Yes/no... maybe?

[mewman]

I love TAXI, I really do, but I feel the need to rant just a little about the "no critiques" listings. I realized today that not a single one of the Film/TV listings includes a critique of the submissions. Considering the hit or miss nature of these opportunities (I'm thinking of the recent "a'la Moby listing), I can't help but feel a little strung along when asked to do something in the style of someone else then rejected without a single word of explanation. It seems to me that these listings, in particular, require feedback to help us along in our endeavors. Thank goodness for the Forum! I've found the critiques I get from my peers here to be worth the price of admission, but hey, I really would appreciate hearing from the reviewer why he didn't think my piece cut the mustard. I just wanted to put that out there. Anyone else feel like I do?Mewman

[simonparker]

One of the things I've learned is that if I can't get an explanation for why my songs were rejected, I can't work to "fix" the problem, or identify common problems in my craft. So for me, I've never joined dispatch, nor do I submit to YES/NO listings. Whether that limits my opportunities doesn't seem to bother me as much as submitting to a listing I have great confidence in only to get a NO. It feels as if I'm throwing $5 to the wind for no reason.Now many on here are touting the critiques and screeners. While I'm not a fan of the screeners or the process in the sense of others in here (I've had some "unhelpful" suggestions), they more often than not provide a valid reason for a return. Since so many tout this process, I'm also somewhat disappointed by Taxi not spending a little more overhead to provide more screening opportunities, especially in Film/TV.

[hummingbird]

I kinda agree with this. I actually stopped submitting to anything but a listing with a critique for quite a while - probably at least a couple of years. It just wasn't worth it for me, while still in the 'educational' process, to pay to submit to a no-critique listing, *unless* I'd already had feedback or a forward for that piece. As my work started to meet the grade more often, then I would take the plunge & join Dispatch, or/& submit to no-crit listings.I posted a piece on Peer to Peer that folks think is great but prob(?) doesn't fit the no-crit listing... so I'm debating... do I submit or not. If the listing had a crit, I would absolutely submit, I would spent $5 to see if the screener said, hey, this is forwardable but not for this... or, hey, this needs some work. But without the crit... I am very appreciative of the fact that there are more listings for Film/tv than before... but I would like to see more crit listings. So who makes that choice, and why? I know sometimes it's a quick turnaround thing, but someone's screening the music anyway... Basically, the value of our membership has a great deal to do with the education that we get from the screeners. Therefore I would like Taxi to push for more 'crit listings'.

[devin]

Hmmmm....would meeting the screeners "half way" on the critique thing help us? I mean, make it super easy for them to click on a few checkboxes (via software) while listening to the submission, but not have to type out any text for us to read?It might take a bit of software development, but not too much. I've done similar things in the past for feedback forms from customers...something like:- screener has our information on a screen, and clicks the link to play our submission- as they listen, they can give a numerical score to 5-10 areas (similar to custom critiques), plus a half dozen "yes/no" boxes ("Tempo too fast?" Y/N "Too slow?" Y/N)- when they're done with the song, they click "close", and the numeric scorecard gets sent with the e-mail response to usThis is assuming a couple of things:#1. Screeners do their thing in a predictable place, with a computer handy (the pictures I've seen show this). They couldn't screen in the car for this to work, for example.#2. The authors submitting (us) would need to be content with this method. While a bit scientific, the numbering system would be very incomplete and possibly baffling...we would have to subscribe to the "something is better than nothing" slogan on this one.As far as cost to develop...I've seen many students do this sort of thing in Access or Oracle for free...just to work on something defined for their school projects (and bragging rights when it's time to find a job).

[avillaronga]

Quote:Hmmmm....would meeting the screeners "half way" on the critique thing help us? I mean, make it super easy for them to click on a few checkboxes (via software) while listening to the submission, but not have to type out any text for us to read?I would actually prefer it the other way around, forget the numbers, they're so subjective anyway but make the Y/N listings have a one sentence explanation for the return, they don't even have to explain the forwards (obviously, do you ever care why you were forwarded??). I think this idea was suggested around here before and I think it does have merit. Even with Y/N listings, the screener still has to formulate an idea in his/her head of why the song is being forwarded or returned. The only extra work is to type that in a concise way. I think for this system to work we would have to agree to take the one sentence explanation and run with it because if this turns into hundreds of phone calls or emails to Taxi complaining about the one sentence, I'm sure the system wouldn't last too long. I would personally agree to never complain about it since we would already be getting more than a simple yes or no.

[twilsbach]

Maybe the could call it a Drive-By critique, keep the whole Taxi metaphor working. Like Devin mentioned, just some quick check boxes and a quick sentence on "The main reason this was returned"It would definitely help, but I can understand the time crunch that they're on with the Dispatch listings. They really just need to get them all screened and sent since the need is relatively immediate.

[ddusty]

I can see where you guys are coming from, and on the surface these are great suggestions. But in reality this would be like opening a can of worms.I believe most Y/N listings are due to time constraints, especially with Dispatch. It is the client that is requesting a quick turn around, so it is not Taxi's fault that they must speed up the process.As for the One sentence reason, sometimes it's just not that simple. If it's something obvious like off target, or bad recording that would be easy to type in. But what about the times when it's more complex? People are constantly complaining about their critiques when they have multiple paragraphs to look at.I think that overall this would be more trouble then it's worth.Vikki has the right idea, if you are dealing with songs that you are not sure about, don't submit them to the Y/N. (Or spring the 20 bucks and get a custom critique)If you are going to submit to a Y/N, only submit songs that you know (as oppose to hope) have a decent shot at a forward.I would love for all listings to have critiques too, i just don't think all opportunities allow it.Rob(to sum it up in short, mewman, you are not alone with those feelings)

[davekershaw]

As a recent newcomer, and adding my two penneth; I suppose like a lot of you, in the beginning I sent tracks to all of the possibly relevant listings, even though they might not really be in with a chance, just to get the ball rolling.The critiques I have received have been detailed and constructiive. They, along with help from this forum's members have helped me move on.I have however gained nothing from the yes/no submissions, and I can now see the wisdom in not submitting to them, unless you have a pretty good idea as to their chances.A return with constructive comments doesn't feel quite so much of a rejection, but a straight return leaves you with more questions than answers.I think anything would be better than nothing. I accept there must be contsraints on the screeners, but if it were viable, the ticked boxes, and/or single line would give at least some feedback.