Critique Anonymity Unfair

[neuphoria]

i completely agree with you, because i've had exactly the same experience, though the music i make (electronica) is the polar opposite to yours. for example: a song of mine, which has a very proven track record (multiple licenses on major networks, generating income in the mid-to-high five-figures), was rejected by a screener, though it was exactly on-target. did that screener have any experience with directors/producers/music supervision, or with electronic music? and recently another song was rejected-- the critique said it was not broadcast-worthy, and that maybe i should go in with a mix engineer to get more separation in the mix. well, tell that to my mix-engineer, and to the music supervisors, producers, and directors who have <i> already </i> broadcast the track in two network shows and one movie. of course a way to do it would be to have the screeners c.v. with their number attached to it, not their name, online at taxi.com so you could weigh the critique. at this point though, i don't care, because i won't be getting the critiques...and maybe not even rejoining taxi... as i've also had tracks that couldn't get past the taxi screeners but got placed via other avenues in the very shows that were in the dispatch, i'm not sure it's worth the money.

[arkjack]

Given the dynamics of this business, I agree with hitwriter.... I don't really want a name.... but a summary of credentials for the screener would be desirable.... even though its not an opinion that will change my life, it does make me consider changes to my material for the next submission.... and like hit.... I wonder if I take a critique with a grain of salt, or a chunk... or a rock ... or even a boulder.... It is also the subjectivity... needing to write what is an "undeniable" hit.... well .... people deny potent realities everyday.... so is a screener's job to come up with a cookie cutter list of reasons to deny hit status to a submission..?? Coincidently, I've always had a great respect for the writers of the songs on the Nashville charts.... but in the last two weeks.... I heard a couple tunes on the playlist by some big names ... I was like "what the ffff......????" how did that song wind up getting cut??? If I was a Taxi screener I would say that song is a piece of ssss.......C'mon.... don't get me started..... ArkJack

[jchitty]

Quote:I do not honestly believe that every reviewer has the credintials that would warrant me rewriting a song or songs that have had solid professional interest.Thanks for the input.Well, that's a fair observation....looks like TAXI employs mostly heavyweights if you read their brochure, but you might get an 'intern' for all you know. Maybe that is a question that M. Laskow could answer.

[jchitty]

Quote:Given the dynamics of this business, I agree with hitwriter.... I don't really want a name.... but a summary of credentials for the screener would be desirable.... even though its not an opinion that will change my life, it does make me consider changes to my material for the next submission.... and like hit.... I wonder if I take a critique with a grain of salt, or a chunk... or a rock ... or even a boulder.... It is also the subjectivity... needing to write what is an "undeniable" hit.... well .... people deny potent realities everyday.... so is a screener's job to come up with a cookie cutter list of reasons to deny hit status to a submission..?? Coincidently, I've always had a great respect for the writers of the songs on the Nashville charts.... but in the last two weeks.... I heard a couple tunes on the playlist by some big names ... I was like "what the ffff......????" how did that song wind up getting cut??? If I was a Taxi screener I would say that song is a piece of ssss.......C'mon.... don't get me started..... ArkJack I think you have a good point about giving a summary of each screeners' credentials, although TAXI might say it would reveal too much about the screener.Some of the stuff coming out of Nashville isn't that great, I agree. I've heard that if you're a major star, you can get away with it because you have a proven track record, and people are going to buy your songs even if you sing out of a phonebook....so when an artist cuts a not so great song, he's pretty much assured people are going to buy it anyway. Also, if you're an established songwriter, you can get away with a not so good song because a major artist will cut it as well. Whereas a new songwriter like myself has to write a monster hit to even be considered.....we don't have that track record that would convince Nashville to buy what we're selling. But then again, it's all subjective. I love songs that everyone hates, and vice versa. I know, it stinks though! Payin' the dues, payin' the dues.

[hitwriter]

Quote:Given the dynamics of this business, I agree with hitwriter.... I don't really want a name.... but a summary of credentials for the screener would be desirable.... even though its not an opinion that will change my life, it does make me consider changes to my material for the next submission.... and like hit.... I wonder if I take a critique with a grain of salt, or a chunk... or a rock ... or even a boulder.... It is also the subjectivity... needing to write what is an "undeniable" hit.... well .... people deny potent realities everyday.... so is a screener's job to come up with a cookie cutter list of reasons to deny hit status to a submission..?? Coincidently, I've always had a great respect for the writers of the songs on the Nashville charts.... but in the last two weeks.... I heard a couple tunes on the playlist by some big names ... I was like "what the ffff......????" how did that song wind up getting cut??? If I was a Taxi screener I would say that song is a piece of ssss.......C'mon.... don't get me started..... ArkJackHeck, the song I had a hit with would qualify as a non-brainer. But it ain't rocket science either.The bottom line is we all are writing to sell advertising of some sort. At radio, on tv and even in film where commercials are run before the film which also includes product placements and eventually DVD sales and to television.Without them, we'd never make a dime.Another point... reviews will always be subjective, but most commercial songs are well crafted whether the "critics" aprove of the character.If I knew my reviewer worked with indie artists at a botique label and I pitched a song like "Achy Breaky Heart" then I might understand better why they wanted more depth in the lyric writing! I am enjoying the responses...

[jchitty]

I'm wondering, does anyone know how many hit country songs out of Nashville have come from TAXI members? I know "Buy Me a Rose" was one. If you write mainly for the high bar listings, are you wasting your time other than looking at TAXI as mainly a critique service. I don't ask that in a nasty way, I really am curious.

[hitwriter]

Quote:Quote:I do not honestly believe that every reviewer has the credintials that would warrant me rewriting a song or songs that have had solid professional interest.Thanks for the input.Well, that's a fair observation....looks like TAXI employs mostly heavyweights if you read their brochure, but you might get an 'intern' for all you know. Maybe that is a question that M. Laskow could answer. I would argue that TAXi as far as I know is a for profit company. While I do not doubt Mr. Laskow's sincerety in helping songwriters achieve success he is running a business.The very marketing techiniques that he would encourage aspiring artists to use are in place at TAXI.Would you want to read in the sales pitch that Jane Doe from Obscure records San Francisco is going to review your works or that one of the industry heavy weights is. Just because a heavyweights name is published doesn't mean he or she reviews x number of submissions...I run a successful business with quotes from clients that have brand name recognition... Even though they only use my services on occassions I have 100's more of clients that say nice things about my services that do not carry the same weight of these well known brands and celebrity figures.Which testomonies do you think I publish?

[hitwriter]

Quote:Quote:Given the dynamics of this business, I agree with hitwriter.... I don't really want a name.... but a summary of credentials for the screener would be desirable.... even though its not an opinion that will change my life, it does make me consider changes to my material for the next submission.... and like hit.... I wonder if I take a critique with a grain of salt, or a chunk... or a rock ... or even a boulder.... It is also the subjectivity... needing to write what is an "undeniable" hit.... well .... people deny potent realities everyday.... so is a screener's job to come up with a cookie cutter list of reasons to deny hit status to a submission..?? Coincidently, I've always had a great respect for the writers of the songs on the Nashville charts.... but in the last two weeks.... I heard a couple tunes on the playlist by some big names ... I was like "what the ffff......????" how did that song wind up getting cut??? If I was a Taxi screener I would say that song is a piece of ssss.......C'mon.... don't get me started..... ArkJack I think you have a good point about giving a summary of each screeners' credentials, although TAXI might say it would reveal too much about the screener.Some of the stuff coming out of Nashville isn't that great, I agree. I've heard that if you're a major star, you can get away with it because you have a proven track record, and people are going to buy your songs even if you sing out of a phonebook....so when an artist cuts a not so great song, he's pretty much assured people are going to buy it anyway. Also, if you're an established songwriter, you can get away with a not so good song because a major artist will cut it as well. Whereas a new songwriter like myself has to write a monster hit to even be considered.....we don't have that track record that would convince Nashville to buy what we're selling. But then again, it's all subjective. I love songs that everyone hates, and vice versa. I know, it stinks though! Payin' the dues, payin' the dues. The truth regarding artist cuts that seem below par reflect the economics of the business... An artist will always try to record hit songs and as all of us know, everything we write is a hit!The Artist feels the same about his or her own works and it allows the Artist to earn more income from having something he or she wrote released as a single.Sometimes a great song, sometimes below par?It takes an artist sometimes 3 or 4 records to start earning real income from a deal. Without the pubishing and songwriting revenue that comes from having their own songs released, an artist can starve.Even with tour money you have to consider the expenses of keeping a band, road crew nad booking agent paid and happy.Add to that producers with publishing companies paying staff writers trying to recoup draws and I could publish an entire book.

[Casey H]

In theory, it would be great. But it just ain't gonna happen. As mentioned, screeners getting harassed is a big problem. That's the same reason 99% of publishers and other industry pros simply say "at this time we will pass on your material" with no explanation. If they give a reason, some people will argue and hassle them. A number of TAXI screeners are folks like John Braheny who also run outside songwriting consulting services. They need to keep their contact information public to conduct business. I'm sure someone like John B would not want an unhappy TAXI member sending tons of angry emails and maybe even phone calls.It is true that most people will conduct themselves professionally. But as noted, it doesn't take many to screw it up for everybody.TAXI has even had problems telling people the names of the companies they forward your songs to. Every once in a while, some moron makes repeated calls/emails and annoys they heck out of folks at that company. Casey

[sgs4u]

this an awesome thread!!