpose, but I might see that as something that doesn’t serve a video as well. I read something from an AJ reviewer once that said good production tracks enhance and focus the viewer’s attention on the visuals. If the song itself becomes the focus - or if something in the song (like chords that abruptly make the song take a left turn when the listener is not expecting it) cause the viewer to lose focus on the video - then the song isn’t serving its purpose of supporting the video as well.
In a way, those two previous paragraphs I wrote appear to contradict each other (rhythmic anomaly works, chords anomaly doesn’t work) but the rules aren’t hard and fast, and I’m sure another editor might have a different take entirely.
With score music for television and movies (stuff that isn’t necessarily rock), the best stuff makes the visuals more powerful by evoking the right tone or emotion without necessarily drawing direct attention to the music itself. Even though I’m not talking about rock music here, I still think that rule can be applicable. Your song is cool and might be fine as-is as a standalone track you recorded and mixed. But, if you’re main goal is to get the song licensed for use on video projects, some of your choices w/ respect to tempo, chords, arrangement, tones, etc. will be dictated by this purpose.
@soundlama offers good advice, too. Test your track with video clips and be as objective as you can. If it helps the videos, it’s working. If something doesn’t sit well, work on the song until the piece works better with visuals. I would also recommend going to VideoHive.net and watching some of the video clips there. You can get a good feel for what is working and what types of tracks video guys choose to put under their videos.
I have produced tracks where I really liked a particular guitar part, keyboard riff, or whatever. But when it came time to mix the track, I chose to get rid of the part I really liked because it was working against the video and not with it.
I hope this helps, and I wish you good luck!
1 Like
Yes it’s really helpful ! Thanks again for taking the time to give me such a detailed answer, I’ll really appreciate it and I’ll work on all of these points ! Have a good weekend !
The only way to handle hard rejects is to forget all together about that track
and get to a new one, with the thought to make it better
and adapted to AudioJungle community.
Hard reject means the track maybe is good but it does not fit into the whole community of songs.
Maybe it’s better for Beatport.com
or maybe it’s better for a song with voice
maybe you can sell it someplace else.
don’t get fixed on the “reject thing”.
cheers
@PaulGraves @soundlama @AlisterBunclark Hi all ! As an update I’m happy to announce that this track was finally accepted.
Here’s what I did :
- Send the synth through an amp + cab sim
- Replace the unsettling break by a more atmospheric break that’s based on the main riff
- Change the drum beat after the break
And that’s pretty much it ! If you’re curious to hear the result, you can check it here : https://audiojungle.net/item/march-to-battle/23159812
Once again, thanks a lot for your precious advices and have a good weekend !
4 Likes