Do you agree with this return?

[k o star]

Actually it's quite simple to understand... I'l try ta explain k...K's dictionary:Musical emmerdale/ emmerdales-plural; a momentary pause (usually longer than a quaver) followed by a harmonic interval tone leading to a chorus.note: the constant practice of emmerdalism produces great hooks.HTH,Kel

[k o star]

There are 2 examples of such in Ethan's song "Great whites and Tigers and Bulls":http://taxi.proboards.com/index.cgi?boa ... d=13489one is at 1:23 the other at 3:00the one at 2:11 was almost an emmerdale but it didn't lead to a chorus... that's probably called a "coronation"...K

[cameron]

May 6, 2009, 5:34am, billg wrote: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.I'm on the fence about renewing too. I haven't made up my mind yet (Dispatch is definitely out) but I am not a fan of the "screener" method and this is exactly why. Casey, this song should have been forwarded. I just spent the better part of two hours doing peer reviews on another site and this song was as good as any I heard there. It's damn good. Anything that could be wrong with it falls into the category of "subjective" and I feel the screener should give you the benefit of the doubt on a song this good. Assuming that the screener's intentions were good, how the hell does he/she know that it's not exactly what the customer wanted?Cam

[billg]

Cam, I think it's a cool idea to have some sort of quality control in regards to the songs Taxi sends out. But it's complicated, where do you draw the line? I thought an averaging system would work. On a system of 10 throw out everything 5 and below and forward the rest. Michael says that's no good because the listing parties only want 10's. But who the heck knows what a 10 is?Common sense dictates that if a screener really knows what he/she is doing AND really knows what the listing party wants AND only sends 10's then there would not be people with 40, 50 forwards and no deals . It can get more confusing if folks are getting a lot of deals and placements with the same songs on the "outside." I've thought long and hard about how this could happen and have only been able to come to two possibilities . . . either the turnaround time is so long on most of these that the needs of the parties have chagned by the time they receive a forwarded song (I know this has happened to me) OR the screeners are not truly forwarding all of the songs that might be what the lising party is looking for . . . either because they aren't clear what's wanted (this just happened where after contacting Taxi we received two completely different answers on what a listing wanted), or because the screeners don't always forward enough deserving songs . . . that happens to me all of the time Maybe it's a little of all of these things and Taxi V2 fixes 'em.

[Casey H]

Thank you to those who listened and commented on my song. In this case, since the screener was the library owner himself (screener issues discussed to death aside), there is no one to forward to. I believe in this song and think that for the right listing, it has a good shot at going all the way.I'm fine with libraries screening their own material as long as the checks and balances are in place. Sometimes having a library president like your song this way can be a great opportunity. We can't ignore all the positive experiences from this method when discussing the recent problem.On another thread, I'll tell a story where a library owner screening for taxi directly almost landed me a deal worth thousands. It fell through (no fault of the library) but it also started a good relationship.Best, Casey

[cameron]

I actually prefer the library owner screening it themselves too. At least then you're getting it straight from the horse's mouth.Cam

[Casey H]

May 9, 2009, 9:31am, cameron wrote:I actually prefer the library owner screening it themselves too. At least then you're getting it straight from the horse's mouth.CamI'm glad you said that. I think it's important that people realize the tremendous benefit available by this and not get too caught up in the "conflict of interest" stuff. I got a forward directly to a filmmaker a few months back. How can that be bad?One bad apple don't... Casey

[hummingbird]

May 9, 2009, 9:31am, cameron wrote:I actually prefer the library owner screening it themselves too. At least then you're getting it straight from the horse's mouth.Camme too.

[eokamura]

i do too but they should be yes/no. To be fair I believe ML said this was meant to be yes/no but there was a mix up somewhere along the line. Totally understandable.