Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Tina Guo Scoring Competition

A minute to a minute 45 is just way too short. Honestly, I wouldn't care for any of the world's greatest performers to only provide me a less than 2 minute snippet. It's just not worth the time, imo.
 
tristancappel said:
These competitions where you have to 'like, share, follow, etc.' always seem so whack. Also, "Using Cinesample and Tina Guo Cello instruments is a plus, but not a requirement," kinda just sounds like a requirement lol.
Click to expand...
To me that just opens it up for anyone to submit any old track, cello or not. I guess they don't mind if it's not composed specifically for the competition. They're probably just out to increase Instagram exposure, which my 3 followers should help accomplish.
 
Glad I wasn't the only one to have an instant negative reaction to the like & follow begging. What is with the current Instagram obsession anyway? Facebook "classic" is apparently evil but somehow Facebook Instagram is ok??
 
I was in the middle of posting this same competition, when @Bman70 beat me to it! :grin:

Would have thought a company of the status of Cinesamples could have at least given us a film clip to score, and the fact that the competition is limited to Instagram doesn’t make it seem important in any way, just a marketing exercise to increase their followers!
 
I agree with what mentioned above already. They are targeting to increase their audience (followers) in social channels, by forcing people to share content that might be irrelevant to their followers.

I just have designers on my Instagram, how that make sense?

As @Marsen said, I am too old...
 
Leslie Fuller said:
I was in the middle of posting this same competition, when @Bman70 beat me to it! :grin:

Would have thought a company of the status of Cinesamples could have at least given us a film clip to score, and the fact that the competition is limited to Instagram doesn’t make it seem important in any way, just a marketing exercise to increase their followers!
Click to expand...
If I had just waited another minute I could have saved myself the work! I did quite an extensive search before posting Lol
 
Henrik B. Jensen said:
While we’re at it, have anyone noticed Cinesamples seemingly inflated their “before”-prices in the current 50% off campaign?

Their solo strings normally sells for $399 for example, but now the “before”-price is displayed as $429.

So it appears it’s a 50% off campaign, but for the solo strings and several other libraries the real discount is less than 50%.

It’s the oldest trick in the book, I just wasn’t expecting a “respectable” company such as Cinesamples to do it.

Apologizes to Cinesamples if they legitimately raised their prices just prior to this campaign and I just have failed to notice it.
Click to expand...
I was puzzled when I saw Taylor Davis sale price, which is usually $49. I'll never buy it for more, so I hope they go back to the regular sale prices sometime.
 
Henrik B. Jensen said:
While we’re at it, have anyone noticed Cinesamples seemingly inflated their “before”-prices in the current 50% off campaign?

Their solo strings normally sells for $399 for example, but now the “before”-price is displayed as $429.

So it appears it’s a 50% off campaign, but for the solo strings and several other libraries the real discount is less than 50%.

It’s the oldest trick in the book, I just wasn’t expecting a “respectable” company such as Cinesamples to do it.

Apologizes to Cinesamples if they legitimately raised their prices just prior to this campaign and I just have failed to notice it.
Click to expand...
You're not alone in this observation. They raised their prices on certain libraries for this month's sale (September). Last month's sale (August) was 50% off on libraries and bundles with no price increases. Piano in Blue just went up $50 bucks.
 
Last edited:
Daren Audio said:
You're not alone in this observation. They raised their prices on certain libraries for this month's sale (September). Last month's sale (August) was 50% off on libraries and bundles with no price increases. Piano in Blue just went up $50 bucks.
Click to expand...
IANAL but I believe this is actually illegal in the UK.
 
I saw a couple comments on social media calling them out on this, all of which have since been mysteriously deleted…looks very much like an admission of guilt.

On the original topic - I also was initially excited, but the blatant social media focus and requirements make this a fairly easy “no” in my book. 🙁
 
Another example of how musicians/creatives are vulnerable to being exploited by those only interested in making money via covert maneuvers (yes, everyone needs to earn a living, we all get that; let’s just be honest/clear/direct about it, please). It’s like the venues/bars/clubs who tell you “its great exposure“ instead of giving you a fair/earned cut of the door or simply something called payment for services. Remember the old “you get two half-price drink tickets”? This whole “share/like/post” via social media is just another version of that scam, a form of free advertising for them, more money in their pockets, avoiding fair payment for services, and a not-so-hidden subtle form of exploitation. I recently inquired with a scoring contest that given that I don’t have any social media accounts to post/like/share (the required rule), could I still participate..and they said “No”. Point taken. Just because it’s become “normal” to request or require share/like/post, does not mean it is not exploitation. It seems like more and more of the industry is in silent agreement that its ok to offer contests/competitions only in actuality to be looking to get their brand/product more visibility (i.e make money without having to pay for marketing). Why pay for advertising when we can get our very own consumers to do it for us…for free? Let’s raise our prices (wink, wink) and they will believe we are actually giving them a “sale price.” (I know I’m ranting, just got me at a negative moment :shocked: )
 
Manfred said:
Another example of how musicians/creatives are vulnerable to being exploited by those only interested in making money via covert maneuvers (yes, everyone needs to earn a living, we all get that; let’s just be honest/clear/direct about it, please). It’s like the venues/bars/clubs who tell you “its great exposure“ instead of giving you a fair/earned cut of the door or simply something called payment for services. Remember the old “you get two half-price drink tickets”? This whole “share/like/post” via social media is just another version of that scam, a form of free advertising for them, more money in their pockets, avoiding fair payment for services, and a not-so-hidden subtle form of exploitation. I recently inquired with a scoring contest that given that I don’t have any social media accounts to post/like/share (the required rule), could I still participate..and they said “No”. Point taken. Just because it’s become “normal” to request or require share/like/post, does not mean it is not exploitation. It seems like more and more of the industry is in silent agreement that its ok to offer contests/competitions only in actuality to be looking to get their brand/product more visibility (i.e make money without having to pay for marketing). Why pay for advertising when we can get our very own consumers to do it for us…for free? Let’s raise our prices (wink, wink) and they will believe we are actually giving them a “sale price.” (I know I’m ranting, just got me at a negative moment :shocked: )
Click to expand...
Ranting or not, you're not wrong. ;) I actually ran across an ad for one of Tina's newest music videos a day or two before this competition was announced. I am thinking about entering just from the sheer coincidence of it all. https://consequence.net/2021/08/tina-guo-serj-tankian-moonhearts-in-space-premiere/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom