Seeking feedback, comments, etc. on a contemplative hybrid underscore instrumental cue

[MJLeeman]

I am thinking of submitting the following cue to the listing referred to below.

https://www.taxi.com/members/nwRU7pygQr ... reflection

All comments and suggestions will be gratefully received.

Regards
Michael Leeman



CONTEMPLATIVE HYBRID UNDERSCORE INSTRUMENTAL CUES are needed by a very successful boutique Music Library that's distributed by Universal and has tons of credits in Big Films, Countless TV Shows, and Commercials!

This is a catalog you want to be in! Please listen to the following examples the Library's CEO gave us to get yourself in the ballpark of what they need:

Instrumental Examples
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/35sc6p87 ... 2&e=1&dl=0

Quoting the Company's CEO: "We're looking for intimate ambient underscores that gradually evolve as they progress. Your pieces should use organic sounds (such as felt pianos) on top of the ambient bed. and starting out on the 'smaller' side and evolving it into something bigger as it moves forward."

ADVICE DIRECTLY FROM the COMPANY's CEO: "Many composers throw in way too many ideas, and are not focused on ONE CENTRAL MOTIF: they try to keep things interesting by adding new harmonic lines and elements (melodies, even improvisations, etc) instead of focusing on the production and textures. What I'm looking for is basically: obvious production music (in form and structure), that sounds like commercial music (production style)." Put simply, keep it SIMPLE! We know that other Libraries like to receive music with complementary A and B sections, but this Library is NOT one of them – stick with ONE CENTRAL MOTIF per submission, please!

Please submit well-crafted Underscore Instrumental Cues with a contemplative and reflective tone! Your submissions should have one clear central motif that gradually builds to create a sense of forward motion and interest. Instrumentation that blends organic and electronic Hybrid elements (guitar, synth pads, keys, light percussion, etc.), and is in the general stylistic ballpark of the references will work best. Please be sure that any virtual instrumentation you use is high-quality and realistic sounding.

All submissions should be about 2 minutes long, give or take. Good edit points and non-faded, buttoned/stinger endings are required. Do NOT copy the references in any way, shape, or form. Use them only as a general guide for tempo, tone, texture, and overall vibe. Broadcast Quality is needed.

NOTE: This company has a strong preference for composers who understand music licensing companies and how typical music library deals are structured. If that's not you, they politely ask that you don't submit to this request.

This Music Library offers an EXCLUSIVE deal with a cool twist. You’ll keep 50% of all gross income generated by your music, plus you’ll get 100% of the Writer’s share income generated by your PRO. In other words, if the company licenses your music under a blanket deal, you’ll get income. If they license it for a YouTube video, you’ll get income. Not all music libraries pay you for things like that! The Publisher will get 100% of the Publisher’s share.

Because this is an Exclusive deal, the music you submit for this pitch cannot already be signed with other Libraries or Publishers. You must own or control 100% of your Masters and Copyright. Please send as many Instrumental Cues 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 (PST) on Monday, March 4th, 2024. TAXI # S240304HY

[fascinatedlet]

Really the instrument has a lot of positive feedbackcoreball. The sound is really ideal for you to practice professionally to become more advanced. I wonder how long everyone has experience with this instrument.

[WSAO]

All good in my ears, Michael.

You created a central motif (very good, by the way) and evolved the song with layers and other licks to keep it interesting and dynamic.
Well done!

[VanderBoegh]

Really the instrument has a lot of positive feedbackcoreball. The sound is really ideal for you to practice professionally to become more advanced. I wonder how long everyone has experience with this instrument.

Who let the A.I. bot into the forums?!?! Lol.

~~Matt

[RealPickle]

Really the instrument has a lot of positive feedbackcoreball. The sound is really ideal for you to practice professionally to become more advanced. I wonder how long everyone has experience with this instrument.

Who let the A.I. bot into the forums?!?! Lol.

~~Matt

At first I thought this was a little harsh, like maybe this person is a non-native English speaker or something, but then I remembered this account commented on one of my posts, and I looked at all four of their comments in the forum, and...yeah, that's a bot

[VanderBoegh]

Sorry for derailing your post with my comment about bots, Michael. I got distracted, and then forgot to actually respond with anything meaningful.

Your piece is good - but gets fairly busy. The 2nd half of the track has a lot of things happening all at once. This listing very explicitly states "Put simply, keep it SIMPLE!", and I worry you've gone the opposite of simple in the 2nd half. Think you could try minimizing all the various elements, or even deleting some entirely?

Oh, and the drums sound pretty fake and MIDI to me - there aren't any drum kits in the first 2 reference tracks (there may be in the later references, but I didn't listen that far). You might be better off replacing the drum kit with some deep booms or hand percussion.

~~Matt

[macomposer]

So I checked out version 4 of this - I really like it. I was interested in listening since Matt mentioned that it got busy in the second half. I've been known to get too busy myself as my pieces go on, so I wanted to checked that out, as well as the note about the drums sounding too midi.

I really like it - I am a sucker for counterpoint, so the lines don't bother me at all. And I wasn't bothered by the drums... but I take Matt's point that if the refs. didn't have drums, then that would be no bueno.

Matt - if you're out there, I'd love to hear more about why the drums sounded/seemed fake to you. I mean, it's obvious they weren't live, but I'm just wanting to learn more from you about that..

As this post was originally from February, I'd be curious to hear from Michael how it turned it. Was it forwarded and signed? Returned? What's up?

- Mark

[MJLeeman]

So I checked out version 4 of this - I really like it. I was interested in listening since Matt mentioned that it got busy in the second half. I've been known to get too busy myself as my pieces go on, so I wanted to checked that out, as well as the note about the drums sounding too midi.

I really like it - I am a sucker for counterpoint, so the lines don't bother me at all. And I wasn't bothered by the drums... but I take Matt's point that if the refs. didn't have drums, then that would be no bueno.

Matt - if you're out there, I'd love to hear more about why the drums sounded/seemed fake to you. I mean, it's obvious they weren't live, but I'm just wanting to learn more from you about that..

As this post was originally from February, I'd be curious to hear from Michael how it turned it. Was it forwarded and signed? Returned? What's up?

- Mark

Thanks Mark for your comments.

I had forgotten about this submission until last week when I stumbled on it again after many months. I see now that the thread was picked up about six months after my original post.

I would like to thank WSAO and Matt van der Boegh for their comments, even though now several months old, of course I appreciate that they took the time to provide feedback.

In response to Marks' query where he said that "I'd be curious to hear from Michael how it turned [out]. Was it forwarded and signed? Returned? What's up?"

I can report that this was a return, the reasons for which, particularly in light of Matt van der Boegh's critique, has frankly left me confused. By hey, what would I know! My approach, for what it is worth, is to accept the criticism, move ahead and try to do better next time.

Here's the track again followed by the screener's feedback :-

https://www.taxi.com/members/nwRU7pygQr ... reflection

https://www.taxi.com/members/nwRU7pygQr ... LKGY0ohF9w


Cheers
Michael

[macomposer]

Hi Michael,

Thanks for letting us know. Yeah... I'm confused too now... Still think it's a good piece And after listening to it again, I can see the screener's and Matt's points. Hang in there Brother!

Onward!!!
- Mark