Here's an idea Audio Jungle (regarding tracks with "questionable" quality)

So instead of taking up our review cue with a track which is on the “edge” of quality (i.e. your submission is being further reviewed…for longer than the initial submission time), why not just put it through and then give it a trial run? An automatic deletion if no sales after a month?
Far too often you have rejected tracks which end up being best sellers on other sites. It’s quite a missed opportunity for you as well. Quality is not so simple as judging by the ostensible qualities of a track. If you are judging as robots, then you can get objective qualities and just shove through what “sounds” good. I’ll leave it there. Thanks.

1 Like

Not to mention you would save time and money on your end, and maybe actually end up making more money in the long run.

In my whole time at audiojungle I’ve only had one track put under ‘further review’.

I don’t think it happens all that often for it to make a huge impact on review times.

1 Like

For some of us it happens a lot. Apparently my stuff is just “not quite there…” ah, but almost. You missed it by “…” this much. Over time I’ve come to view this whole review process as a little farce. Pardon me for being sarcastic and pessimistic. I am not that way about music, just about the administrative and “technical” aspects of the various musical industries. It’s just frustrating for me, because this is a whole different market. And when I see a track which I know would do well (because I’ve seen it elsewhere) get rejected, it costs me a chance at more money. It’s not a pride issue.

It does hurt when your track is rejected after spending all day, all night, all week long for months on end attempting to make it perfect with hopes of approval… love your idea @Erick_McNerney, run the tracks and delete after a month with zero sales, just approve all tracks and then monitor their success for one month and then reject based on performance, that’s computer generated library management and would cost almost nothing to operate (comparatively). Of course that would put some people out of a job, and I am sure they wouldn’t like the idea…ON THE OTHER HAND…I am not happy with getting approvals quickly and then those approved tracks getting zero sales even after they met the AJ expectations, thats no fun either.


And that gets to the heart of the issue. Sales is more important than the perceived quality of a track. Because who are we selling to? The reviewers? No, we are selling to videomakers and so on. Sometimes they prefer something different than what we expect. I’m not upset my tracks are rejected. I’m disappointed that tracks I know will do well based on a precedent (their performance on other sites) are rejected on Audiojungle.

1 Like

I agree with topicstarter for 200%. Envato! Can you hear us?! We are the people who makes money for you and beautiful things for everyone else) Please give us a chance to be heard!

And an interest philosophical point can be made. If you control what is heard, you in a way, create a circular flow of supply and demand. It’s like a circular reasoning of rationalization of why a track is accepted or rejected. If you believe it won’t sell, so you reject, how do you know? Because if it’s not for sale, it can’t get any sales anyway. If you accept it because you believe it will sell, well, it certainly could because you accepted it and it’s for sale. Meanwhile, I wonder how many tracks have zero sales, with a perceived high quality. And I wonder how many lower quality (but relevantly unique) music would have at least some sales. If you control the flow of music, you control what people will buy. So how do you know they won’t buy something if it’s not for sale?
And I think it’s this philosophical conundrum which should allow a secondary marketplace with more of our music. Like in our artists page or something, create our own marketplace with our unique music which we choose (which may have been rejected by AJ). We would be tasked with promotion beyond a simple link in our artist page. Is this not possible?

1 Like

I think there would also be kind of an allure to something like that. Like the B-sides of a record, or hearing the “long” version on the radio.