Do you agree with this return?

[eokamura]

Yes William, you are correct. I, being Ethan, am referred to as such. Whereas you, being William (although I know you prefer Mr Gaunce), are referred to in kind. Thank you for clearing that up. Now if only i could find my emmerdale. By the way, my Mac seems to think I'm misspelling emmerdale. eo.

[djb]

Man, what a bunch of B.S.!!

[billg]

man, in my last post last night I forgot to add the link to emmerdale, but it was the same thing kel posted in the thread right before this. Still don't know what it has to do with music-Emmerdale, known as Emmerdale Farm until 1989, is a popular and critically acclaimed British soap opera that has aired on ITV since 1972. It is set in the fictional village of Emmerdale (known as Beckindale until 1994) in West Yorkshire, England, and was created by Kevin Laffan, with Keith Richardson serving as Executive Producer since 1986 and Anita Turner as Series Producer from January 2008. On 15th January 2009 it was announced both are leaving their positions, with former series producer Steve Frost becoming executive producer. [1]Emmerdale is the third most popular soap opera on British television, behind Coronation Street and EastEnders.

[Casey H]

When I started this thread, I had no idea that there was this problem whereby the screener seemed to be saying the same thing to everyone. Simply, I wanted to ask for opinions as to whether people agreed with the screener or not. It's often said here that if you complain about your return, make sure you post the song and the entire review.If you didn't open my link to read my review:Powerful rhythms push this track along with determination, Charles. There are some hints towards a musical hook though they do not come in with enough of a presence to secure the role. Consider bringing in the riffs that occupy the space between the vocals more fully into the track to secure the role. Now that's scary.I'm sure TAXI is reading this thread. All I ask is they look into it. TAXI, please let all of us who had issues with this listing know what's up. Thanks,Casey

[billg]

I have over the past few years had about (a guess here) 40 returns from this screener. He got me a deal once that I suppose fell through, I don't know because after signing a contract and being told I had money coming to me he quit communicating with me. I never heard another word about it. He also signed a few of my songs through "another place" and then I received what was pretty much a form letter saying he didn't need them. I'm pretty sure I know why this happened . . . I had some songs signed to a company that was being run by an ex-partner of his & I guess it ruffled his feathers. I would like to have thought that this BS wasn't really what was going on but his lack of communication and every song now being returned (where he previously had forwarded some songs) left me with no other explanation.I never mentioned anything to Taxi because I figured it would just come down to me looking like I was crying about not getting forwarded by him. Plus he screens for his own company so he is the first, last, and only word on what he wants so I really didn't see a reason to mention it.I had stopped submitting to listings that I could tell were his but evidently he's changed up his listing descriptions and I just got tricked into dropping another $20 just to receive his returns and oddly phrased critiques.I finally feel like it's time to "air this out" here in public so other people don't feel like they're going nuts or something, it's not you & you're not alone. There, feel better? This kind of thing is part (though not all ) of the reason that I've decided not to re-new in June. No bitter feelings, no sour grapes, just plain don't dig it.

[eokamura]

Hey Bill - Sorry to hear you won't be around. I've enjoyed our exchanges and valued your opinions. This screener issue does seem like a conflict of interest. How are we supposed to get anything out of that critique? Don't mind the return, it's happened before and it will happen again but we pay for a service and seems like we may have been shortchanged on this one. Hmmm...renew in October? Dunno. eo.

[eokamura]

Oh Yeah, Casey, i couldn't open your doc cuz I don't have word on my Mac so this is the first I saw of your critique and it's pretty much word for word. Just insert name. eo.

[jay10music]

Ladies and gents,First, PLEASE don't assume that we're reading all these threads. If there's a problem, please call us. This hit our radar yesterday, and as I'm typing to you, I'm looking at a stack of critiques all generated by this (now former) screener. From what I can tell so far, he probably wasn't cutting and pasting, but he WAS using the same tired phrases over and over. We have NO idea where the hell words like Emmerdale are coming from.Sadly, this gent was a really good screener for several years, and got some great placements for our members. From what we're seeing so far, it looks like he wasn't cutting and pasting (certainly not entire critiques) because it would have taken more work to add plurals, personalizations and many of the other syntax things, than it would to just type them out.Real examples plucked from random critiques: "sound recording is well within broadcast quality," "Sound recording is well produced and delivered," "sound quality works and is within broadcast quality," "sound recording is very well crafted and delivered and falls well within broadcast quality."See what I mean? Strikingly similar, but it would take more work to cut, paste, then modify than it would to just type them. How many ways can you really say it?That said, he IS using similar phrases (and not always exact matches) over and over, and we don't tolerate that. Most of those appear in the "Reason this wasn't forwarded" or the Sound quality boxes. I can understand that there are extremely common reasons for not getting forwarded, such as a chorus not being strong enough. But by using the same line over and over, it lends cred to the cutting and pasting theory, even if it's not the case.I just looked at critiques from a half dozen prior listings he has worked on, and those are clean, much more specific and personalized. They are also much more typical of the great critiques this guy has historically written.As far as some of the strange words he has used of late, I can only theorize that he's had a stroke or saw the "Word Salad" episode of Boston Legal recently ;-)I will get back to you with a further update by tomorrow, but my guess is that he got lazy and was using the same phrases far too often. again, when you look at as many critiques as we see, it's pretty obvious. There are still unique references that only somebody who has heard the song would know or use. If you're going to go as far as to listen and give some specifics on those things, it doesn't make much sense to paste in the third sentence or the fifth sentence of a paragraph and so on.If the reason the song wasn't forwarded was because it didn't fit the genre, how many ways can you really say that? And when you see the subtle differences, it looks less likely that he was evil.... probably just lazy.Again, PLEASE don't ever assume that we regularly police the forums. TELL us when stuff like this happens. We have processes to check for these things, but sometimes you guys get the critiques before we can check the pile. Sit tight, I'll get back to you tomorrow,Michael

[Mark Kaufman]

Anyone know where I can find a nice emmerdale?Maybe craigslist...

[grandmatarkin]

My house in Emmerdale is free from Sept. to March if you're interested in renting.