TAXI.com

Listing: " Quoting the Library: "... each Instrumental should have one consistent motif and always stay very underscore-friendly, ie: No prominent melodies at all. " "

Feedback: "Melody could be stronger"

Post Listing - Post Track - Post Feedback

superblonde wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 19, 2021 10:46 am

Listing: " Quoting the Library: "... each Instrumental should have one consistent motif and always stay very underscore-friendly, ie: No prominent melodies at all. " "

Feedback: "Melody could be stronger"

Come one, man! You got to read between the lines. You couldn't tell that they did want a strong melody just not a prominent one?

Another tip that could save new members a few bucks, when a brief says "should have one consistent motif" it pretty much means one section or chord progression. If you submit anything with a B section it will get returned.

cosmicdolphin wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 19, 2021 3:39 pm

Post Listing - Post Track - Post Feedback

Exactly!

While you may initially think the listing and the feedback is contradictory, it isn't really so much so. "Underscore friendly" and "constant motif"... Maybe it could be worded better but remember, the intended use is under dialog where it will most likely be played at very volume. My interpretation is they don't want any instruments playing in such a way that at low volume they would still be prominent and interfere with dialogue. Do you have any counter melodies to the motif? If you turn the volume way down, does an instrument still jump out?

As a *general* rule of thumb, when writing a TV cue, always play it at very low volume in your headphones. You can even go as far as to record your own talking dialog on top of it and see how it works. And, of course, listen over and over while re-reading the listing.

Please post the entire listing, the track, and the entire review if you want to discuss.

Casey

Cameloide wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 20, 2021 6:32 pm

a strong melody just not a prominent one

Actually an interesting point since it assumes there is a difference between what is a "strong melody" and what is a "prominent melody". Irrespective of volume level. Anyone want to explain either of these?

The strongest melody in 21st century music will contain a b9 and a #4 and almost never a P5 and that is a musical fact of the evolution of tonality.

Pop or hip-hop music producer is like "wow wtf this song hits so hard" and it's actually only going: do sol do sol do sol ... (i.e. 1 5 1 5 ...) Also ironic because the listing repeatedly requested "Emotional" and the most bland, predictable, non-emotional note of them all, in contemporary music, is the P5.

The disconnect in the Feedback is probably because there is no screener option to select "Harmonic Progression could be stronger" which is probably the appropriate choice for the track. Or simply, "Your melody sucks" independent of strong or weak qualifiers. Less confusing to simply have that on the form.

I would argue you can still have a strong melody melody that's not so prominent it interferes with the dialogue

superblonde wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 22, 2021 1:48 pm

Cameloide wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 20, 2021 6:32 pm

a strong melody just not a prominent one

Actually an interesting point since it assumes there is a difference between what is a "strong melody" and what is a "prominent melody". Irrespective of volume level. Anyone want to explain either of these?

The strongest melody in 21st century music will contain a b9 and a #4 and almost never a P5 and that is a musical fact of the evolution of tonality.

Pop or hip-hop music producer is like "wow wtf this song hits so hard" and it's actually only going: do sol do sol do sol ... (i.e. 1 5 1 5 ...) Also ironic because the listing repeatedly requested "Emotional" and the most bland, predictable, non-emotional note of them all, in contemporary music, is the P5.

The disconnect in the Feedback is probably because there is no screener option to select "Harmonic Progression could be stronger" which is probably the appropriate choice for the track. Or simply, "Your melody sucks" independent of strong or weak qualifiers. Less confusing to simply have that on the form.

You still haven't posted the listing, the track, and the full review. Without that, this discussion is meaningless.

Sorry people, I'm just seeing the end of the conversation from August now, I'm not seeing notifications apparently.

I need to locate the info and files requested.

Apparently no one got it right because this listing was re-run about 6 weeks later:


NOTE: We previously ran this request as TAXI Listing xx, but the Library didn't find what they were looking for. If you submitted to listing xx, please send different material this time around.

superblonde wrote: ↑

Sun Jan 02, 2022 3:20 pm

Apparently no one got it right because this listing was re-run about 6 weeks later:


NOTE: We previously ran this request as TAXI Listing xx, but the Library didn't find what they were looking for. If you submitted to listing xx, please send different material this time around.

I call that opportunity!