some things are off topic in reviews in my opinion

[handrick]

Just had a return on one of my songs and got the usual critic of record your vocals one word at a time and perhaps do the same with some guitar parts.. well that I will never do... anybody can be made to look like they have a good voice doing that these days... I am not perfect..not a machine.. in fact some of my recordings are done with one mic and me playing and singing at the same time...WOW imagine that.. I am sure there are some million selling artists who can't..anyway I accept that kinda critic.. and perhaps my approach is not really going to get anywhere with this type of system... no bitterness...just reality of the business...but what I cannot accept is a reviewer mentioning that I could consider changing the title of my song "Shine A Light" because its the name of the Rolling Stones movie.... that is just bullshit of the highest order... it makes no difference that I wrote the song a long long time before even they knew they were gonna call the movie that... I quote listener #249"This is another good song with some very clever and moving lyrics. You could consider changing the title as it's the title of the new Rolling Stones movie."I also wrote a song called A New Moon Today..and then they released an Elliott Smith album(after his death) called something like A New Moon... again a long time after my song had been written.. am I gonna change that.... I bet you know the answer to that by now... it's all coincidence or something..in fact its kinda wierd as I am a fan of both these artists.. maybe its was just something in the ether as us writers tap into things like that ya know... sometimes I wonder what the reviewers are tapping into...Like I said I can take the criticism just not the bullshit... and to be honest if anyone is listening I'd like my money back from that review please as in my opinion it was a stupid thing to say and an insult to a songwriter...unless it affects the song in some way it's nobodys damn business what I call my song...peace and loveAndrew

[hummingbird]

You can call your song anything you like, however, I try to come up with unique titles for my songs. I often post reviews of other people's work, and if the title/hook they've chosen is also a title of someone else's song, movie or book, then I'll point it out too. I'll often google my idea and see if anyone else has used it.Case in point is my first little EP, which I chose to call by the title track "Waiting for the Bus". It was a real downer, after getting the CD produced & manufactured, to realize there was a hit song by that same name recorded by the Easerheads and also Violent Femmes, and the same line was also in a ZZ Top song too. Bummer.No one is saying you HAVE to change the title, but it's being recommended to you for a reason. If you choose not to change it, that might just diminish its commercial viability. Or not. But the screener is doing his/her job by pointing that out to you.JMHOHummin'birdPS - Re your request for a refund - suggest you call call Taxi's customer service - the toll free number at the top of the forum.

[claire]

I'm writing a song right now and our original title was "It Ain't Me". Didn't bother my cowriter at all, but I couldn't bring myself to come that close to the Bob Dylan song. The title now is "That Ain't Me".Titles aren't copyrightable and yes, you can name the song anything you want. People will point out similarities, though, and I don't think it's a minor point for someone to say "you do know that's the same title as (fill in the blank)?".I think the only time it truly becomes an issue in the legal sense is when a song title has become, as they say in legalese, "notorious" (the title is such a classic that it would be virtually impossible for people not to know the song). "Moon River" and "Somewhere Over The Rainbow" come to mind. Other than that, you can go to the ASCAP and BMI websites and do title searches and find some titles with hundreds of songs written to them.As far as Taxi is concerned, the reviewer was probably just doing his/her job.Claire

[sgs4u]

When someone else in a position of recommending your song, (or paying you money to use it), thinks your song title reminds them of ANYTHING else, it works to your detriment. If your song title is not unique, and it causes a listener to give your piece of music a second place rating with that particular title, you have shot yourself in the foot. Why lessen the odds that your song will get chosen? We're not talking about fans BUYING your song, we're talking about Taxi, or music supervisors. You may indeed want to write and record a song that is a close sound-alike to another famous song, if that is what a buyer is looking for. But to have the same title, is like telling someone you don't even care if they remember your song's title. Why chance it? Sometimes new guys need help understanding that...

[matto]

Oct 24, 2008, 2:00pm, handrick wrote:but what I cannot accept is a reviewer mentioning that I could consider changing the title of my song "Shine A Light" because its the name of the Rolling Stones movie.... that is just bullshit of the highest order... it makes no difference that I wrote the song a long long time before even they knew they were gonna call the movie that... It's not "bullshit" for a screener to point out that your song's title might hurt its commercial viability...it's the screener's job to do so.Most Taxi members are quite interested in knowing about their music's marketability, they are not paying a $300 membership fee just for fun and games...Naturally you are absolutely free to keep your title, but you *should* know that doing so may hurt your song's commercial chances, and that's all the screener is saying. And of course no potential buyer will care whether you wrote your song years before the Rolling Stone movie by the same title...all they will care about is that it has the same title.It's a little known fact that the Kenny Roger's hit "Buy Me A Rose" (written by two Taxi members) was originally called "Little Things". However I think it was Kenny Chesney who had just had a hit by the same title at the time, so Erik and Jim changed the title of their song at the suggestion of their publisher. They could've thrown a tantrum and insisted that they wrote their "Little Things" first , but instead they agreed to give their song the best shot at commercial success...and of course it went on to become a #1 country hit...matto

[Casey H]

I cannot for the life of me see why you are so angry about that one comment. The reviewer said "you could change the title", just a casual comment. It's obvious that you are angry about a lot more than this.If the movie title in question is one that is very current and on a lot of people's minds, I can see not wanting a song with the same title. In this case, it's a pretty common phrase and title, one that thousands of songs probably have. So although I'm not sure I personally would change it, I wouldn't be so angry about the suggestion. One caveat-- if the song had a Rolling Stones sound to it, I'd give more consideration to changing the title.This one comment definitely isn't worth getting riled up about IMHO... Casey

[handrick]

I appreciate your thoughts though...The title we are discussing is a movie title.. I wrote a song..Do you all honestly believe that a song released with that title would not do well because of a movie title?? In fact you could go the other way and say it might help it, the curiosity and the fact that it may be in peoples heads already.. you know it takes people to hear something 13 times before they get it...can't remember where I read that...I am not naive enough to battle the rolling stones on who came up with a title first... that is not the point..There are also millions of people who have not heard of the movie..and I think some of you are missing the point here... I had not heard of the movie at the time I wrote the song..so there was nothing to check it against.. and besides there are plenty of songs with the same title... and different audiences for different musicI am not a new guy..I have had plenty of returns and like I say I accept the criticism, I may not always agree with it as maybe I am aiming for a different audience with my music in some respectsat the end of the day consumers are like sheep...they will accept whatever they are given..that is proof by what you hear on the radio and in the charts everyday...I am also not throwing a tantrum, just saying what I believe in as a songwriter who has been writing songs for a long time, playing live for a long time, earned my living busking and has had songs placed in films...and maybe we should be thinking more about fans buying songs as that is what keeps the whole business going...and by the time song would go through the whole process of coming out etc etc... the movie would be history...I realise there is a lot of compromise in the business but what can I say I am a passionate guy when it comes to music... and believe me I am my own harshest critic...interesting to hear your points all the same...Andrewps. Casey.. I don't pay money to get casual comments...

[handrick]

actually I think you hit the nail on the head there Casey... the fact that it was a casual comment...maybe had there been more explanation or something...but it was too casual... like I said I expect a little more when I pay for it...took me a while to get to this... think my B12 is low

[Casey H]

Oct 25, 2008, 2:18am, handrick wrote:I appreciate your thoughts though...The title we are discussing is a movie title.. I wrote a song..Do you all honestly believe that a song released with that title would not do well because of a movie title?? In fact you could go the other way and say it might help it, the curiosity and the fact that it may be in peoples heads already.. you know it takes people to hear something 13 times before they get it...can't remember where I read that...I am not naive enough to battle the rolling stones on who came up with a title first... that is not the point..There are also millions of people who have not heard of the movie..and I think some of you are missing the point here... I had not heard of the movie at the time I wrote the song..so there was nothing to check it against.. and besides there are plenty of songs with the same title... and different audiences for different musicI am not a new guy..I have had plenty of returns and like I say I accept the criticism, I may not always agree with it as maybe I am aiming for a different audience with my music in some respectsat the end of the day consumers are like sheep...they will accept whatever they are given..that is proof by what you hear on the radio and in the charts everyday...I am also not throwing a tantrum, just saying what I believe in as a songwriter who has been writing songs for a long time, playing live for a long time, earned my living busking and has had songs placed in films...and maybe we should be thinking more about fans buying songs as that is what keeps the whole business going...and by the time song would go through the whole process of coming out etc etc... the movie would be history...I realise there is a lot of compromise in the business but what can I say I am a passionate guy when it comes to music... and believe me I am my own harshest critic...interesting to hear your points all the same...Andrewps. Casey.. I don't pay money to get casual comments...AndrewWhat I meant by "casual" was I didn't think it was the main crux of the review or reason for return. If that one sentence wasn't in the review, would the rest of the review be of value to you? That's what I was saying. If you post a link to the song and the entire review, that could be looked at in proper context. If you do that and I don't think the review was helpful, I would be the first to say you should raise the issue with taxi.I also DID say in my post that in THIS case it didn't seem like that title mattered much because it was such a common phrase, used a million times. BUT, I disagree with your point that, in general, this sort of think doesn't really matter. If you wrote a song 10 years ago called "The 30 Year Old Virgin", don't you think it might be a problem now? I don't think a publisher in the world would touch it with that title now. Matto made an excellent point... The person you are submitting to doesn't know or care when you wrote it. It's totally irrelevant. All that matters is pitching it now.I have a song called "Painfully Single". I wrote it 6-7 years ago and couldn't find anywhere the phrase had been used yet as a song title or movie. But if a movie comes out tomorrow called "Painfully Single" (assuming my song is not in it), I could be screwed as far as pitching the song. There is not a doubt in my mind as to that.I'm separating two things... (1) the concern regarding the title of THIS song and (2) the general concept of unique titles... And what else was in the review? Best,Casey