Hi Pandocrator, off the bat I’m not sure why you might be seeing that.. Is it on all items?
Best bet there, if it’s not resolved, is to submit a bug report support ticket with system/browser information and screenshots if possible.. and it can be passed along to dev team to have a look.
In a Music pack you can have 10 items maximum. That means 10 distinct items links on the description. If the item has variations, they can be included in the pack, optionally
If you include 10 items, and there are also variations, you could therefore technically have more than 10 files in the zip.
What can’t change however, is the preview should not exceed 30 minutes, so you should keep that in mind when choosing the number of files for the pack.
Also, only main files are required to be on the preview. Any item variations included in the zip are optional for the preview, because they are heard on the individual item’s preview page, which is linked on the pack description. But any variations, if included should still be listed on the pack preview too.
If you’re not too sure, you can always have a look at different pack items descriptions to see various acceptable ways of approaching the process.
Cheers Taco, you missed Ladanauskas. Yeah like it was noted, it was fundamentally understandable why such a volatile response could erupt.. for better or worse.. It feels like whatever feedback came about was genuine and not intentionally ill willed.. If anything perhaps people felt like it would be like a shot in the arm or a sudden wake up call, given the discrepancy between MusicBoxUK’s stated perception of sucking, re how things ought to be vs how things actually are by necessity. Well, when you contrast that with the inherent quality of the content presented as a defence in the said “denunciation” of the library, people just got riled up, because at face value it doesn’t seem like it adds up.. does it?
Heck, even some of the absolutely most vocal critics of AJ policies in any other instances, were (surprisingly) seen saying their peace.. So it felt like yeah, whoa, in this case there must really have been a common thread..
Anyway, yeah insomnia lurks again on the east coast here so I’ll ramble.. the accolades are bashfully flattering after the fact but really guys, this thread isnt about that.. It’s more about the reality of feedback vs quality I guess, and having reasonable expectations as to the way things work, for legit reasons, when you boil things down to a deeper, more clinical understanding.. Fact is if they could, many reviewers would be very happy to give much feedback, but it’s Just. Not. Possible. Anymore
And again, for those who weren’t around, in the old days when the library was very small, there was a concerted attempt to provide “proper” feedback on every single item rejected, even before Hard vs Soft existed. It took much, MUCH longer to process content, and it was rather soon seen that it was not possible to sustain it as an operating procedure, as it did not engender significantly more approvals, so to stay the course as submissions skyrocketed the situation had to evolve.. No choice, unfortunately, and that’s why the established industry pretty much works this way too.
And that’s all I have to say about that today..Peace to all have a great day, or night!
I agree on reviewers not giving a single hint why items getting rejected. It would take couple of seconds to type it down. They’ve rejected most of my items that i put so much time to create. If they’ve explain what was wrong with them in a matter of seconds. I would make twice of income as i do now.
You do get a hint. Production, or composition, or both. That is a hint. It may not be what you like but it is a hint.
To say “a couple of seconds” to provide meaningful feedback is not reasonable, Ramazan. Not until Artificial Intelligence is significantly more evolved.
Feedback processing has been studied and well tested. Chances are, realistically, you would not make double the income if you got 2 seconds of feedback, that is an opinion, sure.
The fact is each case is often very unique with different parameters, and It takes several minutes, at least, not a “couple seconds” to identify, think, formulate, articulate and phrase several points together that would need to be very specifically addressed, over several minutes of music, and conveyed clearly in a way that is understood by everyone, in all countries, especially when translators often misinterpret meaning. Is this possible?
As professionals it is up to each person to be able to identify, or seek resources to do so, to realize what it is that makes a rejected submission not fitting to be accepted.
Even if we assumed it were possible, without operating as a business, assuming a realistic but quick 3-5 minutes for the rejections on, let’s say.. 150000 submissions. Even If half are rejected, if you do the math, it becomes clearer what the requirement is in terms of man hours, for a result that is essentially more likely to be rejected again, as results in the past have shown. How long would the queue need to be? Do you understand?
Dear Mr. MusicBox,
Well, it’s evident that your comments have created a stir and struck a nerve with a good deal of authors, of many degrees of success and experience.
The bottom line is, based on what you’ve presented thus far, as the caliber of your offerings (as heard on Soundcloud) which is admittedly only the tiniest fraction of what you claim to have; it only begs the question as to why you are only displaying content that is by all accounts egregiously outdated sounding and generally substandard, as far as current production values go?
Would you not want to put your best foot forward first, when introducing yourself in any new arena?
Whether you feel your bridge here is burned or not, the stark reality of the stock industry is that while you may encounter some feedback for a large groups of items as a whole, the stock audio industry does not operate on the basis of providing detailed reasons to every individual person and for each item it cannot accept. If it did that, it wouldn’t be able to exist. Please think about this. You’re talking about hundreds of thousands of emails and messages, if not millions over the years, for the slimmer chance of being able to glean an improved return. The odds do not favor such an approach.
When comparing with current established library content quality, in today’s day and age, most respectfully, are you genuinely not able to distinguish the objective disparity (not subjective) between the way your submissions sound and what is genuinely more apt to be successful as stock audio?
Are you yourself not able to hear the categorically obvious weaknesses of your own rejected submissions here? It is an exercise in introspection, in the rightful sense of the word.
It appears that for one reason or another, you have seemed resistant to take on what feedback was volunteered to you, on your older forum posts, a few weeks ago.
To your point about this library expecting its authors to provide feedback to others, it could not be further from the truth. No one has a gun to anyone’s head to do so. Authors who provide feedback to others do so simply because they want to, because it pleases them to kindly help another person out, as a personal fulfillment. If they chose not to, no one would tell them otherwise.
It simply illustrates the biggest and most important difference between Envato libraries and others out there, in that here, for all the flaws you may find, you will also find a firmly entrenched *community”, that is both a fixed and fleeting group of likeminded souls who inspire each other in many instances, all trying to pursue a common passion, or simply looking to make a buck on the side, with many finding a measure of fulfillment in relating to other artists, to talk shop as it were.
So, not to excuse the abrasiveness of many of the immediate responses you’ve elicited here, one might personally understand it all in hindsight, i.e. if you were to walk into a busy bar with guns drawn, so to speak, and yell “This Place Sucks” with nothing to show for yourself but objective mediocrity (objective, again, in the rightful sense), even if you actually had diamonds hidden in your pants, would you not expect to get shot at?
It looks like that’s what happened here.
In any event, it appears the points are now moot. So finally, to your claim stating that Audio only gets rejected due to it being unfit for use in “presentations”, well what other use do you refer to?
Keep in mind, any game, show, movie, web or use in other visual medium is, in essence, a presentation.
Since buyers are not licensing music from libraries for personal listening, what other uses are there for stock library audio, other than providing support for carrying a presented message? Even “On Hold” music as such, can be arguably meant to support the passage of time, as a means to an end.
So you see, it is not about rejecting tracks in order to ensure VideoHive’s success. Quite the opposite, in fact, would be moreso true.
Ending this note, we can only say that we hope you’ll manage to find a degree of consistency in your experiences venturing into the stock audio universe, be that as it may, and for what it’s worth, that you might consider in the future leading with your best foot forward first. That would only help you more, sincerely.
Round 2, Fight! 12 more weekend review memes for 12 AJ crew. Please don’t be mad at us, we just have a job to do. Thanks for keeping up the sense of humour (this thread is awesome!) and for rolling with the punches. Sometimes the best lessons come from the school of hard knocks. No pain, no gain as they say, that goes for all of us
Well, isn’t this the most hilarious thread ever?
Thanks Sky for the historical initiative, I’m sure this thread will last a long time…
We all know the realities, trials and tribulations of being authors here together… As you know many reviewers were also authors long before they joined the team. That said, just as being an author has its daily challenges, so does reviewing, day after day..
Since it’s lunchtime here we thought we’d add a short series too, from the reviewer perspective, your compatriots whom you all love and sometimes loathe, we hope not too much. Note however any jokes are meant to be taken as such, and the rules stay the same.. In the end they gotta be enforced. But yes, we can make fun of ourselves too