What do you think on this return?

[Casey H]

The feedback: https://www.taxi.com/members/NgzgvadjQC ... uo2tHNkDhQ

The track: https://s.disco.ac/ctqhljdcdhtp
This one has gotten great response from libraries and a sync agent. That doesn't mean it's right for listing though I think this chorus is great for ads. What sayeth you? Forward or Return? Thanks!

MODERN, FUN, EMOTIONALLY UPBEAT SONGS in ALL GENRES with Male or Female Vocals are needed by an awesome Publisher that's highly successful at securing Big Dollar Sync Placements in National TV Commercials.

This Company is open to hearing positive, feel-good Songs in most of the popular/commercially viable genres, including (but not limited to): Pop, Rock, EDM, Singer-Songwriter, Folk, R&B/Soul, Rap/Hip-Hop, Country, etc. We recommend avoiding submitting anything in genres that don't have a lot of mainstream appeal.

This Publisher is looking for Mid-to-Up-Tempo Songs that could be heard on a feel-good playlist with the following references (don't limit yourself to just these):

"Better Days" by NEIKED, Mae Muller & Polo G https://youtu.be/GQAOrCOknCY?si=KuLdoUTUz0h-M9oV

"Good To Be" by Mark Ambor https://youtu.be/qd2rbjAPiKE?si=JI_VBy5SsvnbDFT1

"Feel It Still" by Portugal. The Man https://youtu.be/e-2aoz_Um10?si=7Rs42MZdlRsLn6OQ

"Pearls" by Jessie Ware https://youtu.be/MvB-iPmmIQw?si=jpEFe8q7nW8zYJhE

Please submit current-sounding Songs in any genre that could add a fun vibe and emotionally upbeat energy to whatever is being shown on screen! Your submissions should have ear-worm melodies, engaging rhythms, and well-written lyrics full of good vibes and positivity throughout. Since this request is open to a wide range of genres, your instrumentation may vary depending on which direction you go, as long as it's consistent and competitive with other Songs in your chosen style. Please ensure that any virtual instruments or samples you use are high-quality and not dated-sounding. Confident, well-performed, and emotionally positive vocals are the way to go.

Please avoid lyrics that are moody, dark, or depressing, as well as anything that has specific names, places, dates, times, brands, and/or profanity. Simple, impactful, feel-good lyrics that would work well in TV commercials are the order of the day! Do NOT copy the referenced artists or songs in any way, shape, or form. Use them only as a general guide for tempo, tone, and overall vibe. Broadcast Quality is needed.

The specific deal points will be handled on a case-by-case basis. You must own or control your Masters and Copyright to submit to this opportunity. Please submit as many Songs as you’d like, online or per CD. All submissions will be screened and critiqued by TAXI. Submissions must be received no later than 11:59 PM (PDT) on Wednesday, April 10th, 2024. TAXI # S240410ME

[BradleyHagen]

Geez... I don't know man, this is pretty friggin solid, and I am not blowing smoke here Casey.... I am not a "pop" guy, but let me listen to the ref tracks..... maybe I can learn something from this for once too!

[BradleyHagen]

I disagree with the screener on the rhythmic aspect...it is very upbeat and grooving..... Maybe a harmony on the chorus ?? I don't know Dude, I think it belongs in a playlist with those other ref tracks, and there are some good ones there too...

[WSAO]

There are rhythm issues?
I'm a drummer and very picky with tempo and there's nothing wrong with the rhythm. Evertything is quantized to the grid (as almost every pop song)
Song / production is very current, maybe the guitar has a bit more rock and drive than the references but I don't think this is a problem.
Melody could be stronger?
References have more "happy", chill out melodies and this one is a bit more energetic with more drive, again don't see a problem but maybe is where the difference lies.
Tough one, mate.

[Telefunkin]

I like the track and there's definitely a place for it. I agree with you that the chorus is good and ad-friendly, so I think you did a great job.

If I was to guess what the screener was getting at FOR THIS LISTING it would be the following ...
- the production is perhaps a bit 1-dimensional, so there's not a huge amount of contrast between the verses and choruses.
- the drum pattern is pretty constant, so the rhythm point is not associated with timing but with build, progression, dynamics.
- the vocal melody is not particularly memorable, so the 'ear worm' criteria in the listing is missing (and it would probably fail the 'old grey whistle test' )
- there are few moments that stand out as strong musical hooks that are instantly memorable, so the 'ear-worm' thing is missing again.

Just my guesses though (and I know nothing ). However, I don't think you'll have a problem getting the song signed so I wish you luck with that.

[Casey H]

However, I don't think you'll have a problem getting the song signed so I wish you luck with that.

Thanks for the feedback. It is signed by very selective libraries and an even more selective sync agent. It was recently played for a supervisor who does a lot of ad placements and he loved it, kept a copy.

However, I recognize that it just might not have been right for THIS listing. Disappointed but that's show biz.

Best,
Casey

[macomposer]

I agree with all that's been said here. Casey - this is a great tune! (I got into the groove and was thinking why haven't I heard this song before... it had to have been around for a long time now )

I think Graham (Funkin' if I may ) is spot on.. each run through of the chorus could have been a bit bigger; there's nothing wrong with the rhythm at all - it is consistent and the check must have been about build, progression, dynamics. (which as an aside, I think that needs to be unpacked by the screener in their review... if Graham hadn't pointed that out, I'm not sure how many of us would have gotten to that. I know I didn't. I was thinking it was about the programming too.)

The one thought I did have was to add just a bit more ear candy, and a couple of subtle sweeps and fills. Strategically placed ear candy would help the choruses be bigger, and just give us a few (more - there is some ear candy already) things to hear. And I've noticed that for ads and cuts in promos and stuff, editors love things like fills, transitions and sweeps. Don't get me wrong, there are great edit points there already - everything I'm talking about is the last 2%, which for me always is the hardest last little bit to come up with and get right...

That's a tough break, but I am glad it's getting traction out there anyway.

All the best,
Mark

[BradleyHagen]

RE: "Ear Candy" - I have had screeners comment on some of my stuff on that as well... Not to SOUND naive (I am naive!) but are they talking strictly about risers, transitions, EQ/Filter Sweeps, and those types of "special effects?" I have always shied away from that stuff, thinking that it makes the track sound too "busy" I have always assumed that the libraries will ask for it if they want it??
Man, this opens up a whole new world for me! Does Casey's track have enough "Ear Candy?" How much is "enough?" And how much is genre specific?
I look forward to any and all comments!

[macomposer]

RE: "Ear Candy" - I have had screeners comment on some of my stuff on that as well... Not to SOUND naive (I am naive!) but are they talking strictly about risers, transitions, EQ/Filter Sweeps, and those types of "special effects?" I have always shied away from that stuff, thinking that it makes the track sound too "busy" I have always assumed that the libraries will ask for it if they want it??
Man, this opens up a whole new world for me! Does Casey's track have enough "Ear Candy?" How much is "enough?" And how much is genre specific?
I look forward to any and all comments!

So, the ear candy thing is a little tricky. I look at it as being.. use and genre specific... So, if I see a listing that is for ads and promos for example, and it is more pop genre-based (as opposed to score genre-based), I'll want to include more(ish) ear candy. It's easy to over do it, so you have to be very careful... It's like listening to all the cool pop 80s tracks - even now when I listen to many of those, I'll hear something going on in the background of the mix that I don't hear unless I am closely listening...

Transitions (sweeps, risers, etc.) are a slightly different but related category. (Yes! I think of them as special EFX too.) They are ear candy in general, but they're almost more important because they are structurally important to the song... they're part of the form because they help get in and out of sections... (With regular ear candy, you not really going to miss it if it's not there.. It just adds a little something - a bit more depth to the track.) Also, I view transitions a little different because they're more recent - they come from EDM and the rise of the use of technology in music. Those same 80s pop songs won't (in most cases) have special efx like that.. they'll have ear candy, but not sweeps, risers and such.. (80s dance music - early house and such will, but those are not the pop songs we're looking for...)

Brad - I hope that's not super confusing...

- Mark

[BradleyHagen]

Makes perfect sense Mark- and I really appreciate your insights on this!