listings are misleading or not clear enough!

[k o star]

Agreed...

[mazz]

I'm not too torqued over this because I've had plenty of cryptic requests outside of TAXI, enough to know that it's "part of the job".But I'm still confused at the relationship between the screener's comments and the listing. Scratching my head but moving on.Mazz

[brindabella]

Well, Im not going to dwell over this forever, but my peeve here is that, when we get returned because we are not "on target" for the listing, it is my problem to correct that in the best of my interests, but when I get returned because the listing evidently omitted the key word here, ORCHESTRAL, then I get returned for nothing of my fault and I expect Taxi to correct that in the future. What the heck that listing was for baffles me, but for what I see, there was a keyword, or a specific requirement known to Taxi that was not clear in that listing. I forgot to add that since the listing was a little confusing, I called Taxi before submitting, and I was never told this was a listing for Orchestral Composers.

[mazz]

Aug 5, 2009, 4:49pm, brindabella wrote:Well, Im not going to dwell over this forever, but my peeve here is that, when we get returned because we are not "on target" for the listing, it is my problem to correct that in the best of my interests, but when I get returned because the listing evidently omitted the key word here, ORCHESTRAL, then I get returned for nothing of my fault and I expect Taxi to correct that in the future. What the heck that listing was for baffles me, but for what I see, there was a keyword, or a specific requirement known to Taxi that was not clear in that listing. I forgot to add that since the listing was a little confusing, I called Taxi before submitting, and I was never told this was a listing for Orchestral Composers.Now that's worth a call or e-mail!!

[matto]

I would agree Brindabella, if the main or even only reason given for the return was that it was solo piano then you have a legitimate beef and I would encourage you to call or email Taxi to get some clarification. It doesn't say anywhere that solo instrumental compositions are excluded, or even that you have to show a variety of compositional approaches (although that's of course always a good idea if you're trying to impress someone with your compositional skills).On the other hand if, as you seem to hint in one of your replies, the reason was that the playing was impressive but not the writing, that would be a different thing. Cause it clearly says CLASSICAL COMPOSERS which means the composition (or inventivness/originality of the arrangement in the case of a PD piece) should be the paramount quality to be judged, not the playing.matto

[brindabella]

Aug 5, 2009, 8:13pm, matto wrote:I would agree Brindabella, if the main or even only reason given for the return was that it was solo piano then you have a legitimate beef and I would encourage you to call or email Taxi to get some clarification. It doesn't say anywhere that solo instrumental compositions are excluded, or even that you have to show a variety of compositional approaches (although that's of course always a good idea if you're trying to impress someone with your compositional skills).On the other hand if, as you seem to hint in one of your replies, the reason was that the playing was impressive but not the writing, that would be a different thing. Cause it clearly says CLASSICAL COMPOSERS which means the composition (or inventivness/originality of the arrangement in the case of a PD piece) should be the paramount quality to be judged, not the playing.mattoNo, the piece that I was referring to that got a mini-critique of "Shows off playing (very impressive) more than the writing."was the public domain piece that I chose to "show off my chops", which is what they told me when I called Taxi asking about what they meant by ARTIST listing. (The listing said COMPOSERS and ARTISTS.) That was what I was told, so I chose that piece just for that. What that critique about the writing not being impressive shows me that the screener has no idea this is the public domain writing of a dead composer, so obviously I am not submitting this one for the compositional skills of this composer. Another one got this: " if this listing was for 'classical pianists' I could see forwarding. Since it's 'classical composers', you would want to display your compositional skills within the orchestral genre"Where in the listing said Orchestral? Or again, the screener had no idea a pianist would compose for the piano? Darn, I have not counted, but I'll bet you anything that the main bulk of any classical composer writings, from Bach to Prokofiev, have been for piano. Again, if what they wanted was Orchestra, why not ask for that? If would have save me time and money!

[kavode]

Aug 5, 2009, 4:49pm, brindabella wrote:...when I get returned because the listing evidently omitted the key word here, ORCHESTRAL, then I get returned for nothing of my fault and I expect Taxi to correct that in the future. ...for what I see, there was a keyword, or a specific requirement known to Taxi that was not clear in that listing. To that I say "Amen, Sister!" That seems to be pretty prevalent in many current listings.I don't mind being told my piece was not appropriate for a particular listing, but it seems wrong that it would be your fault for a piece being inappropriate for a listing based on information not available to you.

[brindabella]

Well, I called Taxi and the person in charge of this was not there today, so I was told to send an email, which I did. Let's see now.

[aldicicco]

Hey Brindabella,I feel your pain here. In fact, it is because of inconsistent guidance on the listings that I haven't been reading them for the past six weeks. It's not the five bucks, but my time invested- and I'm not going to waste it. My beef concerns the recent classic rock lullaby listing. The same listing ran earlier this year and the reviewer gave my submission a forward. All 9's and one 10 with a comment that I "nailed it". On the second listing for more material, I stuck with the same formula, but reviewer number 2 gave these next tunes (which I considered better) 6's and 7's and stated that these versions lacked marketability. I wish there hadn't been such a disparity between two reviewers working for the same company on the same listing. Could have saved a few precious weekends in the process. Like I said, I'm not paying much attention to the listings. I'll probably ante up for another year at Taxi, in order to attend the Rally. But- I'll apply my time now to writing and learning more about my DAW tools. Thank you for facilitating this cathartic moment!Best wishes,Al

[k o star]

Bloody hell... I've been controlling myself to not get all pi553d off with this sh@t!!!Didn't join this to play some hide & seek, where's the target peekaboo crapshot games...Time to focus on other creative things til these rubbish piles get sorted out...-Kel