Pointless Revisions?

Home Forums Newbie Questions Pointless Revisions?

Tagged: 

This topic contains 12 replies, has 8 voices, and was last updated by  xev 2 weeks, 1 day ago.

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #31941 Reply

    xev
    Participant

    Hi everyone,

    This is my first thread on MLR although I have been lurking for a few months and learning a lot about how the business works. Very thankful for all the people taking the time to help the newbies out πŸ™‚

    On to my question:
    I have been working with a Library for the last 6 months, it’s going ok I guess, they usually like the tracks I am submitting for their albums, but very often they ask for revisions because the synths sound “outdated”. I change the sounds and resend them and the tracks get approved.

    I know synth sounds are not my forte but as almost everytime I submit there are some tracks that need the synths being changed, I am working on getting more modern sounds. Especially I have been paying a lot of attention to the synth sounds in the tracks they send me for reference, to the point that for the last brief I pretty much copied the sounds from the reference to a T. I honestly don’t know if it is possible to get a sound that is any closer to the reference.

    As usual my contact came back to me requesting to change the synth sounds because they sound outdated. I don’t mind changing anything they ask me for, but I am starting to feel like they are asking to change them just because they can, and I suspect that I could probably resend the same files and they would be ok with the sounds.

    By the way the reference tracks for this last brief sound just like they came straight of the 80s, from a John Carpenter movie or something. So this is quite confusing.

    I wanted to ask for peoples opinions here before saying anything to my library contact that would make him unhappy.

    Has this ever happened to you? If so how do you deal with it?

    Any advice would be appreciated.
    Cheers πŸ™‚

    #31942 Reply

    Art Munson
    Keymaster

    Kind of curious. Are the initials of the library E.M.? If so than typical for him.

    #31946 Reply

    xev
    Participant

    No, those are not the initials of this library πŸ™‚
    Your answer makes me think this is not uncommon. Have you encountered this situation often before?

    #31949 Reply

    Art Munson
    Keymaster

    Not unusual to ask for revisions but some take it to extremes. In the case I was referring to, they took to extremes.

    #31950 Reply

    guscave

    I agree with Art. I had to stop working with one library because their request for changes were just taking way too much of my time. It started to get in the way of my work with other libraries.

    #31951 Reply

    Denbo_17
    Participant

    Art if that is B.K at E.M. in CA ? Yes can be many Rev’s…

    #31952 Reply

    boinkeee2000
    Participant

    had an issue with a lib where its not unusual to go to a 3rd rev…1 is fine, 2 is pushing it…whats frustrating is how each rev would open a new issue for them, or when they didnt catch something on the previous theyd tack it on the next one (which i feel is more a mood thing on their end)…worst part is when they reject it out of all that…backed out at 2nd rev on a few occasions and taken the track somewhere else (mind you these are excl briefs with no upfronts)

    nowadays im happier when a lib rejects my track from the get go haha!

    #31954 Reply

    Pat
    Participant

    That was the first thing that came to my mind Art. lol

    #31955 Reply

    Art Munson
    Keymaster

    Art if that is B.K at E.M. in CA ? Yes can be many Rev’s…

    πŸ˜‰

    #31956 Reply

    guscave

    Looks like we’ve all had the same experience with the same library.. πŸ˜‰

    #31957 Reply

    NY Composer
    Participant

    Yeah Guys,

    I thought the same thing x3, E.M.

    Anyway if it were me, I would politely ask which synth has the fresh sounds they prefer. Another pont. They could mean that they hear the same patch often, meaning “Outdated”. Perhaps you can tweak your favorite patches with some effects. Many times, some synths have too much effects on one patch and you can adjust the parameters. You may also double the lead, pad, etc, using two patches at the same time.

    Funny. When Stranger Things was hot, many libs were using that show for examples on their briefs. All 80’s analogue synths. Go figure.

    #31958 Reply

    BEATSLINGER
    Participant

    LOLOL!! I got put on that mailing list when I first joined MLR.

    Got sent a “Request” and heard the examples they sent me.

    I sent in a couple of things, and got asked to revise the drums. Got a “Green Light”. But after looking into them, and their small Market-share. It just didn’t seem like a move for me.

    Great to do research, and see who’s really making moves. Wish I would have been avidly using the “Access Music Libraries” and doing more research when I first got into this forum. “I found out late about a couple Cemeteries posing as viable Music Outlets”…

    #32005 Reply

    xev
    Participant

    Thanks for the responses

    @NY Composer – in this case by “outdated” they meant “80s or 90s sounding”, as they told me this directly, including the brief where they sent 80s sounding synths as reference tracks πŸ™‚

    I have found this particular library seems to really like shimmer reverb/crystal delay type sounds (in my opinion this sounds more outdated than 80s analog synths – to each his own I guess…)

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
Reply To: Pointless Revisions?
Your information: