How would YOU improve Audiojungle?

I think, that tracks with no sales for 2 years should be just automatically deleted.
Resubmitting is cool idea, but if you take into account nowadays AJ standards, I think only 20-30% of that tracks would be approved, so it’s kinda not worth it.
Would be nice, if all the authors will make something like “cleaning day” and delete some of that tracks, and the rest of them would be reworked. :wink:

@b7official I agree 100%. This is by far the easiest way to do it. Just put in place an automated mechanism that deletes non-selling tracks after 2 years and be done with it.

For some reason I have a feeling that a voluntary cleaning day wouldn’t be very successful. But one can hope. :grinning:

I think we’re arguing over small problems anyway. The reality is that the marketplace is now overcrowded with authors because of how easy it is to buy affordable gear and get to a reasonable standard at writing. The options are to create a massive portfolio and cleverly market it on one site, spread non-exclusive tracks across multiple sites or try to pitch to better paid and more exclusive sites.

Endless threads complaining about search algorithms, generic names and overcrowding are not getting anywhere. Study the market, get better and evolve. The only person that can fix your sales problem is you.


Totally agree! :slight_smile: But the topic is how to improve AJ, not ourselves. :wink:

Yes, I totally agree, but that seems like a different discussion.

I’m not talking about sales problems or search algorithms. To be honest, I don’t know anything about that since I’m just starting out here on AJ. :smirk:

All I’m saying is that having a lot of old non-selling items collecting dust seems like a bizar business strategy. More is not always more. Buyers must be giving the impression that the products here are really low quality stuff since so much is just piling up. It devalues all items and affects the perception of the whole marketplace in a negative way.

My suggestion is a way to continuously clear out the over-saturation. I simply cannot see how that would be a bad thing. And it’s not like AJ would transform into an exclusive production library overnight with just a handful of best-sellers, right? There would probably still be somewhere between 100.000 and 200.000 items left here on AJ anyway. But if anything, it forces authors to do exactly what you’re saying - to study the market, get better and evolve.

All of the suggestions that people put forward to improve AJ are always ways to improve people’s sales not to improve the site. AJ is a multi-million dollar company with a lot of people paid to keep it that way. The way it’s run might not make us as much money but as long as they keep the top sellers happy, they’re going to do what makes them the most, even if us little fish get mad.

1 Like

I imagine what will happen here if Envato announce they will close new author registration after new year and delete all accounts lower 1000th place in the top list. :smiley: LOL Last man standing deadly race :slight_smile:

I’d like to see a download count for the preview files.

1 Like

Hide nubmer of sales to avoid copypaste copypasted tracks.

1 Like

Won’t help i think. People will start copypaste featured items.

Thats nice, because featured items sound a bit more diverse than rest of stuff.

1 Like

I would like this as well. It would show us the amount of interest there is for a track even if it’s not translating into sales.

Staff please delete the thread I started in “Looking For”…This post belongs here. Please consider these ideas pointed out below…

Every now and again I click on these types of threads to see what a client is looking for:

I need something very like this. Anyone have any suggestions?1

I just listened to what the customer wants.

I’d be willing to make a bet that this type of track that the client is looking for would be rejected if someone uploaded it.

So what can be done about this? Start a category called “Specialty” and market it as just that “specialty tracks” I am thinking about cheesy polkas, corny mariachi’s, cheesy, dated 50’s vintage film scores, other corny or odd ethnic/ world music tracks. The main point is that there are always weird needs out there. Yes, most want that slick sounding contemporary, corporate, orchestral epic, or catchy pop/ rock track…we all are well aware of that.

Back to submissions and rejections: At some point AJ should consider thinking about changing it’s submissions policy. What should the change be? I’d propose vetting new writers/ authors prior to allowing for even their first upload. Make them send a link to a 5 to 10 track portfolio on their web site or Soundcloud page. They should essentially “apply” to be an author. Make them upload valid ID - Drivers License or National Identity Card. Listen to their works and then e-mail them saying they have qualified to submit.

For those of us who have been around long enough…Do we really need to wait 25 days now? I know this is starting to demotivate me. I talk to other authors who are also expressing dissatisfaction. I used to not care at 15 to 20 days…but wow, we’re now flirting with a 30 day cue? In these circumstances above with this customer, we do not have the ability to dig into our back catalogs on our own internal servers, locate a track that fits the description, upload it and have it instantly published for the customer to check out. What could possibly be wrong with that?

Additionally, with a change in policy from vetting writers skills first verses vetting each individual uploaded track, AJ will be able to reduce costs by spending less on reviewer labor. Are you not currently rejecting maybe 50% of all tracks uploaded by new authors? Isn’t reviewing labor a very high cost impacting your profit margin? I have the opinion that some authors no longer need any review. Anyone selling here for 3 to 8 years now with some level of success now knows not to release inferior, poorly produced music. I think it’s time to maybe just trust those authors and let them work in an “instantly self published” environment, but maybe cap the uploads to only 2 or 3 per week…even 1 per week would work. You can even delete the track if you really feel as though it’s not good. If anything, I think reviewers could easily get together and come up with a list of 300 to 500 authors (out of the 13,134 supposedly selling here!) and grant those authors “publish your works instantly without review” status. I just do not see any downside to this idea…only upside for AJ, authors, and customers.


Most middle and upper libraries and micro-stocks do this and it’s in everyone’s best interest for the low budget market to go this route as well. It used to be the norm everywhere before open submissions took over some years ago. In today’s market, with saturation levels being what they are, I don’t think there’s any way around composer auditions without drowning. Something has to be done to stop the massive influx.

Something tells me you won’t have to worry about this one. Nothing is ever guaranteed, but I suspect this will happen. I support PRO registration because we as composers cannot afford to see “performance royalty free” (PRF) and direct licensing become the accepted norm. That has an adverse affect on every composer’s potential in every market and standing up for this right across the board is the best way to retain it.

I wouldn’t worry about that, Mike. If PRO registration is to be allowed, I’m about 99% sure Envato is going to change the submission policy to composer auditions. Once the dam breaks, Envato will patch the hole with this better method of screening. From what I can tell, Envato has some very cautious people working on these things and I doubt they would open the door too far without understanding the consequences.

And another thing…

It would be good if Envato started looking at certain situations and saying “enough already” by rejecting things that are too similar to music in areas that are already overstocked. As everyone knows, all you have to do is select “corporate” in the drop down search and move from one song to the next. Most of them sound the same - reverse chord opening on a crescendo, muted guitar washed in delay, simple chord progression, 4 on the floor kick. Come… on!!! There are probably thousands of these now, just like the ukulele tunes with about 12,000 of those. What’s worse is that this isn’t just AudioJungle. If you go to other low budget micro-stock sites and smaller music libraries, you’ll hear the same thing. Much of that is because of non-exclusive agreements (which are going to start disappearing sooner or later) with many composers spreading the same music over multiple sites. But, it’s also because of the mindless plagiarism that is prevalent in the music licensing game. It’s not true that this is “all the customers want”. Customers will license other things if they have options. When you leave them with nothing else, what can they do other than license the same old (and I do mean outdated and “played out” at this point) crap? It’s up to the micro-stocks and libraries to start pushing people towards composing more innovative music if the composers lack the creativity do it on their own.


Good ideas, i am agree.

Exactly :)))

Couple of interesting points here.

Haha Mike Sea I’ve been trying to tell you that on more than one occasion.

Unless things radically change at the PROs, and AJ change their policy, then technically I’m not sure they would still be a Royalty Free outlet. There’s a few RF companies out there watching all this with great interest.

Second point is about similar sounding tracks. If that was implemented, then AJ would hardly have any tracks. At least any tracks that sold in commercial quantities IMO. For instance, corporate tracks all sound more or less the same.

And if say one of the big selling authors submitted a track that sounded the same as someone else’s track that only had 2 sales, you think they would reject it? Don’t think so.

Also wiping non selling tracks from the site after say 2 years would probably only be of interest if it somehow helped to free up the servers.

I haven’t submitted a track here for almost a year, and I won’t do anything that jeopardises my PRO library work or my membership with the PRS until this gets properly resolved and makes any sense.

Every time words “PRO” - “not a PRO” popping out on forums, it makes me smile :smiley:

And I’m trying to tell you that there’s a world outside of Britain and PRS. Other RF sites do allow PRO integration, they are still RF sites. He who laughs last, laughs best. Keep my words in mind and stop “educating” me.

I hope you’re right. If PRO will be allowed, they have to raise the bar somehow.

Yes hoping is always good Mike. I try to rule hope out of things and just deal with facts.