my first beef with Taxi

[crs7string]

Didger,I have not listened to Gladiator.I do like your track. Interesting sounds and well executed.However, setting aside your screeners comments, if I screened this I would have returned the track because it is not "high energy"Also, maybe Jeff had a different screener than you. AND keep in mind it is the listing party who matters in the end. The other tracks forwarded may not fit what they wanted once they arrive on his or her desk.When I first read your post, I thought "well, didger has a track all ready for the World Action listing" but, again there is not enough "action" (whatever that means)Having personally gone thru the "my track is perfect and the stuff forwarded is absolute crab" syndrome, I can tell you for sure it is a dead end street of wasted energy.I'm not sure how many forwards and how many returns it takes to develop the correct immunity to the imperfections of this process. But, you do eventually become immune. (if you don't quit and blame TAXI for the decision to quit)My breakthrough was signing thirteen tracks to a library that were all returns by TAXI. I realized that if I hadn't done the work to meet the deadline of the listings I would not have had the tracks to begin with.Your work is good, don't let the process seduce you into the wasted emotion and angst.Chuck(Off to buy an eBow to do some acoustic guitar sound design (whatever that means!!)

[mazz]

When the listing said "big orchestral" and then referenced Gladiator, I too went and listened to Gladiator and only found a few "big orchestral" pieces (my favorite is the 10 minute battle cue, which does get big as it goes along). Most of it, as you pointed out, was orchestral mixed with world instruments and voices.So what's a composer to do? I chose to try to capture the essence and vibe of Gladiator but keep it in the "big orchestra" realm. Of course, they only heard my "small orchestra" rough sketch as a result of my failed strategy to game the deadline . but my interpretation of the listing was focused by the line "they don't want a sound alike". I took that to mean, in the dramatic vein of Gladiator, not a literal interpretation.Just my 2CHang in there. Your music is good. As you write more and more and submit more and more, as Chuck said, you'll get more immune to the emotional ups and downs. Mazz

[didger]

Jul 30, 2009, 8:45am, crs7string wrote:Didger,I have not listened to Gladiator.I don't think the screener has either. Jul 30, 2009, 8:45am, crs7string wrote:didger has a track all ready for the World Action listingI'm not really upset now, but if I get returned for that listing for being too orchestral, then I'll be upset! I did mean to dual-purpose this.

[didger]

Thanks for the comments all, especially for the encouragement, Mazz & Chuck. I just want to clarify that I'm not freaking out, I'm not getting too emotional about this, I do appreciate Taxi and the service it provides. But I don't think we just have to treat everything they do as infallible. I've happily accepted all my other returns and agreed that the pieces that were forwarded addressed the listing better, but the specific reason I was given for this return seems to conflict with the one example in the listing, and some of the forwards don't explain it for me. I'm not saying other members' work is crap, but just that it is not "more orchestral," "more high energy" or more "Gladiator" than this track I did is. Therefore, I don't understand this result and don't see how I can improve my work for Taxi based on it. Incidentally, since the last orchestral/synth listing was so liberal with its forwards, I threw in two other tracks for the listing that were also returned, and I totally accept those as off the mark. Now seeing what was forwarded, there are other pieces I have that I would have submitted, but I didn't think of based on the listing.All I'm saying is, there are cases where Taxi could do a better job for us with the listings, and there are cases where their screeners might do better for the client. If we can't ask for them to try to improve and they're supposed to be infallible, then I'd like to add "heresy" as my second beef with Taxi.

[fusilierb]

Randin, this is just going to happen with Taxi from time to time. At times there's almost no real way to know what the screener is going to think or what the listing party is really looking for. I've gotten tons of rejections that I thought were spot on. And I've had things make it through that I was convinced weren't going to. You're a very talented composer and orchestrator. You're going to do fine here. But this will not be the last time something like this happens. The motto around these parts seems to be write, submit, forget. B

[allends]

And then there's my favorite courtship analogy:Geez, I was so right for her and she wouldn't give me the time of day! Now look at that jerk she's marrying! If I may be so bold, I can't help wondering if what you're going through is just like that. The same emotions... the same agonizing subjectivity issues. We love our way through the whole creative process, but promoting our creations can be as frustrating as speed dating ... Or so I hear!!Allen

[didger]

Actually, no Allen, but thanks for playing.I'm trying to address the problem here logically, but apparently the answer is expect no logic or quality control and keep paying for a crapshoot. There's a level of crapshoot involved in the music business all the time, but to be rejected for elements that are straight from the only example given while other pieces are forwarded with electronica elements that were not in the example just means the listing and/or the reviewer were lazy.Jeremy's example in the "ORIGINAL SOUTH AFRICAN FOLK INSTRUMENTALS" thread is much better, though (not to mention Barry's theoretical example above). The three listed example artists were a west African pop singer, a South African jazz singer and a South African a capella group all of whom just happen to be the three most famous African artists of the last 30 years. None are even close to the genre of the title, unless you're ignorant enough to consider all African music the same. This does not inspire confidence!So if we're paying for musical expertise to get us placements, and if we're going to spend time and money based on what the listings say, both the people writing the listings and reviewing the music better know what they're talking about backwards and forwards. I don't know why members here are so quick to jump to the defense of bad listings and the randomness of the process when it could be improved. We're paying for this! If that African music listing was a plate of food, I'd send it back! If it was a car, it'd be back at the dealer. Are we so desperate for that chance of a few bucks in royalties from that listing to just accept it as is and pay for it when it's clearly not adequate?

[crs7string]

Randin,An unfortunate part of this experience is that it is a "human" experience full of imperfections, biases, as well as bad moods and attitudes. I agree that it (Taxi) can be improved. But , I think that is Michael Laskow's job.I have made this comment before: I use a very good CPA, yet I've been audited. I use a pest service, and still have the occasional bug in the house. I use a lawn service, and still have weeds.No service I use is ever going to be absolutely perfect- including TAXI, largely due to the "human factor". AND factors beyond anyone's control, like a music supervisor changing his mind at the dubbing stage.On one lisiting, I mistakenly submitted the same track twice. It was forwarded and returned by two different screeners. I could care less that it was returned, because I have begun getting quarterly checks because the forward resulted in an ongoing relationship.I am not trying to defend TAXI, this is just a reality in the "human experience". Nothing is and will ever be perfect, at least until the "human factor" is completely stripped away. Chuck

[k o star]

There are a lot of things I like about Taxi... however I have to agree with what's been said here... 1) "...the answer is expect no logic or quality control and keep paying for a crapshoot. There's a level of crapshoot involved in the music business all the time, but to be rejected for elements that are straight from the only example given while other pieces are forwarded with electronica elements that were not in the example just means the listing and/or the reviewer were lazy."2) "I don't know why members here are so quick to jump to the defense of bad listings and the randomness of the process when it could be improved. We're paying for this! If that African music listing was a plate of food, I'd send it back! If it was a car, it'd be back at the dealer. Are we so desperate for that chance of a few bucks in royalties from that listing to just accept it as is and pay for it when it's clearly not adequate?"Sounds logical to me... simple logic.-Kel

[k o star]

and then... I also agree with Chuck abt "No service I use is ever going to be absolutely perfect- including TAXI, largely due to the "human factor"." ... oh well...