Pretty new to AudioJungle and with just three tracks in my portfolio.
While I am about to hit day 10 in status “Temporarily held for further review” (new submission) for my submission number 4, I was trying to understand if this track could be considered not commercially viable for AJ.
Piano, acoustic guitars, electric bass and drums are performed live.
In addition, I provided 4 versions: 4 minutes, 2 minutes, 90 seconds and 60 seconds.
Any inputs or comment would be very much appreciated.
Hi Luigi. I think I can see why the reviewers are struggling with the approval/rejection. Your volumes are way too dynamic. The start is very low and the full orchestra parts are very high volume. Plus there are some gain drops throughout as well. The swing in gain will make it hard for buyers to use it in a project without a lot of extra work. I think your arrangement is really good. This is probably why it’s getting another review. IMO this track needs better balance in the mix and more attention to the dynamics. Hope this helps.
Thanks for taking the time to review the track and give me your opinion. While I totally see what you are saying, I think that the “gain drops” can be very effective in a dramatic storytelling. Most trailer music has this kind of narrative path, where at some point in the track you “rest” from the madness!
In fact, this track – actually a longer version of it – was already used for a short promo with no dialogue (6 minutes) a couple of years ago. And since I completely own the music rights and the track was never used again after that, I thought it was a good idea to re-edit it a submit it here.
I get what you are saying. The video and music are really good together. I really like the music with the pauses and rests, and exhilaration, etc. I like all of that. In fact, the theme will probably by stuck in my head when I go to bed tonight . I like it that much!
I should have been more specific. In my review I was referring to the overall volume level between start and “chorus” phrases. I think there is an excessive difference between the two. It may dissuade buyers who are looking for background music to talking parts - this could impact commercial viability and sales. When I mentioned gain drops it wasn’t meaning during pauses. One example is at 1:58. There is a sudden gain drop that creates a potential distraction.
Anyway, I guess that’s all I was trying to say. Keep us posted on how this ends up. Thanks!
Thank you so much for the further explanation. Yes, the theme is pretty strong: when I composed it, my wife whistled it every day for months!
I will let you know how things go… Hopefully, this further review is going to lead to an approval or a soft-rejection. I would feel very bad if they think it is not commercially viable.
Other two days have passed. I start wondering whether this is normal or not.
Anybody knowing what is the average duration of this temporary hold, here on AudioJungle, and willing to shed a light on it would be very much appreciated.
So… after two weeks from my initial submission, half of which on hold for further review, my track was HARD REJECTED!
Hey, wait a minute… Hard rejected?
Honestly, I could expect a much less generic explanation than a canned response like:
It was determined that despite several original ideas, this submission does not quite meet AudioJungle’s commercial production (samples/recording/mixing/mastering) standard, and its commercial composition/arrangement standard.
I must say, this comment is so generic that it would be very hard to find it helpful at all, even reading the linked pages (which I had already done thoroughly).
Which of those elements my track is lacking? One? Some? All?
The production involved professional session musicians who performed live acoustic guitars, electric bass, piano and drums. The track was mixed and mastered at the highest production quality level. So none of those notes on the first part of the comment seems to apply.
Is this an automatic random comment to lift some weight from the submission queue? I would not see how to explain all this, otherwise.
Sounds great to me. Maybe the reviewer didn’t like the melodies/themes? It is certainly on the level with anything I’ve heard on this site. Then again, I have yet to get one through here lol. Based on my rejections maybe a cleaner mix might have helped. Or less instruments? I feel like its a crap shoot!
Thanks again for your inputs and tireless appreciations of my work…
I totally understand that the composition might not be 100% aligned with the AJ requirements. That part I completely get. I simply find a little generic a comment that does not shed any lights on why they think it did not meet their standard.
I’ll let this whole situation rest for a while… but it still hurts big time. Particularly for this track…
Thanks for your comment.
I know the orchestration gets a little overpowering toward the end, but that was the directors’ (two, not just one! ) request…
FUN FACT: When they sent me the video to compose the original score, the temp track was a track from AudioJungle. Their comment on that was: “It has the right vibe, but is too flat… you feel like you never get anywhere”. Maybe this is what “commercial composition standard” mean?
Yes yes. This is not at all surprising to me. I’ve been selling music to corporations for video for years, most often the notes I get back call for ‘more’ of whatever it is I’m selling in that composition. I have to restrain them and explain how dynamics work, and “part of the reason you like that second part after the turnaround so much is because you don’t like the part before it as much…the two play off each other for a balance that hits you right”.
“…never get anywhere” - yes. Often I’m asked to make scores that build to a ridiculous climax. All about that splash at the end when they’re in the big rooms with all the people.
Here’s the first mix of my next submission. Keeping it simple.
Simple, yet very cymbal-busy!
I like the sound and simplicity.
I simply thought there was room on AudioJungle for more elaborate tracks where you can “tell a story”.
People say that more elaborate tracks make it difficult for editors to cut the music in. Yet, there are numerous times when they have to cut in two pieces just because a single one is unable to convey their narrative vision to their work.
Amen!
Plus, when you provide them with four versions with different intros/endings and different stops/breaks, they have plenty of options to pick from.
As you speak of, here’s a short version of a longer score (for internal use) I did last year. I don’t feel like this would get accepted lol. https://youtu.be/yh1EQPMJxHE
Really nice work. I think its the simplicity that this market demands. You try to hit it with massive production but it’s “too much” for reviewers. They are picky about that. It’s much easier to create 4/4 straight forward ambient track with faked muted guitars and get approval than this kinda stuff. Well, at least here, on AJ, in my opinion.
) request…