Do you agree with this return?

[Casey H]

This is the first time I've ever publicly posted unhappiness with a return. So to be fair, I'll post the listing, the full critique, and the song and ask you out there to tell me what you think. The screener said it was right on target, good broadcast quality, and other positive things but thought the hook needed some development.The song: "I Don't Need Nobody Else" at www.taxi.com/caseyhThe listing:ROOTS LEANING INDIE ROCK SONGS are sought by a Los Angeles-based music publisher who has signed dozens of TAXI songs/writers and has been successful in securing film and television placements. He is looking specifically for Indie Rock songs that can fit into the Alt Country and Americana format. Examples they give range from College radio acts such as Fleet Foxes, Ben Iver, Okkerville River and Blitzen Trapper to acts with proven track records like The Old 97's, Butch Walker, The Shins, Ryan Adams, The Jayhawks and Uncle Tupelo to Classic acts such as Gram Parsons, The Byrds and Buffalo Springfield. Performances must be excellent and recordings need to be Broadcast Quality - great home recordings should be just fine. He splits the license fee with you 50/50 and doesn't take any publishing - it's a non-exclusive deal. Please submit one to three songs online or per CD, include lyrics. All submissions will be screened and critiqued by TAXI and must be received no later than Tuesday, April 21, 2009. TAXI #S090421IRThe critique: www.caseysongs.com/S090421IR_TAXI.doc I didn't post lyrics here because they weren't mentioned in the review, but I can upon request.So, what do you think? Be honest, fair, and objective. Casey

[billg]

well, obviously they're different critiques altogether. Yours refers to you to Ethan and whereas mine is William ( if you go by Bill you learn early on that your in trouble when someone calls you William!). YOUR vocals and rhythms keep things moving in the same direction while MY vocals and rhythms move with assurance and determination (hopefully in the same direction). Also if you read the part about the stronger musical hook, your hooks are plural so you need more hooks than me. I only need one which is a major relief times being what they are.Ethan I wish that I could swap you my emmerdale for a musical hook but it looks like your gonna need all the hooks you can find, sorry buddy. here's what I found on emmerdale, which sheds no light on things at all.

[t4mh]

Maybe you both had better be for puttin' worms on your hooks AND your emmerdales! That is if you have enough of them in the first place... Keith

[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.

[brindabella]

May 8, 2009, 11:14am, eokamura wrote:You guys are killin' me with emmerdales. I think it's on it's way to becoming the next "google" . You know, when you google this or google that... "Nice tune but i think it needs some emmerdaling..." "Dude, you gotta emmerdale that chorus..." eo.We still dont know what it means but it is a pretty word for sure. Has a nice ring to it....or is it a hook?

[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

[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