I bet if we’d run a statistic, 90% of the authors would agree that removing titles from the search engine algorithm is a good thing. The question is, why don’t they do that? If there is a reason why that’s a bad idea, I’d like to know what we’re missing here :/
I’m just guessing but I think the main point is that search is designed to work with all marketplaces in mind. Searching photos for example, as a buyer you would be confused if searching for “bird” gave first page results with titles like “Plane” or “Sky” just because they have “bird” tags in them.
I agree that tags (ordered weighed tags) should be boosted higher in search. One middle-way solution would be to use two search engines and present the results on alternating lines. Like, result 1-3-5-7 comes from a title weighed search and 2-4-6-8 comes from tag weighed search.
Let’s not forget though that text-based search for music is a rather weak starting point in the first place. I think search results would be much more fair and interesting if reviewers gave these keywords a subjective rating. Take three suitable variables and rate them from 1-10. Like, “This is a 8 Fun, 5 Happy and 3 Upbeat track”. Then when a buyer performs a search for “Fun”, tracks with high “Fun” rating will come higher. Subjective, but relevant. One could also invite the community as a whole to do these ratings on a larger scale, say, every time you log in you can vote and rate 3 randomly chosen songs.
I can’t stop talking about this:
Great tracks, but also giant perpetual roadblocks for new music on AJ. Collectively they absorb about 5,000 AJ sales per month. This keeps them in the top, indefinitely. While these tracks continually serve to drive traffic to the site and add value and sales to everyone (directly or indirectly), there is an unproven argument that there would be less sales overall if these year-old bestsellers were not showing up in a sales sorted search.
How about a “New Music Day” where only tracks uploaded in the last year were visible on the site? Simply filter out all items older than 1 year (or even more fun, items with less than 100 sales). That would be a great day for everyone who actually made a track in the last 12 months (that never skyrocketed), and still kind of fair to the older super-tracks since they still get 364 days a year to dominate the market. We would also quickly get an answer to the age-old question exactly how important these tracks are to overall revenue. Controversial, but relevant? Unethical, but necessary?
My point as always is that so many buyers sort by sales, pick music from a bestselling VH page or check top items pages that any other track will NEVER catch up or have a fair chance on the shelves. One single “New Music Day” will of course not change this over time, but it will give a hint of what a non-monopoly market would be like. Your ideas? Even if such a day “would never happen”, how important do you think it is to address the “hit-dominated” mechanism that keep everyone else’s sales limping in the dark?
OK you’re probably already all over this but… a music search now shows about 50% of all the items are trending. Also, sorting by “Trending” doesn’t even place the “trending” items higher than the “not trending”.
Nice, very professional. I guess more and more high quality tracks from artists like this will start to ooze into AJ non-exclusive accounts now that the iTunes / Spotify “for personal listening” policy is implemented. It’s virtually a floodgate opened, now any label can push their not-yet-PRO-registered content into the RF world for marketing purposes and the occasional sale. It’s definitely raising the bar
I have been selling on AJ for quite a while and am glad to see some movement in addressing audio needs.
Firstly I have to agree with the other posts that including ANY kind of broadcast rights for $18 is just wrong. For all intents and purposes $18 is a micro license and should be used only for things like youtube videos. If you have a budget for broadcast you certainly have more than $18 to spend on audio.
The PRO issue is one that is not going to go away. I have done several projects for websites that required me to be non-PRO because the ASCAP and BMI contracts are draconian for website owners. Take a look at their contracts sometime. If I were a website operator and was going to post a video with music I would never use PRO music because of the way the contracts are written.I do believe that the composer/owner of the music should have the choice as to whether or not their music is registered with a PRO. Many of the other sites I am on allow the user to choose whether the music is registered with a PRO. This would be a very simple solution for AJ. By adding one field in the database and a simple check box on the upload form the problem is solved.
+1 Well spoken!