Somthing odd? And ranting...Lots of ranting....

Liked your review? Rave about it! Hated it, let us know!

Moderators: admin, mdc, TAXIstaff

doortoanima
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 8:32 am
Contact:

Somthing odd? And ranting...Lots of ranting....

Post by doortoanima » Thu Jun 22, 2006 9:31 pm

Hi, I've just been a reader of the forums until now, as I've noticed something odd and I guess I just want to rant a little.So anyway, I've gotten back 2 batches of critiques from TAXI so far and I've noticed something very odd about them. This is not an issue of low scores or returns either, let me explain. First, as you know, looking at the critique sheet the elements rated going from top to bottom are Music, Lyrics, Marketability, Arrangement, Production, Engineering, Musicianship, Lead Vocal. So in that order is how I will give the score numbers for each critique.First Batch of Critiques were for my songs "The Exorcism" and "In Embryo".The Exorcism scored: 8, 8, 8, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8.In Embryo Scored: 8, 8, 8, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8......anyone else see the similarity's here? Its a perfect match, score for score...coincidence I thought...moving on.The Second batch of Critiques were for my songs "The Exorcism", "In Embryo", and "Olivers Wake". This time The Exorcism scored: 7, 7, 5, 7, 7, 6, 7, 7.In Embryo Scored: 7, 7, 5, 7, 7, 6, 7, 7....Olivers Wake scored: 7, 7, 5, 7, 7, 6, 7, 7.....Do you guys see it? HOW does each song for each separate critique get the exact same score? The first critique featured 2 songs with the exact same score as each other....the second critique featured 3 songs that all had the exact same score as each other? Am I the only one to find that strange?Also, something else I found quite odd. Let's look at the second batch of critiques. This critique really pissed me off which is why I waited till way later tonight to write this, as it gave me some time to cool off, but let's forget about the things I disagree with for a second because a critique is just a persons opinion after all, and everyones in titled to one right?OK, The exorcism I recorded around May or so last year. I'm always learning new recording tricks and methods every time I go at it, and I've learned a fair amount more since then. Olivers Wake was recorded in February this year. As such alot of extra steps have been taken that haven't on the other songs such as having all frequency's below 60 Hz removed, and having all DC offset removed before Mastering. I also had gotten tons better with compression and using Limiters and Quad Compression. Theres a whole slew of things that have been done better in the mixing but the bottom line? The audio quality is much better in Olivers Wake then The Exorcism, yet they have the same score for Production and Engineering. It's not small differences either. You can hear the difference on a regular CD player, but if you listen using a proper pair of Mixing head phones or Monitor Speakers there is a HUGE difference, especially with the bass. The bass in The Exorcism is kind of muddy and not well controlled, while in Olivers Wake it is very tight and punchy WITHOUT muddying up the mix even a little as it's very balanced.Also, in the first batch of critiques The Exorcism got an 8 for both production and enginering....concidering that Olivers Wake on the second batch is actually better quality wise, I find a 7 and a 6 to be...well it just seems wrong to me.If your tired, take a break, I'm not done ranting yet....I've gotten many critiques from various places such as www.songoftheyear.com and some other people in the industry from music seminars and such, anyway, the one thing I've always done well with in critiques are Melodies and Originality. They are usually both 9's and 10's, which is why the second batch of critiques really pissed me off. Let me explain my situation here.For a relevant example, let's look at the overall comments from the first batch of critiques from TAXI."Hey Will, your songs feature interesting and unique musical and melodic parts. The vocal delivery suits the material well. The musicianship is solid, the production sounds good. Both songs could be made more accessible (especially on a first listen) by giving the listener something to hook onto, e.g., some repeating vocal lines. It could also be a good idea to try and move away from the root note of the songs throughout. I wish you good luck with everything".OK, it's a nice critique, I'm happy with it. The main thing to take from it is the fact he pointed out "unique musical and melodic parts", AND, the fact that I don't repeat vocal lines. I do NOT do verse chorus verse, and I usually vary up the musical parts as well. I structure my songs like a movie, rising and falling to reach a final climax and conclusion. I use alot of time signatures, I record the strangest kinds of ambiance from scraping on the walls to kicking doors, whatever I have to do to come up with something original and atmospheric. I get docked points and singled out for being unconventional in almost every critique (all except the second batch from TAXI mentioned above) in the arrangement particularly, but its OK, and I understand that its unconventional and doesn't fit into the mainstream...but thats partly why I do it, it makes it different, it makes it fresh, and I take great pride in my ability to do that.....and ya know, I don't mind losing points for it as long as the originality is recognized. This is also the same reason that the second batch of critiques pissed me off so much.On the second batch, this guys Overall Comments were: "Will, you have done a good job of establishing & defining the compositional dynamics & at adhering to the hard rock genre requests of the listing throughout all 3 songs that you have submitted. That being said, I feel that the music is to similar in both it's design & presentation to Tool. There are so many bands that try to sound like them & while the listing mentions them as a reference they are looking for material with more stylistic originality"So...Tools the only band allowed to structure their songs in design outside of verse chorus verse? Are they the only ones allowed to use time signatures? Because orchestras have been using time signatures since the beginning...thats like saying "Hey!, U can't have reverb in your song cause Jimmy Hendrix used that on one of his", and guess what? Almost EVERY band is doing verse chorus verse...so my structures are to much like Tools because their...different? I spent the last 6 years finding my sound, experimenting with everything imaginable to make something original, and that originality has been recognized on several critiques, 2 of which came from TAXI itself (First batch), but apparently, having a different structure/design makes me like Tool, because Tool is also unconventional...should I just go and chop up my songs into cookie cutter designs now?To be completely honest, my first impression when looking at the second batch of critiques was that the reviewer must have been a big Tool fan, and was offended that someone else had gone out into uncharted territory, and then had a bias to critique me with. It's funny cause Olivers Wake had all 8's and 9's from www.songoftheyear.com, was praised for it's originality, got me an honorable mention, and scored a 9 for marketability with the closing notes:"This song has huge market potential and is well worth the effort to clean up a few items. Get busy promoting this song as soon as possible!"And yet, my second batch of critiques from TAXI, the reviewer gave it a 5 for marketability....Now, I don't want anyone to get the idea that I'm blaming TAXI, just one reviewer, but while I'm here, I have a few questions about the service after being a member for about 4 months now. That second batch of critiques I got, I received on June 22nd...yesterday. That critique was for a listing that had a deadline of May 10th....OK, so it was late, it happens, things get swamped, I understand...so why can't the critiques be sent through email? I have the feeling I read that they can be sent through email if your a member of band-jam, maybe I'm wrong..but if so, why is it I have to be a member of band-jam to get my critiques emailed to me when the membership to TAXI is $299.95 PLUS submission fee's? Hell, the critiques could be done up in word pad, even www.songoftheyear.com sends out the critiques by email and they get hundreds to thousands of entries each month (and no $299.95 membership fee). What happened to "You Finally Have Friends In the Music Business"..Im sure none of my friends would make me pay them an additional 30 bucks a month on top of a 299.95 membership fee just to send me a critique. I can understand not being able to send songs via email as it would take some pretty big expensive servers for TAXI to offer that, but little critiques in wordpad I think TAXI can handle.Please don't take any of this the wrong way. I love the concept of TAXI, and I've seen little blurbs of different ways that TAXI is trying to improve the service. I'm just wondering why the small but important things like emailing all critiques without additional fee's is not part of the service improvements.Lastly, a scary thought. TAXI is made up of top professionals within the industry, professionals that scan everything and send the best on for a chance for some kind of success in the music business right? To have credibility, TAXI A&R are tough scorers and they only forward the best because thats what keeps the credibility right?Well, as you all know and can see from my rant here, the reviewers opinions are often very conflicting and subjective. Getting forwarded by TAXI seems to be hard enough, because our musics getting graded just like it would be at an actual established label (TAXI is made up of the best of the best after all). So weather we have good music or not, we have to find JUST the right reviewer that will be impressed greatly before it is forwarded. So it gets forwarded....now you have to luck out and have it reviewed by someone else, and they have to feel at least as good about it as the TAXI reviewer did before you actually get signed...which is going to be hard considering how conflicting most music reviewers opinions are. One might love it, another like it but not enough to sign it. It'll be hard to get 2 picky people to love it. It would kind of be like winning the lottery twice.Anyway, thats my rant. It's long but, it's everything that I never wrote and wanted to since joining, Just had to get it all off my chest. Thanks

johnnydean1
Committed Musician
Committed Musician
Posts: 867
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 9:14 am
Contact:

Re: Somthing odd? And ranting...Lots of ranting...

Post by johnnydean1 » Fri Jun 23, 2006 12:20 am

Quote:Hi, I've just been a reader of the forums until now, as I've noticed something odd and I guess I just want to rant a little.So anyway, I've gotten back 2 batches of critiques from TAXI so far and I've noticed something very odd about them. This is not an issue of low scores or returns either, let me explain. First, as you know, looking at the critique sheet the elements rated going from top to bottom are Music, Lyrics, Marketability, Arrangement, Production, Engineering, Musicianship, Lead Vocal. So in that order is how I will give the score numbers for each critique.First Batch of Critiques were for my songs "The Exorcism" and "In Embryo".The Exorcism scored: 8, 8, 8, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8.In Embryo Scored: 8, 8, 8, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8......anyone else see the similarity's here? Its a perfect match, score for score...coincidence I thought...moving on.The Second batch of Critiques were for my songs "The Exorcism", "In Embryo", and "Olivers Wake". This time The Exorcism scored: 7, 7, 5, 7, 7, 6, 7, 7.In Embryo Scored: 7, 7, 5, 7, 7, 6, 7, 7....Olivers Wake scored: 7, 7, 5, 7, 7, 6, 7, 7.....Do you guys see it? HOW does each song for each separate critique get the exact same score? The first critique featured 2 songs with the exact same score as each other....the second critique featured 3 songs that all had the exact same score as each other? Am I the only one to find that strange?Also, something else I found quite odd. Let's look at the second batch of critiques. This critique really pissed me off which is why I waited till way later tonight to write this, as it gave me some time to cool off, but let's forget about the things I disagree with for a second because a critique is just a persons opinion after all, and everyones in titled to one right?OK, The exorcism I recorded around May or so last year. I'm always learning new recording tricks and methods every time I go at it, and I've learned a fair amount more since then. Olivers Wake was recorded in February this year. As such alot of extra steps have been taken that haven't on the other songs such as having all frequency's below 60 Hz removed, and having all DC offset removed before Mastering. I also had gotten tons better with compression and using Limiters and Quad Compression. Theres a whole slew of things that have been done better in the mixing but the bottom line? The audio quality is much better in Olivers Wake then The Exorcism, yet they have the same score for Production and Engineering. It's not small differences either. You can hear the difference on a regular CD player, but if you listen using a proper pair of Mixing head phones or Monitor Speakers there is a HUGE difference, especially with the bass. The bass in The Exorcism is kind of muddy and not well controlled, while in Olivers Wake it is very tight and punchy WITHOUT muddying up the mix even a little as it's very balanced.Also, in the first batch of critiques The Exorcism got an 8 for both production and enginering....concidering that Olivers Wake on the second batch is actually better quality wise, I find a 7 and a 6 to be...well it just seems wrong to me.If your tired, take a break, I'm not done ranting yet....I've gotten many critiques from various places such as www.songoftheyear.com and some other people in the industry from music seminars and such, anyway, the one thing I've always done well with in critiques are Melodies and Originality. They are usually both 9's and 10's, which is why the second batch of critiques really pissed me off. Let me explain my situation here.For a relevant example, let's look at the overall comments from the first batch of critiques from TAXI."Hey Will, your songs feature interesting and unique musical and melodic parts. The vocal delivery suits the material well. The musicianship is solid, the production sounds good. Both songs could be made more accessible (especially on a first listen) by giving the listener something to hook onto, e.g., some repeating vocal lines. It could also be a good idea to try and move away from the root note of the songs throughout. I wish you good luck with everything".OK, it's a nice critique, I'm happy with it. The main thing to take from it is the fact he pointed out "unique musical and melodic parts", AND, the fact that I don't repeat vocal lines. I do NOT do verse chorus verse, and I usually vary up the musical parts as well. I structure my songs like a movie, rising and falling to reach a final climax and conclusion. I use alot of time signatures, I record the strangest kinds of ambiance from scraping on the walls to kicking doors, whatever I have to do to come up with something original and atmospheric. I get docked points and singled out for being unconventional in almost every critique (all except the second batch from TAXI mentioned above) in the arrangement particularly, but its OK, and I understand that its unconventional and doesn't fit into the mainstream...but thats partly why I do it, it makes it different, it makes it fresh, and I take great pride in my ability to do that.....and ya know, I don't mind losing points for it as long as the originality is recognized. This is also the same reason that the second batch of critiques pissed me off so much.On the second batch, this guys Overall Comments were: "Will, you have done a good job of establishing & defining the compositional dynamics & at adhering to the hard rock genre requests of the listing throughout all 3 songs that you have submitted. That being said, I feel that the music is to similar in both it's design & presentation to Tool. There are so many bands that try to sound like them & while the listing mentions them as a reference they are looking for material with more stylistic originality"So...Tools the only band allowed to structure their songs in design outside of verse chorus verse? Are they the only ones allowed to use time signatures? Because orchestras have been using time signatures since the beginning...thats like saying "Hey!, U can't have reverb in your song cause Jimmy Hendrix used that on one of his", and guess what? Almost EVERY band is doing verse chorus verse...so my structures are to much like Tools because their...different? I spent the last 6 years finding my sound, experimenting with everything imaginable to make something original, and that originality has been recognized on several critiques, 2 of which came from TAXI itself (First batch), but apparently, having a different structure/design makes me like Tool, because Tool is also unconventional...should I just go and chop up my songs into cookie cutter designs now?To be completely honest, my first impression when looking at the second batch of critiques was that the reviewer must have been a big Tool fan, and was offended that someone else had gone out into uncharted territory, and then had a bias to critique me with. It's funny cause Olivers Wake had all 8's and 9's from www.songoftheyear.com, was praised for it's originality, got me an honorable mention, and scored a 9 for marketability with the closing notes:"This song has huge market potential and is well worth the effort to clean up a few items. Get busy promoting this song as soon as possible!"And yet, my second batch of critiques from TAXI, the reviewer gave it a 5 for marketability....Now, I don't want anyone to get the idea that I'm blaming TAXI, just one reviewer, but while I'm here, I have a few questions about the service after being a member for about 4 months now. That second batch of critiques I got, I received on June 22nd...yesterday. That critique was for a listing that had a deadline of May 10th....OK, so it was late, it happens, things get swamped, I understand...so why can't the critiques be sent through email? I have the feeling I read that they can be sent through email if your a member of band-jam, maybe I'm wrong..but if so, why is it I have to be a member of band-jam to get my critiques emailed to me when the membership to TAXI is $299.95 PLUS submission fee's? Hell, the critiques could be done up in word pad, even www.songoftheyear.com sends out the critiques by email and they get hundreds to thousands of entries each month (and no $299.95 membership fee). What happened to "You Finally Have Friends In the Music Business"..Im sure none of my friends would make me pay them an additional 30 bucks a month on top of a 299.95 membership fee just to send me a critique. I can understand not being able to send songs via email as it would take some pretty big expensive servers for TAXI to offer that, but little critiques in wordpad I think TAXI can handle.Please don't take any of this the wrong way. I love the concept of TAXI, and I've seen little blurbs of different ways that TAXI is trying to improve the service. I'm just wondering why the small but important things like emailing all critiques without additional fee's is not part of the service improvements.Lastly, a scary thought. TAXI is made up of top professionals within the industry, professionals that scan everything and send the best on for a chance for some kind of success in the music business right? To have credibility, TAXI A&R are tough scorers and they only forward the best because thats what keeps the credibility right?Well, as you all know and can see from my rant here, the reviewers opinions are often very conflicting and subjective. Getting forwarded by TAXI seems to be hard enough, because our musics getting graded just like it would be at an actual established label (TAXI is made up of the best of the best after all). So weather we have good music or not, we have to find JUST the right reviewer that will be impressed greatly before it is forwarded. So it gets forwarded....now you have to luck out and have it reviewed by someone else, and they have to feel at least as good about it as the TAXI reviewer did before you actually get signed...which is going to be hard considering how conflicting most music reviewers opinions are. One might love it, another like it but not enough to sign it. It'll be hard to get 2 picky people to love it. It would kind of be like winning the lottery twice.Anyway, thats my rant. It's long but, it's everything that I never wrote and wanted to since joining, Just had to get it all off my chest. Thanks I don't see the point of this post unless you give us a chance to listen to your work and make our own judgment as to whether you have been treated fairly or not.All I see are three links for Song of the Year.Are you working for them!

User avatar
davewalton
Serious Musician
Serious Musician
Posts: 4172
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2004 11:57 am
Location: Cape Girardeau, Missouri
Contact:

Re: Somthing odd? And ranting...Lots of ranting...

Post by davewalton » Fri Jun 23, 2006 6:14 am

Hello,I'll take a crack at this. Emails and forum posts sometimes doesn't always reflect the mindset of the person doing the writing. If we were talking face-to-face, this would be a pleasant conversation even though I'm giving an alternative point of view. Quote:Do you guys see it? HOW does each song for each separate critique get the exact same score? The first critique featured 2 songs with the exact same score as each other....the second critique featured 3 songs that all had the exact same score as each other? Am I the only one to find that strange?Since all of the songs were recorded by you presumably on the same equipment, under the same basic circumstances, etc, I would expect that the songs would be consistent from song to song. If I got varying production numbers from song to song, that would throw up a red flag for me. Plus the production numbers are based on values that are given to all musicians submitting, not just one of your songs compared to another one of your songs. They may sound different to you but compared to thousands of other songs they probably fall into a certain production category collectively. Anyway, 7's and 8's are good enough to get forwarded consistantly for most listings if the song meets the needs of the listing client. Quote:...because a critique is just a persons opinion after all, and everyones in titled to one right?Yes but this is more than just some person's random opinion. Their #1 priority is to act as a reputable screening source for their listing clients. Their "opinions" have concequences (i.e. happy client, dissatisfied client) so their "opinions" are informed decisions on behalf of and based on the needs of their listing clients.Quote:I get docked points and singled out for being unconventional in almost every critique (all except the second batch from TAXI mentioned above) in the arrangement particularly, but its OK, and I understand that its unconventional and doesn't fit into the mainstream...Being unconventional can work in your favor if you're promoting yourself simply in the context of your music, having nothing to do with anything else and it certainly works in your favor if that's what the listing client is asking for. In the case of all Taxi listings, the listing clients have asked for something very specific. If you're doing something that isn't what they're looking for then you wouldn't get the gig even if Taxi went ahead and sent it anyway. A house painter doing multi-colored walls can get good work on the basis of their originality but if a client wants a solid tan wall, you'd better show examples of other tan walls you've done.Quote:should I just go and chop up my songs into cookie cutter designs now?I have different goals depending on the situation. Concerning Taxi, my main and only goal is to get forwarded. I approach work outside of Taxi the same way. If a client wants a certain sound/style, I provide that (actually, writing a song within the confines of a certain set of criteria takes a lot of creativity). If they don't know what they want, I get creative in the way that you're thinking about creativity. Quote:To be completely honest, my first impression when looking at the second batch of critiques was that the reviewer must have been a big Tool fan, and was offended that someone else had gone out into uncharted territory, and then had a bias to critique me with. It's not that personal and no one that submits commands that kind of importance. Taxi's #1 goal is to screen music for their client and give them the cream of the crop. If the things you were doing were what the client was looking for you would have been forwarded. Taxi has no reason to withhold qualifiing music from their listing clients.Quote:It's funny cause Olivers Wake had all 8's and 9's from www.songoftheyear.com, was praised for it's originality, got me an honorable mention, and scored a 9 for marketability with the closing notes:"This song has huge market potential and is well worth the effort to clean up a few items. Get busy promoting this song as soon as possible!"I'm stealing this line of thinking directly from a post that Michael from Taxi made sometime back. "SongOfTheYear.com" has no stake in anything you're doing and so there's no downside to telling you what you want to hear. Contact the person that gave you that critique and ask them for a modest amount of money ($10-25,000) to produce and market your track. After all, it has "huge market potential", right? They should jump at the opportunity to invest and make boatloads of cash. When they turn you down, ask them why... that's when you'll get the REAL critique. Besides, you're focused too much on all these details and missing the big picture. Both Taxi and SongOfTheYear.com agree that that you need to "clean up a few items". That's the common thread that I think you missed. Clients inside of Taxi and outside of Taxi won't consider songs that have to be cleaned up because they have too many other songs to choose from that don't have to be cleaned up.Quote:I understand...so why can't the critiques be sent through email? They can if you're a member of Broadjam but I agree with you on this one. When you submit on CD via snailmail, if you get forwarded you get a postcard (not notified via email) and the postcard says "Congratulations! Your tape has been forwarded" Tape? The postcard and reference to a "tape" doesn't seem to project a "cutting edge" image not to mention the inefficiency of printing, handling, mailing, etc of that little postcard. Quote:Lastly, a scary thought. TAXI is made up of top professionals within the industry, professionals that scan everything and send the best on for a chance for some kind of success in the music business right? Sort of. Taxi provides a service to us but kind of through the back door. The listing client is the main thing. The focus is to provide their listing clients with quality, pre-screened music that meets their needs. If the focus was on us, Taxi would just send everything in hopes that something would stick.Quote:So weather we have good music or not, we have to find JUST the right reviewer that will be impressed greatly before it is forwarded. It's not about the reviewer. It's about the listing client. Yes, the greatest Latin Pop song won't get forwarded for a Country listing. Quality requirements can vary from listing to listing, but if you have decent quality AND you're meeting the needs of the listing you'll get forwarded every single time. It's the job of the reviewer to find the right music for the client. Simple and straightforward.Quote:So it gets forwarded....now you have to luck out and have it reviewed by someone else, and they have to feel at least as good about it as the TAXI reviewer did before you actually get signed...which is going to be hard considering how conflicting most music reviewers opinions are. One might love it, another like it but not enough to sign it. It'll be hard to get 2 picky people to love it. It would kind of be like winning the lottery twice.You're now describing the music industry but you're way ahead of yourself. Concerning Taxi, all you have to concentrate on is meeting the needs of the client listing and getting forwarded. Changing the entire music industry is something you can do after you get a few forwards. Dave

matto
Serious Musician
Serious Musician
Posts: 3320
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2004 5:02 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Re: Somthing odd? And ranting...Lots of ranting...

Post by matto » Fri Jun 23, 2006 6:39 am

There's nothing wrong with a little ranting from time to time... But I'm with johnny on this one...your eloquent waxing about your wonderfully original music, tight bass and dc offset doesn't do anybody any good. Let us hear the songs and decide for ourselves if one of them is "songoftheyear"... And just as an aside, anybody can say things like: Quote:"This song has huge market potential and is well worth the effort to clean up a few items. Get busy promoting this song as soon as possible!"...the real question is, would that person take the song to major record labels for you?

53mph
Impressive
Impressive
Posts: 419
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 10:57 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Italy
Contact:

Re: Somthing odd? And ranting...Lots of ranting...

Post by 53mph » Fri Jun 23, 2006 7:48 am

Hey doortoanima (or is that "door to the soul?" Italian Doors fan by any chance?)Even if you've learned new recording techniques I presume you're using the same guitars, same vocalist, same mics, same mixing desk, same DAW etc.. and you're musicianship is probably very similar.Just by cleaning up the bass or tweaking compression does not change the song much if the rest is the same. I think you're being a bit hyper sensitive about that issue.

doortoanima
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 8:32 am
Contact:

Re: Something odd? And ranting...Lots of ranting..

Post by doortoanima » Fri Jun 23, 2006 3:13 pm

OK guy's, thanks for replying. I've read your responses and appreciate your input, but some of my points I don't think will make sense until you hear them yourself first hand. So, how can I upload my tracks? And where can I get a GOOD and FREE mp3 converter for you? It's been mentioned in your responses of the quality being the same because of using the same gear, but I beg to differ and would gladly like to prove it. Show me where to upload them, give me a good mp3 converter and I will gladly show you. Also, at the same time I can prove all of my other points.I know it's not just me, I've seen differences in scores from critiques else where, plus friends and such, there IS a big difference in the quality and I would love to prove it to you.Also, I don't get why you guy's seem to be crapping on the credibility of the songoftheyear critiques... Why are TAXI's reviewers more credible? Read the site and look at the reviewers, they claim to be professionals too. Some of you are talking like you own share's in TAXI. To crap on songoftheyear for no reason is being a bit biased I think. Also, don't get offended like I'm attacking or crapping on TAXI myself, nothing is perfect and I'm just sharing my thoughts now that I've been a member for a while. I still enjoy the open doors TAXI provides, I'm just sharing my thoughts."Besides, you're focused too much on all these details and missing the big picture. Both Taxi and SongOfTheYear.com agree that that you need to "clean up a few items". That's the common thread that I think you missed. Clients inside of Taxi and outside of Taxi won't consider songs that have to be cleaned up because they have too many other songs to choose from that don't have to be cleaned up."My response to that^ is this: That critique that your referring to "clean up a few items" has already been noted, and the song has already been redone with those notes in mind. Nextly, I'm aware of how subjective my approach to song writing is. I'm usually told that they love it for its originality, but then say that it's because of that unorthodox manor that they won't take it. BUT, thats OK, I wasn't mad because I wasn't forwarded, and let me say that again so I get my point across, I'M OK THAT I WASN'T FORWARDED!!!! What I didn't like, was being told that my original music that I've slaved and experimented on for years to make, the music I've made that has been credited by many people for being very original, was to much like Tool because of it's design/structure. Usually people follow a format like verse chorus verse, I dont even have a format. All of my songs are different in structure from one another. I have no set way that I write my songs, they are all different. My point, is that the reviewer was saying I was like Tool because of that, and the only other alternative to writing freely, is to write conformativly, as in, verse chorus verse.....you can't say I'm like Tool because I don't follow a given format, THATS my point! THATS what I took offense to. Anyway, with that said, it was mostly just a rant with some thoughts I've had, but I would like to upload my songs for you so that I can prove my point....so I need a good mp3 converter thats free, and of course a place to upload it to. Help me with that, and I'll gladly present my case. Thanks

nomiyah
Serious Musician
Serious Musician
Posts: 1470
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 8:29 pm
Gender: Female
Location: Home Is Where The Studio Is
Contact:

Re: Somthing odd? And ranting...Lots of ranting...

Post by nomiyah » Fri Jun 23, 2006 5:40 pm

I use Download.com and search for free mp3 converter.

doortoanima
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 8:32 am
Contact:

Re: Something odd? And ranting...Lots of ranting..

Post by doortoanima » Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:14 am

Quote:I use Download.com and search for free mp3 converter.Thanks for your suggestion nomiyah, but I've used download.com before for that same purpose, and the converters I found their were both a) Crap, and b) Full of spy ware.I used a free trial of Sony MP3-Plugin 2.0 that was great with one of my friend's copy of Sony Soundforge 7, but that was last year and thus, the trial is gone. Anyway, it was one of the only mp3 converters that I've used that had a quality close to that of the wave file. Since the sound quality of my songs is part of my argument, I wouldn't want to degrade the quality to much. Is there any free converters out there that can preserve most of the quality? and where to upload? Thanks

edteja
Serious Musician
Serious Musician
Posts: 1171
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:07 am
Gender: Male
Location: Siver City, New Mexico
Contact:

Re: Somthing odd? And ranting...Lots of ranting...

Post by edteja » Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:58 am

Go to PC Week and check their downloads. If you can find lame or one of those (razorblade) they let you endode at various bit rates. Do it at 192 and it shouldn't be a bad comparison to wav. There is always some compression in MP3--it goes with the territory.
"In the future, when we finally get over racism, bigotry, and everyone is purple, red, and brown ... then we'll have to hate people for who they truly are."--George Carlin

spariam
Impressive
Impressive
Posts: 159
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 5:35 pm
Contact:

Re: Somthing odd? And ranting...Lots of ranting...

Post by spariam » Wed Jun 28, 2006 10:49 am

I use Lame myself, both at command line to do simple conversions and also using Audacity, where you can simply import the wav and export the mp3 using the Audacity interface..http://lame.sourceforge.net/download/do ... forge.net/

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest