Not everyone can win.

Even if titles were completely removed from search, the order of tracks would be the same. It would sure look a lot better though.

Buyers only use 10 common search words or less to try to find tracks. Half a million tracks to search from.

It would make most sense to ONLY have a random generator in each style and tempo.

I don’t think abuse of the search engine is necessary for a track to gain momentum. In fact, I’d say any more than 3-4 keywords and you’re doing your track a disservice. It is most certainly not paying off. Granted I’ve experimented with 4 word titles before, but I honestly don’t think it helped.

Let me elaborate:

Buyers will often search more than one popular term. As long as your track appears in one or two of those corresponding results pages, you’re fine in my opinion. Adding a sentence-long string of keywords will NOT help you here. It will make your title harder to remember, and it will blend in with the rest of the tracks. A 2-3 keyword title is actually optimal in my opinion.

The main issue here is abuse of the automatic approval system. Authors are uploading tracks as 1-2 word titles (which get manually approved), then proceeding to change them to sentence-long word salad. Normally AJ reviewers would reject titles like this, but because “trusted” authors can pretty much change what they want with auto approval, they’re free to wreak havoc on their titles.

Notice how NONE of the top sellers’ sales changed after adding an extra keyword or two to their titles. I’m talking LumenMedia’s smash hit “Upbeat Corporate” - it did just fine with 2 keywords. Studio89’s track “Upbeat” (later “Upbeat Corporate”) managed fine as well. RedLion’s “Inspiring” is doing better than ever and it’s a single word title! My point is that that there’s a sweet spot - and it’s probably 2-3 keywords. Even my track, which used to be called “Uplifting and Inspiring Background” (only 2 useful keywords), didn’t really sell any more after adding the keyword “corporate” to the title.

Unfortunately many authors think that by adding more keywords they are increasing the sales potential of the item by upping the exposure. Wrong. In fact, by continuing to subscribe to this idea you’re not only damning your own work but you’re reducing exposure on other tracks as well.

Let me finish with this. The only way you’ll benefit from having a keyword in your title is if your track perfectly reflects that keyword. Minldlessly adding keywords will not help you. I’ve seen many authors begin to tack on words like “motivational” or “epic” to their otherwise light and inspiring corporate tracks, thinking that this will improve their sales. On the contrary, what they’ll notice is that the track won’t sell anything more (eg buyers find the track after searching epic and don’t even bother visiting the page because the track sounds nothing like an epic track) Instead, the new title only serves to confuse buyers and crowd the search results.


I don’t know… the main issue I can see is that on the bestsellers page, there is not a SINGLE unique name. I know a few people in my daily life that use AJ on a regular basis and they find the over usage of these words very frustrating and make it difficult to find what they’re really looking for. I don’t understand why the search engine can’t disregard the name of the track and only go off tags and description, and maybe something like a sub title where we can plug in all these words that we’re currently using for the titles. This situation also makes it harder to market outside of AJ. Unless a potential buyer already shops here and is aware of these naming conventions, everybody that comes across my stuff is very confused that a bunch of adjectives are what constitute the title of my track.

Part of me is afraid of any change in this regard because I’ve had some success here. I don’t exactly want to rock the boat. But I wonder if its possible to have everything stay as it is and just have what are the current titles become sub titles and let the search engine go off that? I dunno… just spit balling here.


That’s true. I think a sub-title feature could be handy.

I’m also going to add something that I don’t think many of us have thought about: different languages.

A significant (probably 30-40%) portion of buyers on AJ are from non-English speaking countries. Having descriptive, adjective-based titles may seem like a strange way to name our music, but for someone who isn’t very familiar with English or doesn’t speak it at all, these titles are probably very useful. By using simple, accurate keywords to form a descriptive title, you are not only making the most of the search engine, but also making your items easier to be found for non-English speakers. Now as I said before, I still don’t advocate huge incoherent sentence-like titles, but I can understand the point of having appropriately-sized descriptive titles for the reasons outlined above.


It’s been brought to my attention that the example I used in my earlier, lengthy post was indeed incorrect; the word “Health” does in fact appear in either the tags or the descriptions of the tracks displayed under Best Sellers. I stand corrected, and apologize for disseminating misinformation.

However, it does raise another legitimate question:
Why are tags and descriptions taken into consideration by the search engine ONLY when sorting by Best Sellers, thereby promoting ONLY those tracks which objectively do not “need” more exposure??

Maybe some general rules on naming the tracks could be applied. I remember some time ago that you couldn’t put in the title the genre of the song (eg. “Thinking of you trance”); but this rule dissapeared in time and there are many tracks named only “trance” “the trance” “a trance” etc. So in conclusion why not agree on a few rules that will take out some of these situations?

Remove the title from the search ranking, problem solved. Then we can have more interesting and meaningful titles like I have with my music outside the royalty free market. This will make the marketplace look much more professional. This system sucks as it stands and is biased I’m afraid. Tags are there for a reason, titles should not be used as tags. Obviously my opinion will upset some, who benefit from this system, but let’s encourage new buyers in by looking like the quality audio marketplace we actually are.

Here’s some recent examples of titles that I have used outside of AJ.



Tags and descriptions are always weighted, it’s just that the title is weighted MORE. It only shows when you use uncommon words.

Of course, the only real solution is to completely remove titles from the search. It won’t change the exposure or search order for tracks since they will all have the same words and phrases in the tags, but it will make things look like something other than a dictionary consisting of 10 words.

Other sites do this and it works just fine. As suggested before, a specific title field (NOT default) can be present if you’re searching for a specific track title (which is useless now).


By the way, this is the very reason a certain ex-leading artist is now struggling to even get half of what he used to. By not changing titles he’s giving up $10,000 a month…


Sure, I had to drop a few words from the title to get it approved:

So maybe this is why there are only 10 common search words or less as @Flumen Stated? …Maybe buyers are using only words they know or look up on google translate and search only using those…they wouldn’t even be able to read or understand the “creative” titles, it would take mush work to translate everyone…But this is stock audio people, buyers search for a mood/sound/emotion anyway, not a popular chart topping song from an album, for that they would just contact the artist directly and pay wayyyyy more!

Are you saying here that if I name my tracks using 2-3 of the 10 famous keywords I would sell more?
Damn I have to change at least my last 30 titles!

Guys, just a practical question, when you change a title of the track do you change a file name too and re-upload each time files? Thanks

“Porn Star From My Village” and look, a decent track with only 4 sales - I wonder why? Maybe because they didn’t name it “Fun Happy Indie Rock” - oh well. sigh

1 Like

Interesting point and I hadn’t thought of the language thing before. However, I’d argue that for the 60-70% who are native English speakers, the current way is much more confusing and cumbersome. I’d much rather have a system that works best for the majority of customers.

I understand something like changing the entire search structure of a large marketplace like AJ is HUGELY complicated and probably loaded with unforeseen consequences. I’ve got 250 tracks here… I wouldn’t be thrilled about the prospect of changing all of the titles. But the homogenization of track titles is a bit embarrassing as far as I’m concerned, and I’m not convinced it’s productive…

Also, I was thinking about a way to expand on the sub-title idea. Perhaps the sub field could be created in a way that would automatically populate with current titles. That way we could keep titles the same, or have the ability to change it to something more subtle and creative, without being penalized by the search system (assuming you keep the sub title the same and the search engine is using that as its reference). And then, for those who have gone with creative titles could have an opportunity to enter new sub title info that would be more accepted by the search engine. Not sure if I’m explaining that clearly… it makes sense to me lol.

Dang, @Stockwaves for Audiojungle President - you got my vote!

Yeah, I’m done. I sold here for about two months, then removed all my music and moved on. This place is in a world of its own doomed to revisit the same issues that really only exist here over and over again. I’m sure a good number of people appreciate the point to this post as intending to discourage this naming practice. But I’m equally sure that a number of readers, no matter how ridiculous this sounds, are walking away with the idea that this is how they must name their files to make it to the top seller list. It’s not the search engine’s fault, it’s the fault of the authors and Envato could easily make it stop, but won’t.

1 Like

I strongly disagree. The search engine (and top lists) will ALWAYS dictate author behavior. The smart ones have been using it to their advantage for years but now the masses have caught on (too late).

Yes i think naming problem is real…but…hey…i am also noticing that probably AJ isn’t worth it after all. I mean, i know it’s all about competition nowadays and it’s ok, but maybe being a drop in an ocean full of similar tracks with no chance to stand out and have a “decent” sales amount it’s not worth it. it’s ok to provide the best items we can in terms of quality and usability, but to have decent (extra, in my case)) money it’s too hard with millions of similar items and names.
I am going to see where all this is going in the next months, then i think i’ll see if it’s worth it. Even for extra money it’s not satisfying at all…unfortunately, even because anyway when we make a track we put the best we can in it, no matter what…and it’s still 9,50$ at the best.
Good sales everyone! :slight_smile:

Well, it’s more like $150,000 at best… Nothing in life worth something is easy. The competition is tough, naturally, since there is lots of money to be made and lots of talented people around the world who love making music. The ones who really succeed are the talented ones who put in the hard work CONSISTENTLY over a long period of time. It is usually like that.

Like the old, but very true, saying goes: The harder you work the luckier you get.