Okay, that is a really excellent, fresh idea!
Congrats on the milestone, Luca!
Congrats and enjoy the goodies!
Had a very similar situation with YouTube. In an email regarding a complaint about another video, I referenced my own video as the legal version. The next response notified me that the content had been removed – both the illegal version and my own.
When you visited my video it said it was removed due to a copyright notice initiated by myself against myself. How dumb is that? I had to rescind the infringement against myself and the video came back to life a day later. What a headache!
My advice is to never refer to any link of your own in a copyright complaint with Google or YouTube. It will likely get the hook.
Thanks for the kind words, guys!
I was the recipient of some big promotional pushes last month. From the song contest, I was selected to be the featured author, and in addition my track was the featured item of the week. Plus, I benefitted from a popular YouTube video using my song, which brought in more than 10,000 new visits to my AJ profile. Those things really helped a ton.
It will be interesting to see what happens in November. I’m going to try, but I’m not sure I can keep up that pace.
Thanks for the thoughtful response, Michelle. This must be a pretty crazy time over there switching all the marketplaces over to the new search engine.
I know the search engine is a work-in-progress and it must be a very challenging puzzle to solve.
At this point though, the search is both too random and at the same time not varied enough.
A search for “quirky” brings up lots of corporate motivational music, sentimental music and just a generally strange collection of tracks. I don’t think anyone looking for quirky music is going to pick up a motivational track. I don’t think the previous title-heavy search engine before was great, but at least titles with the word “quirky” were likely to actually be quirky.
Try a variety of common search terms like “happy”, “cheerful”, “positive”, “corporate” etc. and you will see a very similar list of results. This makes it look like AJ has very little range of music to offer these different search terms. Again, the title-heavy search was flawed, but at least the title-heavy search produced a fresh variety of tracks for each of these terms.
I needed to reference the description for one of my tracks and I did a title search for it. It’s a one-word title. I had to dig and dig until I found it deep on page 3. That’s not good. If a buyer has done their research and is now headed for a track title they need to find it immediately. How frustrating it must be for a buyer who knows what track title they want to have to sift through hundreds of tracks to find something they should be able to find instantly.
Perhaps a percentage of additional weight should be given to the title to make the search more effective. It seems out of balance and I think the functionality is suffering.
Thanks to the search team for all their efforts at trying to make the best search possible.