# Another Trailer track from me (audio jungle rejected it)...



## Puzzlefactory (Mar 21, 2017)

Not sure why this got rejected by audio jungle, it sounds pretty similar to ones that got accepted....

Let me know what you think.


----------



## MatFluor (Mar 21, 2017)

I like it - the only thing I could say against it is that the drums are a bit loud and the general mix is a bit on the high-frequency side - there is not that much "oomph". It's trying to sound big without having the feeling of "big" - I hope you get what I mean

But on the music side I think it's a solid trailer piece.

Greets
Matthias


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Mar 21, 2017)

MatFluor said:


> I like it - the only thing I could say against it is that the drums are a bit loud and the general mix is a bit on the high-frequency side - there is not that much "oomph". It's trying to sound big without having the feeling of "big" - I hope you get what I mean
> 
> But on the music side I think it's a solid trailer piece.
> 
> ...




Hmmm, maybe my subwoofer is turned up too much. Thanks for the feedback.


----------



## robharvey (Mar 21, 2017)

Nice harmony mate!


----------



## maro (Mar 21, 2017)

So cool! Powerful crescendo. I wonder why they rejected it?


----------



## NoamL (Mar 21, 2017)

IMO the track would be quite sellable if you made four small changes.

1. The reverse drum hits in act 2, and the drumkit in act 3 (I presume these are the same VI) are too loud and have excessive treble, they don't feel baked into the track.

2. It's possible the reviewers at AudioJungle only listened to the first 35 seconds of your track and rejected it after they felt it was going nowhere. I would either axe act 1 entirely or reduce it to a 2-bar intro to act 2. Act 2 is really where you start "saying stuff" musically. Don't spend too much time setting the table. 

3. The chord moves in act 3 feel pretty random, specifically the three chords that come after the bII (F maj). You either need to set up those moves earlier and make that progression the basis of your entire track, or try something more conventional in act 3 that feels like more of a logical consequence of act 2. I think you could keep the bII and try something else from that point (check out Michael Giacchino's Star Trek theme...)

4. *THE BIG ONE* - ok so I'm just gonna barge into the china shop and say it... this "Trailer 101" course that everyone is taking contains some real bad advice (and lots of good advice too, I don't doubt). This idea of stopping every 20 seconds for 2 bars of dead space is _*killing*_ your track. It works for the big guys because they build all the way to where there's nowhere left to go in orchestration. They also generally use 1 bar breaks in my observation. Don't bother with this "clean break for the music editors" idea (says a music editor!), focus on making a good and convincing piece of music. The act structure is valid but try to find a more musical way of linking your acts. As long as you stem things out rationally, a good music editor shouldn't have any trouble editing a trailer track to whatever length is needed.


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Mar 21, 2017)

maro said:


> So cool! Powerful crescendo. I wonder why they rejected it?



I've been told by a few people that AJ don't like long intros.


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Mar 21, 2017)

NoamL said:


> IMO the track would be quite sellable if you made four small changes.
> 
> 1. The reverse drum hits in act 2, and the drumkit in act 3 (I presume these are the same VI) are too loud and have excessive treble, they don't feel baked into the track.
> 
> ...



Thanks for the very constructive criticism and feedback. Very much appreciated. 

Will definitely go back and remix the drums (like I said before, I think my subwoofer is turned up too loud making my mixes a bit trebly).

I'll also try adding a version of the chord progression to the intro so it's not so much of a surprise later on and makes the intro not so monotonous.

As far as structure is concerned, I'm very new to this and (like you say) am following advice from the Evenant Trailer course. From what I understand the separation of parts is purely for a video editors benefit so that can play around with the different sections while cutting the video. But maybe I've got that wrong? (The reason mine are often 2 bars is because I use a lot of reverb/delay and it takes at least 2 bars for the tails to decay).


----------



## InLight-Tone (Mar 21, 2017)

I think in your case the first two sections develop too slowly and the breaks between sections are too clear cut needing some filler like risers, whooshes etc. Also the production is on the dry side, and lacks space, reverb?

People say that AJ is crap, but it's harder there than some think. To toot my own horn I just had one of my tracks placed for an extended license and is going to be in a movie, not sure what yet. Keep at it!


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Mar 21, 2017)

InLight-Tone said:


> I think in your case the first two sections develop too slowly and the breaks between sections are too clear cut needing some filler like risers, whooshes etc. Also the production is on the dry side, and lacks space, reverb?
> 
> People say that AJ is crap, but it's harder there than some think. To toot my own horn I just had one of my tracks placed for an extended license and is going to be in a movie, not sure what yet. Keep at it!



Cheers for the feedback. 

Like I say I'm just following the guidelines from the Evenant course (which states that you should have gaps and slow buildup). 

Maybe I'll start "bending" the formula a little.

In terms of AJ, I'm just using it as a platform while I practise composing. I'm still very new to it and don't feel confident yet to approach Trailer companies. 

I was surprised at just how cheaply people sell their tracks for. I guess it's really a buyers market nowadays. 

Also the reviewer rejections seemed a bit random. I've had two tracks accepted and two rejected, but to my ear they were all pretty similar in terms of composition, mix and structure.


----------



## SagZodiac (Mar 21, 2017)

I like this piece.I agree with the drum part.Maybe shorter break between the different parts.
However still good job!


----------



## Sean_Gouws (Mar 21, 2017)

To be honest this track is great. I do not see why this was not accepted. 

Track analysis is correct with the intensity constantly building, great edit points and a clear indication between each act. 
This is a awesome track. Maybe it was a case of it being listened to "in the wrong frame of mind"?

Keep up the great work brother


----------



## John Busby (Mar 21, 2017)

MatFluor said:


> It's trying to sound big without having the feeling of "big"


exactly my thought! 
With the market as saturated as it is with trailer music - it HAS to be BIG, if not big, then something unique...
this track doesn't quite get there.


InLight-Tone said:


> I think in your case the first two sections develop too slowly and the breaks between sections are too clear cut needing some filler like risers, whooshes


this too! i also noticed the whooshes that you did have had nearly no tail on them and the orchestration could use some heft with delay and reverb...
take this for what it's worth because like you, i too have been writing some trailer music lately and will probably post some up for some feedback to see if i can live up to my own words! 
thanks for sharing!
JB


----------



## InLight-Tone (Mar 21, 2017)

I agree completely about AJ's rejections lately. I think the reviewers were told to clamp down because of lax standards in the past. Some don't seem to know what they are doing, I've had some rejects that had me scratching my head....


----------



## MatFluor (Mar 21, 2017)

I'm new to Libraries (one track still is pending on Pond5...)

The least they could do is a simple checkbox style resoning - "not accepted because XYZ" simple to click and gives much needed info for the composer.

Sorry if such a system is in place and I don't know it


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Mar 21, 2017)

MatFluor said:


> I'm new to Libraries (one track still is pending on Pond5...)
> 
> The least they could do is a simple checkbox style resoning - "not accepted because XYZ" simple to click and gives much needed info for the composer.
> 
> Sorry if such a system is in place and I don't know it



There's certainly not a system in place like that with Audio jungle for "hard rejects" you just get a form email saying "it doesn't meet compositional and mixing standards". Nothing specific.

You do get some feedback for soft rejects (which is when it gets rejected but you can submit it again after working on it a bit more). 

But like I say, the whole thing is all a bit random (especially when I submit a whole bunch of tracks that are very similar and some get accepted and others rejected).


----------



## dannymc (Mar 21, 2017)

hey man,

that is strange they rejected the track at audiojungle, i didn't think the standards were that high to get in there. anyway have you tried pond 5 instead? i think those guys are really good over there they may not get the same volume of traffic as audiojungle but they do give the composer a little bit more of a level of control over their catalogue.

i put 15 of my earlier epic orchestral tracks up there last year and set my prices between $40-$60. one of my tracks priced at $60 has sold 10 times now since last summer. no idea who's buying but its a nice surprise every time it happens and a little bit of pocket money. 


on your track, i think it builds nicely if not a bit predictable. the intro doesn't modulate or vary enough to keep interest for the listener they may have just stopped listening after 30secs as someone else said. the big hits sound more like big kick drums from EDM than epic trailer hits. the spic strings sound really cool, i like them with the underlining harmony. act 3 still doesn't sound big enough to me to get into trailer libraries. also some of the chords sound a bit odd here. but all in all its a good effort. my advice give pond 5 a go if you're trying the RF game. 

Danny


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Mar 21, 2017)

dannymc said:


> hey man,
> 
> that is strange they rejected the track at audiojungle, i didn't think the standards were that high to get in there. anyway have you tried pond 5 instead? i think those guys are really good over there they may not get the same volume of traffic as audiojungle but they do give the composer a little bit more of a level of control over their catalogue.
> 
> ...




Thanks for the feedback. Yeah, I may give pond 5 another look (I got put off when they asked me send in a copy of my passport/drivers license during the "enrolment").

Not sure where the kicks are from. I think it's a layered hit and one of the layers may very well be a kick drum. I know I used a few "Twisted Tools" samples in this track so may be from there.

Yeah my tracks so far are a bit predictable and formulaic but like I say, I've very new to this genre (this is only my fifth finished track ), i'm sure i'll find my feet.

As for the chords and melody, not sure about this. I think I made the chord progression forst and then played a melody over it. I did start to hear something "star trekky" when doing the melody and just kind of went with it.


----------



## ghobii (Mar 21, 2017)

As a video editor who has wasted way to many hours scanning tens of thousands of tracks over the years, my first impressions were 1)buildup too slow and boring, 2) those dry sounding hits in the beginning are not mixed correctly - _Click, on to the next track._


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Mar 22, 2017)

Thank you everyone for the feedback. Going to have go at reworking the track today. Make the intro less "boring", remix the drum parts and make the whole thing "flow" a bit better.


----------



## karelpsota (Mar 22, 2017)

The idea and structure is there. Nice work.

However, you are lacking a bit of *production value*.

Add more layers to fill the stage.
Put some ambiant drone, subtle tremolo strings.
Add a sine sub bass under your bass.
Layer your percussion so it doesn't feel like a loop taken from 1 damage library.
My best advice would be to A/B your track with quality trailer music. You will hear what your missing.

Good luck.


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Mar 22, 2017)

karelpsota said:


> The idea and structure is there. Nice work.
> 
> However, you are lacking a bit of *production value*.
> 
> ...



Thanks for the feedback. Some interesting ideas. 

I assume when you talk about filling up the sound stage, you're talking about the build up? The climax sounds pretty full to me already...?

I like the idea of the tremolo strings, might try that with the intro.

Might also try layering some Taiko drums over the damage loop (you're almost right, it's actually 3 damage loops layered over each other ).

So far today, I've shortened the intro and cut out the gaps between acts as well as made the hits in the build up blend more with the instruments. 

Will post a bit later today to see what people think.

Just hope I don't end up with a camel.


----------



## John Busby (Mar 22, 2017)

look forward to hearing what you come up with Puzzle!

i'm going out on a limb here but below is a link to the trailer I'm currently writing for a client. (this is the first draft and this is my frist attempt at a modern hybrid style trailer track)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7rqd68mnnagbhfv/Reaper Trailer 2 - 1st draft - NO MIX.wav?dl=0

my client wanted something gritty and dark at the start and then climaxing with a heroic theme coming out of the darkness. he needed it 58 seconds so he could post on Instagram but eventually will need a full length cut later so it won't sound so condensed.
this is the static mix with only volume and panning with a hint of imaging so it still needs a lot of work but i wanted to post this up after running my mouth yesterday (opens mouth inserts foot lol)

oh and btw, i'm using that same Damage loop in this!


----------



## karelpsota (Mar 22, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> I assume when you talk about filling up the sound stage, you're talking about the build up? The climax sounds pretty full to me already...?



The climax could also benefit of more layering.

By that, I don't mean adding new melodies or chords. I mean emphasizing what you already have.

Layer some spitfire ambient mics behind your stacc strings.
Combine your bass, cello, brass and sine waves to create a massive and rich bass line.
Place some elements further in the mix with reverb, like choirs and ambient sounds.
Think about your drum kit in terms of time. They're missing a bit of tail because your hits are really short and punchy. You can benefit of another drum kit with more room mics to add depth.
Back to the first part of your track. Here's an example I wrote a for a trailer company. (There's only act 1 and 2). Its very simple and repetitive. But notice how the drones, brass and strings are pushed back in the mix, while the guitar and drums are closer. I also automate synths to come in out, this adds movement to make it less boring.


----------



## John Busby (Mar 22, 2017)

@karelpsota 
awesome que man! do you polish and master you own stuff? just curious because that's the stage i always seem to fudge stuff up lol
the production in this is fantastic!


----------



## karelpsota (Mar 22, 2017)

johnbusbymusic said:


> @karelpsota
> awesome que man! do you polish and master you own stuff? just curious because that's the stage i always seem to fudge stuff up lol
> the production in this is fantastic!



Thank you! I mixed and mastered this track.

I reference a lot of work while I'm producing. I'm always trying to figure out "why is my track not as good"?
I break things down as much as I can. sometimes I'll even write it down on paper.

A cool trick is to drown in reverb parts that only use one note. Like that, the reverb tails don't clash harmonically.
My drones, brass stingers and ambient sounds are drenched. However, my moving bass line and ostinato have shorter reverb tails.

When it comes to drums, shorter drums like hats and and medium hits have shorter reverb. But the impact every 4 bar has a huge decay.


----------



## chillbot (Mar 22, 2017)

karelpsota said:


> Here's an example I wrote a for a trailer company.


This is great, did you edit the video yourself? I dig the track but the video puts it over the top for me. With so many similar-sounding tracks out there I would think the production value would make you stand out above all the other soundcloud links.


----------



## karelpsota (Mar 22, 2017)

chillbot said:


> This is great, did you edit the video yourself? I dig the track but the video puts it over the top for me. With so many similar-sounding tracks out there I would think the production value would make you stand out above all the other soundcloud links.



Thank you chillbot. I did not edit the video. I just wrote one track on a trailer album.
I then was pleasantly surprised that my publisher paid someone to cut this promo. It really helps to stand out.

I can get you the editor's info if you need. Just pm me


----------



## chillbot (Mar 22, 2017)

Ha, no.. not for me thanks. But I was just thinking everyone is always posting around here "how do I sell library music" "how do I stand out" "how do I get hired"? This seems like a killer way to stand out.

EDIT: also I am DYING to see the "movie" in this trailer now!


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Mar 23, 2017)

karelpsota said:


> The climax could also benefit of more layering.
> 
> By that, I don't mean adding new melodies or chords. I mean emphasizing what you already have.
> 
> ...





Wow, thats really cool! Not a lot to say other than i need to up my game. 

p.s, where can i get hold of wavs of modern hybrid trailer music? I have some TSFH cds but nothing "hybrid". Don't really want to use youtube or soundcloud as reference tracks if i can help it....


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Mar 23, 2017)

johnbusbymusic said:


> look forward to hearing what you come up with Puzzle!
> 
> i'm going out on a limb here but below is a link to the trailer I'm currently writing for a client. (this is the first draft and this is my frist attempt at a modern hybrid style trailer track)
> 
> ...




Haha, thats really cool too. Listening to your guys work is very disheartening (and a little inspiring too ).


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Mar 23, 2017)

Edited the track a bit. Not majorly altered but the intro's shorter and i think the drum hits sit a little better in the mix.


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Mar 23, 2017)

Hmmm, just listened to it on my earbuds.

Think I turned my subwoofer down too much.


----------



## John Busby (Mar 23, 2017)

@Puzzlefactory
i think this is an overall improvement on the last one from what i can remember. Do you still have the old one up somewhere for comparison?
Any way, if feels like you kept the energy flow throughout and the structure felt better.
What's the trumpet patch @ 1:43? to me it sounds like the dynamics/attack could be smoothed out better, but that's just me.


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Mar 23, 2017)

johnbusbymusic said:


> @Puzzlefactory
> i think this is an overall improvement on the last one from what i can remember. Do you still have the old one up somewhere for comparison?
> Any way, if feels like you kept the energy flow throughout and the structure felt better.
> What's the trumpet patch @ 1:43? to me it sounds like the dynamics/attack could be smoothed out better, but that's just me.




Thanks. 

To me it sounds a bit bassy (muddy) at least through my earbuds. 

Like I say, I think I turned my sub down too much and overcompensated in the mix. 

Or it could just be my earbuds. I'll check when I get home.


----------



## dannymc (Mar 23, 2017)

hey man, it does sound a bit better alright but i still felt underwhelmed by it. you really have to push the emotion over the top and keep the variation interesting from what i hear in the best trailer/epic tracks. also those hits are still too weak. really listen to how the best guys in the game do it. that's what i try to do to help me learn. 

check this great track out from Tom Player, hear the difference? 



Danny


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Mar 23, 2017)

dannymc said:


> hey man, it does sound a bit better alright but i still felt underwhelmed by it. you really have to push the emotion over the top and keep the variation interesting from what i hear in the best trailer/epic tracks. also those hits are still too weak. really listen to how the best guys in the game do it. that's what i try to do to help me learn.
> 
> check this great track out from Tom Player, hear the difference?
> 
> ...





Yeah thats an amazing track. Way above my level.

Have just bought the resonance theory album on iTunes on the strength of that track. Hopefully will give me some inspiration.


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Mar 23, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> Have just bought the resonance theory album on iTunes on the strength of that track. Hopefully will give me some inspiration.



Damn it's good. Wish i could get it on WAV, so i could use it as reference tracks...


----------



## SymphonicSamples (Mar 25, 2017)

Hey Puzzle, some good advice already given . In the track Danny shared it's worth noting how all the sections blended with each other both instrumentation wise and frequency wise in the mix. Given the harmonic simplicity in many trailer tracks the production quality becomes super important and it's not an easy thing to do. With some more work based on what others have mentioned it could really elevate your track


----------



## FriFlo (Mar 25, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> Hmmm, just listened to it on my earbuds.
> 
> Think I turned my subwoofer down too much.


If you work in an acoustically unprepared (or not correctly done) room, it will not help you to use a subwoofer. You will automatically turn it down by ear, as on your listening location, some frequencies will be to loud, while others will be inaudible in the lower spectrum although they might be within the range of your sub. As a general rule: the lower the frequency, the more expert knowledge and effort is required to really make it work in a room. Also, the smaller the room, the more work is required up to a point where it actually does not work (e.g. you cannot expect to make 30 Hz really work in a 20 square meter room).
As others said here, with trailer music it is mostly about the mix! The musical complexity is mostly pretty simple, so you need very high level production skills both with your VIs and with the mix. Hence, if you go for that low end richness, you will probably do it all wrong if you are not hearing correctly what you actually produce. That is why it becomes very difficult to produce in that style in a home recording studio. The only way to do it there is to use a lot of different references to decide on your mix. Getting your studio to reproduce all those frequencies correctly will take you a lot of time, learning, money and expert advice (more money).
All of that goes for producing great sounding tracks ... not for composing great music, which is an entirely different task!


----------



## Smikes77 (Mar 25, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> Edited the track a bit. Not majorly altered but the intro's shorter and i think the drum hits sit a little better in the mix.




That build up needs more sound design. It`s a really cool section but it gets old rather quick, and those drum hits (@1;00) aren`t that effective immediately afterwards - layer them up with some others, they sound a bit fake to my ears.

That drum groove could be better too and it`s too up front.

The 2nd climax needs some work.

I love the ending. It`s a good solid track, it just feels like it gets stuck in 3rd gear that`s all.

Keep going with it, it`s easier to sell one great track than it is 5 average ones.


----------



## novaburst (Mar 25, 2017)

great work, and mix, kind of had a groovy feel but nice work


----------



## mwarsell (Apr 1, 2017)

dannymc said:


> hey man, it does sound a bit better alright but i still felt underwhelmed by it. you really have to push the emotion over the top and keep the variation interesting from what i hear in the best trailer/epic tracks. also those hits are still too weak. really listen to how the best guys in the game do it. that's what i try to do to help me learn.
> 
> check this great track out from Tom Player, hear the difference?
> 
> ...




I found this track utterly boring and not going anywhere. It had no tension, no development - it was very bland. The same riff just repeated all over. How Position accepted it baffles me. Maybe because of editability.


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Apr 1, 2017)

I've been listening the album on repeat all week. Love it. Especially "Takedown".


----------



## dannymc (Apr 1, 2017)

yeah great track i also love "speed" 

so many gems on that album.

Danny


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Apr 1, 2017)

dannymc said:


> yeah great track i also love "speed"
> 
> so many gems on that album.
> 
> Danny



Yeah, he has a huge low end in his tracks. Especially the celli and bass staccatos. 

I'm guessing he doesn't mix down like a "natural" Orchestra and he pushes those short parts up in the mix. There's tracks where the ostinatos seem louder than the brass "braams".


----------

