TAXI.com

Hey, Taxi!

I've had some really great feedback recently, thank you - returns have been constructive, specific and actionable. They've made a great deal of difference to my writing, and I've had more forwards as a result - a virtuous circle for me and for Taxi.

I know most listings aren't full critiques these days, so it's doubly great that a lot - even most - screeners seem to be able to say something useful to explain their thinking on a Y/N rejection.

Because great feedback seems to be the default these days, it's a bit disappointing when screeners just "cut and paste" the listing into the comment boxes. Hitting me back with something I've already read isn't great - obviously it gives me a ballpark for where the track fell short, but it's pretty lame feedback compared to something as simple as "layer percussion as the track progresses" (for example)

Normally I'd just roll with unhelpful comments like that - I've had a few like it - but Screener 319 has done this to me on about $25-worth of pitches recently, and I guess I'm feeling burnt when I put that next to the excellent quality of feedback I've had from other screeners even on rejections (thanks go out to Screeners 396 and 347)

I can justify the $5 pay-to-play as being for Taxi's endorsement on a forward, and some helpful critique on a return; but in this particular moment, experiences like this make me less willing to part with the cash.

M

Hi Matt.

Yeah, sometimes the brevity of comments can be a hard pill to swallow. However, if it is on a Y/N listing you know going in if you get more than a Yes or No then it's more than TAXI guaranteed.

Remember, the $5 serves two purposes:
1. to pay the screeners who are private contractors
2. to keep you from sending everything you have to every listing they post

Screeners that copy-and-paste on full-critique listings is a big no-no at TAXI. If that kind of thing happens, they appreciate a phone call to let the head screener know about it.

Regards,
Russell Landwehr

Hi Russell

I do take the point about Y/N listings, and a clue that it was "this" part of the listing that it missed rather than "that" is more helpful than nothing, even if it doesn't feel like it at times. It just stands out as a lot less helpful next to all the great feedback I see the rest of the time - and I needed to let off some steam after the $25 hit.

From a purely business-minded perspective (and not specifically about Taxi, although it does apply) I don't know whether it's possible these days to justify $5 pay-to-play on a two-sided market platform without there being some benefit to the payer, too - think Uber's slice of cab fares, Airbnb's slice of a stay, eBay's listing fees etc etc.

As most Taxi submissions are returns (based on the forward/signing ratio thread), most customer service models suggest there needs to be some benefit on a return as well - I suspect this is why Y/Ns actually have an element of critique to them now.

If a few screeners are just hitting ctrl+V on their feedback (and I emphasise that this seems to be a lot less common than it used to), are they earning their $5 per track on the musician side of the platform? (Bearing in mind that in a two-sided platform - Uber, eBay, Airbnb etc - the service providers are also customers of the platform.)

One thing that did occur to me is that if screeners are paid per track (I don't know if they are) then this incentivises a ctrl+V mentality - something for Taxi to watch for.

That said, I generally feel really well looked after by Taxi. But it's an interesting thing to ponder on the business side of my brain.

Anyway - it's 0720 in the UK and I've got to boot up my DAW.

Cheers
Matt

Hey Matt, something similar happened to me and I am definitely giving Taxi a call about it. Haven't ever called about a screening before (in 5+ years), but on this one I feel I have to.

Hi Matt
Can you post an entire listing text and everything the screener wrote for it (an example)? That would help us understand better.

Screeners are not allowed to copy/paste from review to review. That being said, if the screener is trying to make the point as to how your submission missed key points mentioned in the listing, I could see them repeating those points.

But again, we need to see the whole picture.

Best
Casey

Hey Matt - I did call and rather than explain the whole thing, asked if they would prefer an email for stuff like this, and was told 'yes'. Customer service at Taxi is always really good and friendly, so I'm pretty sure they would take a call, too, but with your timezone difference, thought you might like to know that email is an option. headscreener AT taxi (you know the rest)..

Hi guys

Thanks for the tip about the email. I'm largely over it now but needed to let off some steam a few days back.

For completeness - and purely to answer Casey's question - the entirety of the feedback on the tracks that irritated me was:

"Tracks needs to be more “forward moving and interesting”. (Yes, including the typo)

"Piece needs to be more 'dynamically interesting and forward moving'. Audio file truncates and has a click at the end. Needs a complete full fade and tail, including reverb ring-out." (Listened back and they're spot-on re the end, which several screeners and me had missed before. Easily fixed. The rest is still a mystery.)

"Needs stronger development."

Some of the others were more helpful in that they were targeted at features of the track, but unhelpful in that they didn't explain what the issue actually was:

"See above. Needs a stronger melodic theme." ('See above' refers to the first quote above)

"Could use more orchestral realism."

And I'm comparing them to returns like the ones below. To my mind, the inability or unwillingness of some screeners to write in full sentences says something about their level of engagement or interest, and I think that presentation is critical to the success of businesses like Taxi. Feedback like that below is invaluable, and makes a return as worthwhile (sometimes more so) than some forwards:

"Lots of good ideas and sounds here. The main thing in these cues is to not be distracting, but to fly under the radar while setting a dark tone. The opening (and recurring) high pitched metallic was at a frequency that doesn't tune out well, rather, it becomes an unwelcome distraction. Good sound, but should be used more sparingly."

"Good alternate version of this cue. We are running into the same issue here with that one sound that lingers on far too long. The ideas presented here are good, but that one needs to be pretty sparse for it not to take over the cue.."

"Hi Matthew, I like the strings to create that ominous vibe. I am glad that you change things up around 0:40 to ensure the piece doesn't risk feeling repetitive. Ultimately I think you have a good foundation here but I worry that the piece is a bit thin to really create the tension and movement requested. I think that adding and subtracting more elements as suggested in the listing would really pull this together."

"I definitely appreciate the creativity here, Matthew, but I find that the piano is just standing out as too bright and bouncy for me and I worry detracts from that ominous, tension building mood requested. I feel like if you stripped it down more and made it even higher, maybe a toy piano instead, the piece would feel more cohesive."

"I like the moodiness here, Matthew, and I think the percussion helps add needed texture. I like the change around 0:50 but I find that the strings aren't quite keeping up to the drums after the change. I think that taking that change further would help the piece feel more cohesive and give it more momentum. I worry that it risks starting to feel a little flat as far as arc and trajectory. I think more variation will help fix that."

Hey Matt
I don't see anything wrong with the feedback you posted here-- none of it looks copy and paste-- it's just that sometimes in different sections of a review form, there's not much one can do except emphasize one major issue. I see nothing but worthwhile comments as a whole (reading ALL the comments in your post) on why your tracks weren't forwarded. From my POV, you got (at least!) your money's worth.

"Needs more development', "more forward moving and interesting", "more melodic development', etc. are all ways of telling you your piece doesn't have what it takes to keep the listener engaged, enhance a Film/TV scene, etc. Usually it means it's just too dull and repetitive and doesn't "take off" in some way. If you haven't already, I suggest you post a track with the comments you got on P2P, and ask for more suggestions from other members.

Best of luck!
Casey

Hi Casey

Sorry if my original post isn't very clear - the screener has cut and paste words from the listing, not across the different reviews.

Although it gives an idea of where the problem is, it isn't specific or actionable (which is pretty much the definition of useful feedback). It strikes me that Taxi has said "give feedback", and some screeners are making fairly cursory comments to get through their allocated tracks as quickly as possible.

I expect more when I'm paying to play - we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one

Cheers
M

Hi Matt
Why don't you post ONE example whereby you (a) post the entire listing text (b) post the entire review and (c) post a link to the track? Pick an example from ONE submission/return.

PS While I agree that too much repeating what's in the listing MIGHT be problematic, sometimes the screener is simply trying to make the point as to what your submission missed as far as the listing requirements and quoting from those requirements is the best way. If the listing says "Make sure your lyrics are upbeat", for example, and you submit something with sad lyrics (exaggerated example), I certainly could see referring to the exact listing text to explain the return.

But again, please show us ONE full example we can decipher.

Best
Casey