Returns for "stranger things" listing

[Paulie]

A little frustrated with my three returns today for this listing...

SYNTH TENSION INSTRUMENTALS are needed by an EXCLUSIVE Music Library that's connected with many TV Production Companies and Showrunners (Executive Producers)! This Library is on the lookout for Instrumentals that could be heard on a playlist with the following references:

"Powerful Psychic Connection" by Kyle Dixon & Michael Stein
"100% Convinced" by Kyle Dixon & Michael Stein
"Hellfire Isn’t A Cult" by Kyle Dixon & Michael Stein
"A War is coming to Hawkins" by Kyle Dixon & Michael Stein

Quoting the Library: "We're looking for Synth Tension – Stranger Things/80s flavored tension tracks with analog synths."

All three had the same comment: "This one might also work better with more development to the motif for a slightly more captivating sound. I returned this instrumental because it's slightly off target compared to the references in terms of melody and needs some additional work."

My issue? None of the references have melodies. They are all synth tension tracks, the closest thing to a melody is some of the arpeggiation going on. I double checked before creating my tracks, there are no melodies. My track "Untrustable' has more of a melody than any of the references... I was actually concerned it was too melodic and unlike the references, which is why the other two I submitted are not as melodic... because the references were not either.

Feel free to check out my tracks for comparison in my profile. If I'm missing something, I'm all ears.

• Untrustable
• The Clouds Below
• Shady Character

[garrettmiller]

Hi Paulie,

The link to “the clouds below” won’t open. I could hear “untrustable”and “shady character” on a “playlist with the following references”. I too got a return with similar feedback regarding melody. I’m curious to hear what did get forwarded. Great job on these though.

[superkons]

I do not really agree with the screener, I too could not listen to "The Clouds Below", but the other 2 are 100% in the ballpark IMHO. I can only conjecture the screener was expecting a more definite melody in your tunes in order to better "sell" them to the client

[Paulie]

Oops... forgot to click the "Public" checkbox on The Clouds Below. Should work now.

Thanks for listening.

[Paulie]

I too got a return with similar feedback regarding melody. I’m curious to hear what did get forwarded. Great job on these though.

Exactly. Show me the melody on any of the references...

[Telefunkin]

Hmmm...a tough one, but to me your tracks rely more on texture and one-off sounds, whereas the refs rely quite heavily on their repeating motifs which also give them more of what could be interpreted as melodic content. 'Shady Character' goes that way but the faster arp work makes it sound busier and perhaps too distracting. That's just my opinion but I hope it goes a little way towards helping you decipher the screener feedback. In the end though, I don't think you'll have problems finding a home for these tracks elsewhere.

[Paulie]

Hmmm...a tough one, but to me your tracks rely more on texture and one-off sounds, whereas the refs rely quite heavily on their repeating motifs which also give them more of what could be interpreted as melodic content. 'Shady Character' goes that way but the faster arp work makes it sound busier and perhaps too distracting.

Great feedback, thanks! The genre is interesting.... I've got a couple of albums worth in libraries now and have had several placements in this style. I'll take a closer listen to the arpeggio stuff in the references.

[TheShyPersistence]

I was just about to post the EXACT same thing lol. I too, got returned for the same reasons when the reference tracks clearly have little-to-no melody! Like you, I had to DIAL BACK the melody line to closer align to the listing *urgh*

It's very frustrating when the screener hears something completely different or when they contradict themselves - sometimes in the same critique. I personally feel if it's so close, then they should leave it up to the client to decide? But I don't even work here, so what do I know lol

Great tracks tho, Paul. I'm sure they'll find a home somewhere

[Paulie]

Thanks Vincent. I had a forward and two returns for a different listing earlier this month (investigative cues). The library reached out to me (cool!), so I sent them the two returns... and they liked them both, and want an entire album from me. Sometimes I think subconscious over-analysis happens during the screening process. Overthinking. I get it, it's hard to power through dozens, sometimes hundreds, of submissions and your mind starts to play tricks on you. I've been a music adjudicator many times, sitting in a room listening to dozens or hundreds of students playing their state or region audition music. How the scores end up can vary wildly, a lot of it depends on the first two or three students you hear. If they stink, it sets a tone... if a good player is early in the process a proper skill spectrum is created and alters how judges score. I think the same might happen for screeners... and it will change with every batch of submissions.

[DavidClipperton]

Hi Paulie,

I had a return for the same listing. The screener said "For this listing, a bit more development and forward motion would help the arrangement sound more dynamic, similar to the reference tracks."
I was actually worried my track had too much melody and motion compared to the references! He might be correct but I was super confused.
Here is the track if you wanna check it out and let em know what you think:

https://www.taxi.com/members/UZWINzSqT_ ... d-presence

BTW, big fan of your Youtube vids. Great info!

Cheers!

David