Keep waiting buddy. I see nothing to be angry about. Calling any track “medicore” is subjective. It’s an art form, like pablo pıcasso’s work wasn’t recoginized until he passed. In his time he could barely get by with his work. Doesn’t mean it was medicore. So anything you might like I might not, it’s subjective. Also, tracks that have been rejected on this site have gone on to win awards, which further prooves my point. Just becuase it’s not good enough for this site doesn’t mean it’s “medicore”.
1 Like
11 Likes
I have the same thoughts, but maybe it could be aimed at new authors that needs to bulk upload parts of their catalogue from other sites? Just thinking of that since we saw a huge influx of new sound effects authors this summer.
4 Likes
I guess they’ve assessed the data and come to the conclusion that the number of inexperienced authors trying things out is enough to outweigh the potential influx of extra tracks from authors who can output more than 10 items per month. I suppose that if it doesn’t, they will probably bring the upper limit down in the future.
I think that since a lot more people are at home at the moment and are perhaps getting into their music hobby, the queue is chocker block with unsuitable music. It could also have the undesirable side-effect of stopping seasoned authors from experimenting with new, more interesting kinds of music and just sticking to their comfort zone though, which would be a shame.
I agree that the 30 upper limit is ott. It’s kind of like rewarding those who make high quality stuff one month with the opportunity to rush out a bunch of crap the next month. I think in real terms, it will only benefit artists who specialise in short and simple sub-1-minute tracks; experienced authors who are new to Audio Jungle, but already have a large back-catalogue of stuff to upload; production companies with several musicians on their books; oh, and the templaters who seem to be able to get away with murder.
@steve_lam with these new changes, please can you also bring in tighter restrictions for authors who copy-paste? I think it’s important for the health of the library, since you seem to be opening the door to more of this kind of behaviour.
6 Likes
I do agree that 30/2 limit has no sense in terms of review time. It is still too much items from highly productive authors. 15/5 would be good. Or auto-approve for some “trusted” authors.
5 Likes
Agree 15/5 balanced ratio
5 Likes
But again, how would this improve the queue time?
1 Like
Good! It’s important step for rapidly grow new authors and prevent the creation of multiple accounts. Maybe more balanced ratio would be better. (20/5)
1 Like
When you’re down to >50% approval rate and you can only upload 2 tracks a month, the best you can statisticly achieve is 1 approved item a month (when you don’t improve substantially), and maybe none at all (depending on how low the rate is). So either this wasn’t thought about well enough, or it certainly was (what I think) and this will eliminate very much uploaded items with accounts under the 50% approval rate.
1 Like
I agree that the “based on your last 20 music items submitted” part is quite unfair for up-and-coming authors, since you could be penalised for your previous failed attempts for years.
@steve_lam Could you work it so that they only assess your upload eligibility based on your previous two months submissions? This would stop authors who are genuinely improving their skills from being overly penalised for their earlier inexperience.
2 Likes
Excellent thank you!
It should have been done a long time ago, but better late than never…
I registered on the AJ in 2017. I had no experience at all (as produser, composer, musican) Just guitarist hobbyist. For a long time I received rejections and even stopped loading tracks. But this year I started to work harder this summer. I started to fix the quality and commercial value of the tracks and as a result my tracks started to be accepted. And the ratio of rejections and approvals began to change for the better. But with the new upload restrictions, I’m afraid my old rejections are pushing me into the “2 p/m” league. With two tracks a month it is very difficult to rise. Just an unfortunate coincidence for me
2 Likes
In theory, approvals take less time to process than rejections. Often, rejections will be heard by multiple reviewers before it is decided if the track warrants a soft rejection or hard rejection. Therefore, if the queue is being filled with tracks by authors who have a history of uploading work that is approved nearly all of the time, there is less work for the reviewers to perform.
Cool!
But how is having the same upload limit (5) for those with below 50% approval while raising the limit for those with an above 50% approval ratio to 15 as suggested in the post I was responding to, be any help in decreasing the queue?
I have no issue with lowering the limits, it’s the new “30” limit I am puzzled by. To me, it would only favor copy-pasters or even shadier strategies.
Frankly, if someone is able to procure 30 approvals in a month, then my hat is off to them. They would have to be working fast and efficiently and producing work that could be darn near rubber stamped for approval. They would have to have a solid history of uploading work that is quickly recognized as approved work. I am not sure why there is a preoccupation with the limit of 30. It seems that only a few will fall in this category and it really shouldn’t be that concerning to the rest of us.
I think its a goal to make your best and keep refining the songs
30 is indeed too much if that is going to delay the process
and 2/m for <50 is indeed too low, there should be more ratios and options for different authors
2 Likes
please do this for sound effects <3
or maybe not because companies can upload tons of sound effect per days ahah
I’m glad AJ is finally starting to address this issue of overly long queue times. To have an item sitting in review for 2 weeks or more isn’t serving anyone very well, and I don’t think ANY of us want to see a return to the 30+ day review times we experienced a couple of years ago.
I see this as a positive first step in solving the problem. I’m certain there will be adjustments to the submission criteria, but we’re going to need to put the plan in place in order to observe the results.
It will ultimately be a positive change, I am sure. The current situation isn’t sustainable.
1 Like