Inconsistent Audition Feedback - No communication about my application
Greetings,
The feedback I received for my most recent audition attempt was different from the notes posted in the online project workflow. I was dinged for white noise (hiss) in the email, but the online workflow also indicated boxiness. I sent in the SAME sample for the revision as an experiment as was given different feedback.
1. I want to know why I wasn't given consistent feedback.
2. I want to know why the same exact sample was given different feedback.
3. Why was I told that eq or a noise gate was used in my revision - but not in my original sample. I don't use those things
I'm fine with being reject, I'm still learning, but be consistent and honest. I cannot improve if I don't have the proper feedback.
Respectfully,
Sharon E.
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Here's the submission I sent in. I would like feedback here - from a consistent source. Rejection is fine for me if I can learn from it. Thank you for your time.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QcX-Nb5V6WYyuebu6QPsQLVZsGDCDYsx/view?usp=sharing
Hello Sharon,
Thank you so much for reaching out!
I wanted to let you know that we have many different QC agents and in some cases, one might decide to focus on a specific issue, while a different agent might focus on another one, and they both can be right if both problems are present on one file. As an example, and whenever I check applications, one of the main things I focus on is acoustics since room echo or boxiness can definitely be a constant rejection reason on the platform.
I checked your file and I do agree that there is white noise/hiss which is actually your noise floor which is a little high, also, there is some boxiness too, which can be heard as near-field reflections that can bounce back from hard surfaces like tables or even a laptop screen. Regarding the EQ comment, I think it is not something specific to your file, maybe the feedback said that it sounded overprocessed? I think that might be since your recording does have an emphasis on the mid-highs, but it could be the sound signature of your mic, so I don't think that is one of the main issues.
Also, did you get any comments about mouth noises? I can hear some that are especially forward on some sections, but since acoustics are harder to fix, I would have focused on that primarily. If you want, please share with me the second feedback reasons to check them out with you! But from my point of view, the high noise floor and the boxiness are the issues to be addressed.
Kind regards,
Daniel
Thank you for your explanation. You aptly cleared things up. I'm a newbie so the feedback does help me. I did not get any comments about mouth noises. That is an ongoing concern for me. As for the boxiness and reflections, I think I know where I went wrong in my set up. I will keep working on my own improvements so I can be ready to re-apply when prompted again. I'm persistent. I covered all the feedback I received from the qc folks.
Again, thank you for your reply. I feel more better about what I need to work on. It helps having professional feedback!
Be well Daniel,
Sharon
Hi Sharon,
You are welcome! I'm happy I could help :)
If you have any new samples or want to check any new changes to your setup before a new application, please let me know and share your files here! I will personally review them and help you with as many tips as I can.
I hope that you have a wonderful day!
Kind regards,
Daniel