Critique Anonymity Unfair

[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.

[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...

[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.

[hummingbird]

Quote:Quote:Send your 3 best songs to a Taxi custom critique and to 2-3 professional critiquing services like Jason Blume's, Michael Anderson's, NSAI etc.Ask them specifically to comment on whether your songs are ready for the Nashville market.If the answer from all of them is no, there is no point in making calls or mailing stuff out, cause you have much more work to do. If the answer from all of them is yes, then you need to research EVERY possible avenue of getting your songs into industry hands.The bottom line is, you first have to make sure your material is of the highest quality.Thanks, Matt. I feel like I'm at a disadvantage sending my stuff for a TAXI custom critique unless it's properly demoed. I play guitar only a little, and I've been told (or it's my understanding) that to submit songs for a TAXI custom critique, they have to sound really good or the screeners might be affected by the poor sound quality....it might affect their judgement about your song. This is one reason why I'm spending so much money having my stuff demoed first..... I'm not a musician and I can't play an instrument well or create that 'broadcast' quality that I need. I like your idea about submitting to Jason Blume though.....actually, I bookmarked his website last week, the one where you pay 30 bucks a critique. Jason will critique 'a capella' songs sent in on CD, and this is right up my alley. I don't think there are many critiquers out there who'll critique a capella type songs.....looks like Jason Blume can hear any potential in a song, even if it's not arranged or accompanied by instruments.Actually, I think you have this backwards. The whole point of getting a custom critique from Taxi or a professional critique from folks like John Braheny or Jason Blume is to provide a sketch of the song - lyrics, worktape - so that you do not waste money demoing songs that are going to need rewrites. I strongly urge you to rethink. You are submitting to be critiqued on the song, not the production (unless you specificly request that). Once you are sure the song is working, is commercially viable, then you spend the money on the demo. That's why investing $10 - $30 on a pro critique now is so important.Hummin'bird

[matto]

Quote:That said some extremely "blunt criticism" helped me become a better songwriter.I agree with that...I think there's a balancing act there too. You wanna tell people why their stuff isn't working, but ideally without insulting them too badly...

[bc]

Steve, I wasn't referring to newbees or you. EOMBTW: I do like the Pro tier idea; but what an administrative hassle. I belong to a very elite 2 tier organization and a small number of "associates" are always griping about how unfair things are...until they qualify for regular membership status that is. Matt, you've went from being a thorn in my psyche, to a valued cyber-friend. Gravitas notwithstanding! Aub, I disagree. Creds count when you're paying for specific creds. We can do the semantic waltz with words, but when creds are in the adv copy, they become a viable issue. However, I do agree that no amount of creds can ordain a good reviewer. I was a first chair trumpet player in high school, but you don't want me adjudicating trumpet players at Solo and Ensemble competition.

[Casey H]

Wow, this place is hopping today... There were over 120 posts, many of which were on this thread! How can we complain about reviewer anonymity when we don't even know who Johnny Dean is? Now THAT'S an issue!!! I think I'll go meditate with my new mantra, "hit song"... hit songhit soooooooonghit soooooooooooonghit soooooooooooooooong cAsEy

[aubreyz]

Quote:...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.Sorry if I came off condescending. Not my intent. I just thought it important to note that there is value in every opinion, and many statements made here give the impression that your skillset and credentials place you beyond the need for such opinions if they come from an anonymous source. Perhaps I misread your statements as you misread my intent.For me, it's not the source of the opinion that matters, but rather the validity of the opinion's content, and only one opinion, regardless of the source, has very little merit unless corroborated with other sources, including my own evaluation.I have a decent little resume too, and am lucky enough to make a living making music and have for quite some time. However, I have learned a lot from both this forum and Taxi screeners.Sorry if it felt like I was taking a jab. I'm pretty blunt sometimes, but there's a nice guy under this text Aub

[hitwriter]

Quote:Quote:...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.Sorry if I came off condescending. Not my intent. I just thought it important to note that there is value in every opinion, and many statements made here give the impression that your skillset and credentials place you beyond the need for such opinions if they come from an anonymous source. Perhaps I misread your statements as you misread my intent.For me, it's not the source of the opinion that matters, but rather the validity of the opinion's content, and only one opinion, regardless of the source, has very little merit unless corroborated with other sources, including my own evaluation.I have a decent little resume too, and am lucky enough to make a living making music and have for quite some time. However, I have learned a lot from both this forum and Taxi screeners.Sorry if it felt like I was taking a jab. I'm pretty blunt sometimes, but there's a nice guy under this text AubThanks for saying so... I did by the way value your input and agree with it.