Proposal for Audiojungle work

Agreed!:+1:

Good suggestion! However, about video operation of the process, I think it is unnecessary. 1) possible cheating (insert other audio over the video can be in any editor) 2) Not everyone is able to work with video 3) additional space on the server. For begin will can add meta tags in MP3 file with the description of the project, or just txt file with description (time of creation, the authorā€™s name, giving the number of tracks e.t.c.) and attach a screenshot of the project with the total number of tracks. But it is too difficult.

2 Likes

fully support

Support! Nice idea

I support this idea!

fully support ! +

completelly agreed, +1

+1. Agreed

I say letā€™s leave audiojungle team alone, they knew what they were doing so far, letā€™s give them some benefit of a doubt that what they are doing is in both,their own and our interest.

3 Likes

Lets see. Now all looks mixed.

To staff, it is true and obvious that you want to escalate quality. There have been many shout outs on the discussion boards over the last couple of years about how quality trumps all on this market. I agree 100%. There was a time when quantity did help make a few more bucks but as we approach 400,000 items for saleā€¦that strategy will no longer work. Only the cream will rise up. Itā€™s already the case. It is very normal for music market places to first show proof that you have the chops and professionalism to create high quality music for use in media. I realize that simply by submitting a track will stand that test. Perhaps it is time to:

  1. make authors reveal their identity to staff by asking them to first upload a drivers license or identity card
  2. send a link to their best 5 tracks and first evaluate that before you open the door.
  3. Make sure that the 5 you hear have composition and production value and are something that really has the potential to sell, and sell more than once.
  4. If they do not pass the test in round 1, say ā€œtry again and submit in 90 days.ā€

At this point in time, there are enough qualified authors here that can meet all of the music demands this market has. I do believe and like the system of inclusion and opportunity for all. All of us needed that first break at some point in our career, but yes in the interests of limiting sub par submissions and wasting spend on reviewers (and their time), I do think itā€™s in your best interests to escalate quality control to a higher level. Think about all the money that gets wasted when reviewers have to evaluate tracks that are going to be rejected. By making new authors go through a few extra steps prior to uploading to the cueā€¦this may help weed out professionals from amateurs having fun with garage band and loops.

The goal should be to have every cue in the cue, be a cue that is coming from someone who has proven that they are a professional. When you are spending valuable money on reviewers to listen to unprofessional, slapped together music, and they are rejecting 75% of what they hear something needs to change. I have no idea what the rejection to acceptance ratio is, but it would not surprise me if 3 out 4 tracks donā€™t get in. Long term that is a problem and clearly you are losing ( or certainly wasting ) money because of this. The other idea would be to limit uploading to 1 per week once an author has 10 or 15 accepted for sale.
In my opinion, strategically (for all you newer authors) it does make sense to release 1 per week long term. I remember being frustrated early on about not being able to have 50 for sale instantly, but the fact is that itā€™s better to upload 1 per day to get goingā€¦then scale that back to 1 per weekā€¦and then even 2 per month or even less once you get somewhat established in here.

6 Likes

I agree with everything you are suggesting except for this. Obviously, ā€œauthorsā€ who would upload pre-made construction kits would be a problem (are people really doing that?) but it seems like it would make review times even longer.

But for the sake of understanding, please explainā€¦
What exactly would need to be shown on this video? How long would it need to be? Even then - how would it prove people arenā€™t using construction kits?

2 Likes

+1 good idea!

Silence. Meanwhile - 21 days for review queue.

Full support!!!

None of the staff does not respond and does not comment. I would like to know the opinion ā€¦

1 Like

As you see, no one replied to my thread too. Silence, or call it ignoring, or busy, or whatever.

I think subjects get mixed. 1 is quality. But what is that? Quality in music or in AJ production. My opinion: here itā€™s AJ so quality in whatā€™s demanded here. +1
2 queue line. How to control that? AJ needed quality will be filtered. It just takes time. 3 donā€™t take away the mistic attraction that AJ has by shutting the door. That will do more damage in the long run. 4 the main perspective is that of the (potential) buyer. From that perspective author troubles are of no importance. If thereā€™s demand there must be supply and if there is a lot, prizes can stay low. Which is a strategy to begin with. 5 All that said: quantity is the main goal of AJ in a whole (I think) but should not be the goal of Authors, because it leeds to nothing. Other authors will succeed with quality items that are demanded here. 6 I know I can do better here myself, but I donā€™t want to compromise too much. Not being said that I wonā€™t try to hit the jackpot :wink:

1 Like

Agree with suggestion

Absolutely aggree