Feedback on a totally different Listing!

[markmathewsmusic]

I just woke up to get one of my tracks declined and the screener has reviewed it against totally different references to what the listing said! I'm so annoyed.

For a start to the listing (S200811HB) is still showing as open ("Closing tomorrow') and the feedback talks about completely different reference tracks!

The reference track that Taxi posted on this listing was for a Sia song ('Breathe Me'), yet the guy that has got back to me has spoken. about The Doors 'Roadhouse Blues' and sent a link to a Black Keys tune as another reference! He is way off from the listing that has been posted - no mention of the Doors, The Black Keys, or that style of music. So, going by their logic, yeah, my song is TOTALLY different to the references, because they are the wrong references that I am being marked on!

I've had reservations of the quality of the screenings (I get knock backs and yet other libraries seem to take the same songs on and disagree with the feedback), the fact that even after paying a large yearly amount there is still a $5 fee EVERY single submission, but now this is proof that the screening is totally and utterly wrong. I put so much hard work into these tracks, it takes a lot of hard work, I pay the subscription, I pay the $5 so my side of the bargain is done. So to be sent and judged on a totally different brief is a real slap in the face.

Just to be clear the screener wrote the following:

I really love the trippy / pop feel of this track.
I don't have a lot to complain about on this track. It's a solid song with a great dance beat. Unfortunately, they seem to be looking for something much more roadhouse blues and this doesn't have that backbone.
I'm returning this track because, cool as it is, it just doesn't sound enough like the reference tracks to be a good fit. They want a heavy bass track. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZa-EXC7ST4

So, it's not the track that is not any good, it is because they have based it on a totally different listing - I've checked and double-checked I sent it into the correct one btw, and I have.

The track I wrote doesn't rip off the Sia song 'Breathe Me', as the listing explicitly states: The Music Supervisor is NOT looking for clones or soundalikes! Similar tempo, feel, and overall vibe? Yes. Clones? No!
And my track works within those parameters .

I've messaged a guy called Matt Hutchison who got in contact when I joined earlier this year, but I am really deflated and a bit angry about it all to be honest. Has this happened before to anyone?

[cassmcentee]

Have you tried calling Taxi?
They are very helpful regarding these matters.

[todddunnigan]

I feel like I definitely had that happen. I got a return that said "I like the creativity of this track but the listing isn't for Spoken Word" and he mentioned 'Spoken Word' 3 more times in the review. It was most definitely NOT a spoken word track at all. No spoken parts anywhere. Nothing rapped, nothing talked/sang. It was a straight up pop singing all the way through the track. I figured the only way the screener could have been so far off with the references was if he was actually referring to another track, or possibly he has a really bizarre idea about what constitutes Spoken Word.

[cosmicdolphin]

Email the Head Screener... Clearly some sort of mix up

[Casey H]

Hey Mark
It happens occasionally and I wouldn't get angry or upset about it. You email headscreener AT taxi dot com and they will look into it fairly quickly. It happened to me (first time in MANY years) recently, I wrote head screener and it ended up getting forwarded. Of course, don't assume it will be a forward (it still has to meet the criteria and the 'bar') but it will get re-reviewed I promise.

My experience with Taxi going back 15 years of membership is the customer service is top notch. Be nice and courteous and they will very much return the same. They monitor the screening a lot and pride themselves in fixing any issues.

Good luck!!
Casey