Critique Anonymity Unfair

[hitwriter]

Quote:[quote author=hitwriter board=complaints thread=1173986815 post=1174246306]Matt makes a good point ..."professional level" doesn't necessarily mean "mature, sane, can handle rejection, has sufficient medication on hand...." in fact, anything but.I still remember my agent coming to the play I was in (hurrah)... front of house called me to the lobby to deal with him... cause he showed up late, with a girlfriend... with a dog... and they were obviously stoned. How embarrassing!!!I mean no offense to hummingbird... However I'm just going to go on record now and say this excuse for anonymity is ridiculous.Creative product is rejected every day in every form of industry. Those rejected who are mentally unbalanced need not know the name of the person who rejected them personally. They are still free to assimilate a threat or bias against the company itself who's address is very public.In a earlier thread you or someone else made mention of the TAXI screening training... this is my point. Why would someone with real world experience in the music business need "Training". With exception to specific TAXI policies and standards, a real music business executive would have all of the skills necessary to make an informed critique.So who are these screener's that need "training".Relative to this post and not to boast but I've had a hit single, active publishing in place with established Music Publishing houses, holds with Nashville artists still on the charts.I joined TAXI wanting to establish new contacts outside of Music Row and have had several forwards already.(I was out of the business for about 8 years for personal reasons) for those that might question the time between successes.A pass on a pitch is perfectly acceptable!What I want to know is if the screener critiquing my music has had more or less success than myself. I certainly hope they do.If they have... then maybe I should consider their advice at times... (not to be arrogant). If not, then I should listen to my own voice and not be tempted to second guess myself.Let me say it again... There is no bitterness, no call to demand change, just a curious look at TAXI as a paying member should have a right to discern.TAXI works just fine for what it is... It could be more is all I'm pining about PS: You should get a new agent!

[sgs4u]

Quote: We have a couple people around here who remind me of brand new groupies. As soon as they perceive they're in the IN crowd, they exhibit the same snobbery and elitism they espouse to disdain. Go figure. perhaps PMing a Newbie who's opinions you think are "elitist" would be a better choice than making a blanket statement denigrating them. embrace the energy of the newbies. groupies matter, they help sell records and especially, create excitement. or are you wishing YOUR opinions mattered more than theirs.just a friendly observation,steve

[johnnydean1]

Quote:Quote:[quote author=hitwriter board=complaints thread=1173986815 post=1174246306]Matt makes a good point ..."professional level" doesn't necessarily mean "mature, sane, can handle rejection, has sufficient medication on hand...." in fact, anything but.I still remember my agent coming to the play I was in (hurrah)... front of house called me to the lobby to deal with him... cause he showed up late, with a girlfriend... with a dog... and they were obviously stoned. How embarrassing!!!I mean no offense to hummingbird... However I'm just going to go on record now and say this excuse for anonymity is ridiculous.Creative product is rejected every day in every form of industry. Those rejected who are mentally unbalanced need not know the name of the person who rejected them personally. They are still free to assimilate a threat or bias against the company itself who's address is very public.In a earlier thread you or someone else made mention of the TAXI screening training... this is my point. Why would someone with real world experience in the music business need "Training". With exception to specific TAXI policies and standards, a real music business executive would have all of the skills necessary to make an informed critique.So who are these screener's that need "training".Relative to this post and not to boast but I've had a hit single, active publishing in place with established Music Publishing houses, holds with Nashville artists still on the charts.I joined TAXI wanting to establish new contacts outside of Music Row and have had several forwards already.(I was out of the business for about 8 years for personal reasons) for those that might question the time between successes.A pass on a pitch is perfectly acceptable!What I want to know is if the screener critiquing my music has had more or less success than myself. I certainly hope they do.If they have... then maybe I should consider their advice at times... (not to be arrogant). If not, then I should listen to my own voice and not be tempted to second guess myself.Let me say it again... There is no bitterness, no call to demand change, just a curious look at TAXI as a paying member should have a right to discern.TAXI works just fine for what it is... It could be more is all I'm pining about PS: You should get a new agent! Maybe your too big a fish for this particular pond.

[hitwriter]

Quote:[quote author=hitwriter board=complaints thread=1173986815 post=1174248621][quote author=hummingbird board=complaints thread=1173986815 post=1174246839]Maybe your too big a fish for this particular pond.I stated that I was not trying to be arrogant, nor boast. I listed my background for reference.I have remained humble in all of my posts.I also stated that I was trying to extend my network of contacts outside of Nashville thru TAXI which appears to be their true niche.Why would I not want to earn more income from the music business?TAXI is for the professional songwriter... they do not forward songs that are not professional. How could I be too big?Unless your comment was intended as an insult?

[matto]

Quote:Creative product is rejected every day in every form of industry. Those rejected who are mentally unbalanced need not know the name of the person who rejected them personally. They are still free to assimilate a threat or bias against the company itself who's address is very public.Which is EXACTLY why Taxi is shielding its screeners' identity from the members. So that Taxi may act as a lighning rod for the disgruntled and the crazies. Thus Taxi can continue to attract the high calibre screeners we all want them to use...most of which would not sign on if doing so meant exposing themselves to harrassing phone calls or voice mails. I'm quite certain the lady I mentioned in my earlier post would've have harrassed the screener who rejected her stuff, had she known that person's identity (as would several others I've had the "pleasure" of encountering on this board over the years).Instead she berated Taxi. Which is how the system is designed to work.Quote:In a earlier thread you or someone else made mention of the TAXI screening training... this is my point. Why would someone with real world experience in the music business need "Training". With exception to specific TAXI policies and standards, a real music business executive would have all of the skills necessary to make an informed critique.So who are these screener's that need "training".I'm sorry, but if you are gonna quote me out of context and without reading my posts in full I'm kind of wasting my time here... But in case I wasn't clear enough...most of the screeners that need training are publishers and A&R people with long track records who tend to be too blunt...Taxi simply wants to ensure that the critiques we receive are as constructive and as helpful as possible...that the quality of service is a high and as consistent as it can be. I can't see how that would be a bad thing...

[aubreyz]

Just wanted to put my two cents in here as this thread is cracking me up. Credentials don't mean anything as far as the validity of an opinion. Even those with impressive credentials can have boneheaded opinions. I think the basic problem here is trying to find some absolute, static principle here and make it a rule. That's impossible. It is also boneheaded to say that because a few critiques seemed off the mark that all critiques are no longer valid and so I won't check that little box anymore.Whether or not I know who the person is, or what their track record is, doesn't matter. Taxi has a certain bar of training and credentials that screeners have to meet. But the bottom line here is that for commercially viable music, it's not some industry guru that has the final say, it's that housewife, janitor, or teenager that plops down the cash to buy the product.Critiques are a tool, whether they come from Taxi, or Joe Smoe on the street. There is a proverb that applies in so many areas:Prov 15:22 Without consultation, plans are frustrated, but with many counselors they succeed. (NAS)It's multiplicity of opinion that is really key to success. One or two critiques aren't that valuable. Even industry pros blow it a lot - so to take their opinion too highly is unwise. If industry pros think it's great, but your average listener can't relate to it, what good is that? However, many critiques from many sources that say similar things are incredibly valuable.I find that many who can't handle critiques think they know it all anyway, and are only looking for ego affirmation rather than actual self improvement.All input has value, even if it is wrong input. If for no other reason than for you to evaluate and prove to yourself that the weakness pointed out is really no weakness at all.There are too many loonies in the world for Taxi to tell who their screeners are. Some of those "clueless" reviews could have very well come from someone who has impeccable credentials. Look for patterns, common things said from multiple sources - that's where the value is.Expecting perfect evaluation each time you throw down five bucks to get your song heard, is unrealistic and petty. If there was a computer algorithm that could determine what a "hit" song is, then more accurate results could be expected. Defining good music is a very subjective, intangible matter. Just because someone has credentials, doesn't mean they know what a hit song is every time, or that process would be repeatable like clockwork.Taxi is one tool. If your skills are so good that you don't need any further input, then why in the heck are you wasting your time getting any opinions at all. The charts are just dying for your next stroke of genius.Once you think you know it all, then you do in fact know all you ever will.Aub

[hitwriter]

Quote:Quote:Creative product is rejected every day in every form of industry. Those rejected who are mentally unbalanced need not know the name of the person who rejected them personally. They are still free to assimilate a threat or bias against the company itself who's address is very public.Which is EXACTLY why Taxi is shielding its screeners' identity from the members. So that Taxi may act as a lighning rod for the disgruntled and the crazies. Thus Taxi can continue to attract the high calibre screeners we all want them to use...most of which would not sign on if doing so meant exposing themselves to harrassing phone calls or voice mails. I'm quite certain the lady I mentioned in my earlier post would've have harrassed the screener who rejected her stuff, had she known that person's identity (as would several others I've had the "pleasure" of encountering on this board over the years).Instead she berated Taxi. Which is how the system is designed to work.Quote:In a earlier thread you or someone else made mention of the TAXI screening training... this is my point. Why would someone with real world experience in the music business need "Training". With exception to specific TAXI policies and standards, a real music business executive would have all of the skills necessary to make an informed critique.So who are these screener's that need "training".I'm sorry, but if you are gonna quote me out of context and without reading my posts in full I'm kind of wasting my time here... But in case I wasn't clear enough...most of the screeners that need training are publishers and A&R people with long track records who tend to be too blunt...Taxi simply wants to ensure that the critiques we receive are as constructive and as helpful as possible...that the quality of service is a high and as consistent as it can be. I can't see how that would be a bad thing...First knowing the screener's bio doesn't mean TAXI has to provide company voice mail, addresses, email etc...I did read your post in full, I did not research further to add the full quote. To be fair I did say with respect to TAXI standards which you have clarified here.TAXI is doing a balancing act then to some extent... Keep membership high by encouraging those at lower skill levels to keep swinging away. There is nothing wrong with this even at 5 bucks a pop which is a very fair price. Anyone should be allowed to pursue their dreams and better educate themselves at their craft. TAXI goes to great lengths to this with RR and newsletters and the entire product.That said some extremely "blunt criticism" helped me become a better songwriter.I have agreed several times that TAXI is what it is and I am not demanding change.Anything else i could say here I'm sure I've already said.

[sgs4u]

OK this is getting tiring, mostly because there isn't anything new actually coming out. I'm going to add one last thing.What should anyone expect for $5. The Taxi membership cost is to allow us to submit. The $5 is to stop us from submitting every song we have to every listing under the sun. Professional critiques ought to cost more than $5 anyway. I just don't think it's logical to expect or hope for a more thorough level of review feedback (per song) for that meager price.steve

[johnnydean1]

Quote:Quote:[quote author=hitwriter board=complaints thread=1173986815 post=1174248621][quote author=hummingbird board=complaints thread=1173986815 post=1174246839]Maybe your too big a fish for this particular pond.I stated that I was not trying to be arrogant, nor boast. I listed my background for reference.I have remained humble in all of my posts.I also stated that I was trying to extend my network of contacts outside of Nashville thru TAXI which appears to be their true niche.Why would I not want to earn more income from the music business?TAXI is for the professional songwriter... they do not forward songs that are not professional. How could I be too big?Unless your comment was intended as an insult?My comment was an observation.You would be in no doubt if I were to insult you.Hitwriter.Are we supposed to be impressed.

[hitwriter]

Quote:Just wanted to put my two cents in here as this thread is cracking me up. Credentials don't mean anything as far as the validity of an opinion. Even those with impressive credentials can have boneheaded opinions. I think the basic problem here is trying to find some absolute, static principle here and make it a rule. That's impossible. It is also boneheaded to say that because a few critiques seemed off the mark that all critiques are no longer valid and so I won't check that little box anymore.Whether or not I know who the person is, or what their track record is, doesn't matter. Taxi has a certain bar of training and credentials that screeners have to meet. But the bottom line here is that for commercially viable music, it's not some industry guru that has the final say, it's that housewife, janitor, or teenager that plops down the cash to buy the product.Critiques are a tool, whether they come from Taxi, or Joe Smoe on the street. There is a proverb that applies in so many areas:Prov 15:22 Without consultation, plans are frustrated, but with many counselors they succeed. (NAS)It's multiplicity of opinion that is really key to success. One or two critiques aren't that valuable. Even industry pros blow it a lot - so to take their opinion too highly is unwise. If industry pros think it's great, but your average listener can't relate to it, what good is that? However, many critiques from many sources that say similar things are incredibly valuable.I find that many who can't handle critiques think they know it all anyway, and are only looking for ego affirmation rather than actual self improvement.All input has value, even if it is wrong input. If for no other reason than for you to evaluate and prove to yourself that the weakness pointed out is really no weakness at all.There are too many loonies in the world for Taxi to tell who their screeners are. Some of those "clueless" reviews could have very well come from someone who has impeccable credentials. Look for patterns, common things said from multiple sources - that's where the value is.Expecting perfect evaluation each time you throw down five bucks to get your song heard, is unrealistic and petty. If there was a computer algorithm that could determine what a "hit" song is, then more accurate results could be expected. Defining good music is a very subjective, intangible matter. Just because someone has credentials, doesn't mean they know what a hit song is every time, or that process would be repeatable like clockwork.Taxi is one tool. If your skills are so good that you don't need any further input, then why in the heck are you wasting your time getting any opinions at all. The charts are just dying for your next stroke of genius.Once you think you know it all, then you do in fact know all you ever will.AubSince this appears to be addressed to me I will comment that I agree with most of what you said in context as very valid.It's not the content of the critiscism that matters pro or con as much as knowing who it is from to add weight.As far as assuming that my ego is above criticism and that I somehow know it all is absurd.Songwriters much greater than me face constant rejection from the charts dying for hits. Save your cute lines for a song.Your condescending attitude however in making your point will no doubt be greatly appreciated by those who disagree with my "opinions".This had been a very considerate debate for a few pages.