JPF Home Page Forums General Messages Songwriter Message Forum PAYING FOR CRITIQUES

What is your opinion of the “Pay for Critique” services?

Seems like there are no shortage of business/site/individuals who are willing to give you a precise, honest critique of your material for a price. (I have found the range between 15$ to 30$ per song.) BUT I question the validity of such services. (Which for me answers my original question.)

What makes these individuals “experts” on song writing? (I am not questioning their own personal history or experience.) AND is this really the route the “professionals” take when they go about honing their craft to get their material to the point where it MIGHT interest a possible publisher, et al?

Is the difference between the “Pay for Service” and sites like JPF really that extreme? The latter claim that “for a fee” they will give you an honest assessment and might even point you to a collaborator. Is this not what occurs on sites like JPF? Is this not what publishers do? (I might be wrong but believe this is how it once worked?) Can we, the writers, only expect an improvement in our craft, in our writing, only if we pay for it?

Once upon a time the writer created a song and once satisfied demoed it and began the next step. (Finding a publisher or maybe an agent.) Maybe the writer would purchase the latest Song Market Book and use it to research those that might be interested in what he/she had to offer. The writer would contact said person/business to see if they were accepting submissions and if they were the writer would package the demo up and send it out. Maybe there would be a connection maybe not. Sometimes you received a critique, sometimes not and sometimes the writer might be directed into a whole other direction. AND that was free. (Well except postage et al.)

If the House took an interest in your material they would take it from there with the understanding that they owed part of the writers creation. If they believed in what you had then they would cover the expense. (Again it was understood that they now ‘owned’ your material for a set period of time.) The bottom line is you did not have to pay for them to critique it.

Years ago, when I was going the route described above, a ‘shark’ got a hold of my address and mailed me a response. The letter contained everything one wanted to hear and my wife, who had opened the letter and read it to me, was very excited. She read down a little further and read out that a price was involved. I stopped her there and explained what I still believe is true today, “If ‘they’ think it is good for ‘them’ they pay you.”

So. What do you think?

Douglas

Doug,

If you want to see the difference between a "JPF" critique and a professional one, just visit the "Mentor Lyric and MP3 Critique Forum" -- there is a world of difference.

Most of the comments here are just meant to keep the writer motivated and are, by and large, positive. No matter how good the "song" is or not.

Professional writers get critiques all the time -- from publishers, co-writers, professional peers, and from live performances (I guess, I am not a professional).

I haven't gotten a "paid for" critique yet, but if I had a song that had great potential, I would do so.

Kevin

Thanks Kevin I will stop by that particular Board. As for your last comment if I believed a song had potential, and I do believe that some of mine do, I still would not pay for a critique. As I mentioned what makes that individual or individuals an expert or makes their opinin more important or better then someone who looks it over for free?

Douglas

Good thread Doug. I think there is a place for both. As Kevin said I do get some feedback here and most of the time it is positive (although there is no shortage of constructive criticism) and it keeps us motivated. I struggle with who to listen to and who not to. All I can do is look at a persons profile so I really don't know them. I am a member of NSAI and have sent in three songs for critique so far. I guess you could say it is a paid critique as it comes with the dues. These critiques have been pretty spot on as to what was needed. But I have also gotten very good critiques here. I can usually tell the difference in a pro's critique and a relative newcomer. That's not to say there aren't very experienced writers here, there are. But I think there's an art (one I don't possess) to properly critiquing a song. And in the end, a critique is someone's opinion of a song. Whether it's my opinion or Jeffrey Steeles opinion it's an opinion. I enjoy the folks who critique my songs here and on other forums. I'm interested in hearing what others have to say.

steve

Douglas,

It is just one more part of an ongoing process. A lot of people from outside Nashville think that everybody in Nashville get things for free, get paid for music, etc. That is not always true. We generally sacrifice family, jobs, financial success, etc. to move here. There are so many people here doing the same thing making a living at music is actually very few and far between. And for the most part, almost anyone getting into the music business have done the same workshops, seminars, paid for the same critiques as most outside people do. They have just moved forward from it.
What determines a professional is generally his or her standing in the communtiy. Many don't want to do critiques as they feel their opinion is not worth it. No one has to do anything. Most people who do song critiques are currently involved in the industry and understand current trends, what is overdone, etc. And that is a lot of the situation. Sometimes it is not that a song is good or not. It might have just been done a lot and a wave of interest in that type of song has past.
One of these examples would be in topical issues, such as war, politics, etc. The outside writer might not have heard that many of those type songs but closer to the source, there may have been hundreds or thousands of them and that "train has already left the station." so one of the bonuses of a paid critique might be that, to save you that precious publisher appointment from bringing in things they cannot use.
Publishers today see less and less people that they don't know since they are so overwhelemed with friends, co-writers, relations and product. So actually they don't really give much in the ways of critiques any more. A song is either right or not. It is called a "pass." And that is what most songs get.
Getting a critique from an objective source often takes away the personal aspect of critiques and give a business like assesment. Some opinions might be biased or even from other areas that might not be relevant to you. I would have absolutely NO idea what the Montreal market would be like, so it would pay me actually to have informed comments from someone who participates in that market currently.
That is why most people who get critiques online or with things like services and sources or even make trips to a place like this. And since the Internet has so much informtation it is relatively easy to find out who is shooting straight and who is jerking someone around.

MAB

Exactly Steve.

The bottom line is you can get a decent critique here and on other sites like this for free. Paying someone, even if that someone has more experience, is still paying for an opinion and yes you can be re-directed by both but the end result is the same. "Who knows?"

Hello MAB.

I have followed your other responses to the industry type questions and agree with most of what you have to say. (Even if I did not you always have the right IMO to say what you think.)

But the point of my 'argument' is almost summed up in this quote: Getting a critique from an objective source often takes away the personal aspect of critiques and give a business like assesment.

But it is still a 'paid' opinion and I still question the validity of such a service.

Anywho agree to disagree some times right?

Thanks for stopping in.

Douglas

At one time in Nashville this was rule number one: Never pay anyone to listen to your songs. In the late 80s there was a company for whom Larry Gatlin was a public spokesperson. This company would listen to your songs for a fee and then would "coach" you for more fees. This was a very controversial issue at the time because it violated rule number one: Never pay anyone to listen to your songs.

I've had the benefit of living in Nashville and getting more involved than a lot of people in the group. I wrote a lot of hits (but none of them were recorded). I haven't lived in Nashville since 1990 though. A lot has changed since then.

Most of the professional critiques I've heard follow a pretty standard outline of talking points. They honestly don't offer a lot I don't already know. I think they are great for someone who isn't "as far along" as I am but for me it's pretty basic stuff. That does not mean I am much better than other folks, it just means I'm better than some at some things.

We reach different plateaus in our writing. It's like advancing in American Idol. Very few will ever get a recording deal, much less have a big hit. A professional critique (in my opinion) can take you further along if you have the talent and the initiative. There comes a point however when the "critique for pay" services won't help you much with how to write a song. However, using the critique services (in my opinion) can open doors for you IF you really have commercial talent.

Here are some things you may want to consider:

Over 60 record companies turned the Beatles down. In essence, they critiqued The Beatles and found them lacking.

Elvis Presley was told by the manager of the Grand Ole Opry "give up on singing and go back to driving a truck."

Garth Brooks left Nashville after 12 hours feeling like a failure the first time he performed there.

Go to this link, read all the stuff but look for the link to Walt Aldridge's song "Just Say What You Feel And Make It Rhyme." It's the best songwriting advice I ever heard. http://www.durango-songwriters-expo.com/songwriting-tips.html

Then go to this link and read about John Volinkaty, who wrote a country standard called "Satin Sheets." http://www.countryweekly.com/feature/766

If you feel the desire to pay someone to evaluate your Songwriting,then in my honest opinion, you haven't learned the art of Songwriting.A Songwriter knows within himself, when the song is complete and finished to the best of his/her ability.
If for talkings sake you were a fully competent bricklayer,would you pay another bricklayer for his opinion on your work.
Unfortunately this is the downside of the internet..Songwriting for instance grows arms and legs,where the Songwriter can feel obliged to pay for a second opinion(in some cases).The arms and legs are always at someone else's behest,which can be driven
solely for profit,and in most cases do not benefit the Writer..
Songwriting isn't rocket science,Songwriting comes from deep within the soul,and if YOU feel, that it comes from there,then by the same natural progression,you will know within yourself if you have got it right,to the best of your ability...Terry Moore

EB

Voicing my sentiments exactly. Once, very recently, performed some of my material live and received the feedback that I was looking for. "Did they join me in the chorus? YES!". "Did they laugh in the right spot? YES!" and, "Did they get the message?" (After the performance some approached me and thanked me for expressing their emotion. Then, "YES!") I have received the same sorts of comments here on JPF. That being said what makes the 'paid' critique any more valid?

Glad you stopped in and I will book mark those two sites.

Douglas

Wouldn't and couldn't say it better then that. Thank you for your comments and insight.

I am sure that like myself others have written what they believe are great songs. As well I know I have written my share of duds. But while I often drift between the two extremes I am learning all the time.

"Seems you can't please everyone so you've got to please yourself." R. Nelson AND

"I know it may sound funny but money don't mean nothing to me. I don't make my music for money. 'Cause I make my music for me." (as sung by K. Rodgers)

Douglas

Not sure why you would pose the question in the first place, if your mind is already made up on the subject.

If I had a "hit" song and I wanted to get a pro demo done, you can actually bet that I would probably pay for a professional review or two before I shelled out $500-$800 bucks on that demo.

Kevin

Well because I was reading a post this morning and the link directed me to a site that offered the service. This got me to thinking about Taxi, SOCAN and the others out there and, as you have already figured, I do not agree with forking out money for a 'professional' critique. Just wanted to see what others thought and to generate a topic of discussion.

That being said:

"If I had a "hit" song and I wanted to get a pro demo done, you can actually bet that I would probably pay for a professional review or two before I shelled out $500-$800 bucks on that demo."

What would you expect for your money and why would you believe or feel that by paying for the critique that you would get what you needed? Wouldn't you know already?


Douglas

Doug,

Wouldn't you know already?

Now that's a good question. ... and the answer is "probably not!". I mean, I like all my songs -- some of them are even pretty hot rod. That doesn't mean they will sell, though. In fact, I listen to my songs so many times while mixing that I really lose all objectivity.

To be truthful, the only way I would pay for a pro critique is to learn something. I am not going to pay for a $500 pro demo no matter how good my songs are. There is no reason to -- I ain't getting a nashville cut, ever, period. Not unless I want to move there and begin the long process of paying the dues.

However, to say that you can learn everything you need to know about writing great songs from JPF critiques and reviews of performances by friends and family strikes me as a little naive.

Kevin

Point taken and I am glad for the feedback.

You are right though. Believing that the comments/suggestions received from JPF, reviews from performances, family and friends will make one a great songwriter is naive.

I am not saying that any of those are exact indications of the so called "great" song. That is the ultimate question.

What I am saying is that paying someone for their 'professional' opinion (and it is just an opinion)seems a tad naive as well.

Please do not read any animosity in my words. There are none. Just having a discussion and sharing views.

Thanks for your interest in the topic.

Douglas

Guys,

I would point out a few things here.

First of all, no one is Required to pay for anything. It is a very good rule of thumb to never pay for a critique, or anyone to listen to songs. If you are a great writer, you will probably find your own way, given time. The problem in this day and age if you wait for someone to listen to your material and find you, you will probably be waiting a very long time.
I have been here 21 years and I really can't think of anyone I have known in the past 15 years that haven't done some kind of paid critique, workshop, seminar, or lessons, be it guitar,keyboard, voice, business, etc. Some people go to college, some people go to the college of hard knocks. But all pay. In one way or another, all pay.

Getting critiques are often a way to cull down material as opposed to getting a statement of validity. It is more to get an assessment of commercial potential as seen through the eyes of people who do that for a living.

People miss all the time. These are opinions. If you dont believe they are valid, don't do them. However what you find are that professionals hit a lot more than they are wrong. The reason is perspective. If you are emersed in music all day long every day and silmultaneously subjected to the demands of the industry, see and hear what they accept and turn down, you generally have a broader perspective than those who are not surrounded by it all the time, write less methodically and have less information.

If coaching, mentoring, critiques, education, etc. are not worth anything, I would wonder why professional athletes, Tiger Woods, particularly, spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in continuing education, lessons, and coaching. It might be strength training, equipment training, etc. Most occupations have similar things. Seminars, review boards, professional counciling, is a very large part of almost every job in the world. Sometimes you might have very talented craftsmen but they have to have continuing education to stay current in things they don't know.


There is actually an order to these things. Getting critiques, help guide people in their efforts to up the level of their game. by having critiques done, they often become familiar with styles, subject matter, etc. to try to focus on and those to avoid in many instances, things that might have been overdone, overused, or simply not done very well.
As a writer advances in their career and are better known, as well as writing with others, they become known to publishers, and less and less "paid" critiques are needed, as they tune into the industry as well as their own artistry. Again, what a writer wants to say might not be the thing the market is interested in.
Getting paid critiques are only one avenue for finding out about one's music. The others are basically getting out there and marketing them yourself, playing shows, meeting people, making your way. There is nothing EVER that says ANYONE has to pay for anything.
But this is a different age. Publishers don't listen to music like they once did. They don't develop writers anymore. Writers are expected to come developed. They often don't do demos. Writers are expected to have examples of their work, recorded commercially. Record companies are building upon what artists already have started.
So getting paid critiques are one way of speeding up the process and making sure some of those very rare opportunities don't end before they get started.

MAB

Hi Doug, How are you?

Basically it ALL boils down to your situation and what situation you want to be in.

As for the last part of your question -
"As I mentioned what makes that individual or individuals an expert or makes their opinin more important or better then someone who looks it over for free?"

I guess the best way to look at that would be with the most common situations.
Apply that to just about any other thing or profession and what do you get?
Very simple, someone is being PAID to look it over as opposed to FREE!

My free mechanic did a lousy job I guess he just wasn't into working on yet another car for nothing lol.. The guy who did my plumbing free? My free lawyer or doctor or worse yet dentist.
Now I know there are FREE estimates.... And I know that reviewing songs doesn't seem like a job or real work, but guess what? It is! That along with loads of other things people get get paid to do.

You are BUYING some ones time so you are going to get it... plain and simple.
I have done and do many many reviews all free. And I have helped a lot of people. which is so rewarding in itself. One time I did one for our friend Perry here and he later told me he later submitted it for a professional critique. He got back to me and said " MIke they hit on every single thing you had mentioned.

Still I can't afford to put in the kind of time I spent on Perry's song. It just took so long to sit and discuss and think into. But I knew he was shopping (seriously) And I wanted him to have every advantage he could. Besides he's a good guy! I still do them but can't hold up like I used to. Time is money for ALL of us...

You take what you can from a review and finally you decide what stays.goes or happens with the content of your song. But enough people saying the same things
is something to really consider. Again it's all about your situation and GOALS!

Marc really hit a GREAT point about using it ALL as part of the same package.
The co-writing, the lessons the gigs, the sessions the meetings, seminars etc..
That's all part of being critiqued in a way and certainly a HUGE part of learning, which is what the critique is mainly all about.

I think things like a reviewer HAVING to find something to point out is always a tricky issue. Like well it's my job so I better say something, usually on the negative but still maybe in a constructive way.
I would also say anyone throwing nothing but compliments and flowers at you professionally maybe not be a cool thing too. Who wants to PAY to be Put Down!
Finding the right people is important as it is with everything else.

I sent a song to TAXI years ago, perfect music for the add description. The guy says I LOVED the title "Orphanology" and the song.. However I looked it up.. what does it mean? I çouldn't find it in the dictionary..

HELLO! It's a made up word! And if you LOVE the title what are you LOOKING it up for??? I just happen to catch someone who is afraid you'll find alot of them in this business.

Now on the other hand I submitted a song for our Harriet.. I figured with her background more or less she would NOT get my material. I slightly doubted her insight on something that was not the average "I've read all the books I'm pitching songs now" approach! WELL she blew me away.. Nailed EVERYTHING! She has my total respect in every regard. If I was in a position to hire her to help me in a certain circumstance I would do it in a heartbeat...

There is a SKILL to constructive feedback & critiques. It's more than just knowing, or even doing. It about being like a teacher one second and then a friend or co-writer the next. A leader and yet an outside objective observer. Patience!

Sometimes I'll do one wonderfully.. I use EMOTION and I can enthuse anyone who gets near me BIG TIME even by email lol.. But that same EMOTION works against me sometimes and I'll miss my mark.
Harriet never misses, steady man! even keel.... She's got the knack!

Good Thread Guys!

I really like this thread Doug. Thanks for starting it. I agree it all depends on what you want to do and where you want your songs to go.

1. I have played and sang most of my songs for my friends or at my church. They have all, without exception, told me how wonderful they are. They love me. But I discovered that most of the songs had serious flaws craftwise. So an audiences opinion of a song only counts if that's all your looking for (unless it's an audience of songwriters). If your audiences love your songs and respond just as you want them to then that's your target and you've reached it.

2. I do not know many of the people on these forums, thier experience level, the target market of thier songs, etc. I have used "paid critique" services to find out what an "industry" is looking for and if my songs come close to that. Because my ultimate goal right now is to produce a song that, not only I really like, but that "my" target industry will like as well. My target industry is Contemporary Christian and Southern Gospel music. There are very strong contingincies of publishers, artists, writers, etc. for each of these fields in Nashville. That's why I'm aiming at that market.

As I said earlier I'm very picky about who's opinion I "take to heart" when it comes to making changes and adjustments in my songs. I really appreciate all who are part of JPF and the other forums I'm a member of but do not take all of thier comments "to heart". A: Not all of them have experience writing in my target genre's. B. Not all of them are familier with that industry's wants and needs.

I would hope that a "pro" who does critiques has had some training in actually "critiquing" songs and not just writing. I know that NSAI says they train thier critiquers. BUT I will concede that I have gotten song critiques from "pros" and in my opinion they have missed my point in a song completely. AND I have had folks here or on other forums give me a critique that I thought was dead on and they exposed things I never thought about.

Great thread Doug. Thanks for raising the issue.

Steve

Well I have not read any of the other replies so excuse if I repeat anything. I have mixed feelings on paid critiques but in the main I would not use this service. There are plenty scams who operate on a pay for critique service. $30 for listening to a song and writing a letter is nice work if you can get it. There are reputable people who offer a critique service but you are paying for a single opinion. That opinion will not get it sold and you had better make sure of their credentials and that they are aux fait with the style and genre of the piece they are presented with.
If a songwriter knows the craft and what is required of a song then there is little reason to have a critique in the first place. That is just copnfirming what he already knows.

It is important to test drive the song but that is different than a paid critique. To test drive a song I would use several trusted objective constructive opinions and take an average.
You know these people and can see where these opinions agree and differ.

Off to work but I will be back this afternoon to respond to each and everyone.

Douglas

Taxi and NSAI will have critiques of songs done for you...not sure the person doing them is qualified to pay them to do it though. SongU has a critique service for members for like $10 a song, i have used that on occasion when i am headed into the demo process with a particular song. Not all songs are going anywhere. those i am proceeding with high hopes for, well those are the candidates for a pro critique. I have pulled a few lines, adjusted tempo, scrapped a project and saved the money, gone into rewrite, and gotten single song publishing deals with the songs i have run through my "coach" (i use the same one because i know he is a hit writer and i value his opinion)...would i without the critique, who knows...but at $10 a song occasionally i go that route before laying down the demo $$....i will add this two cents, while well appreciated most comments here are along the pat on the back method rather than get down to see if there's any meat on the bones of this song. I have however gotten great lyrical suggestions and changed things in songs from right here on these boards. Even songs that are now published. MAB and Sub, right here on this thread, are 2 people that are highly qualified to give you a pro critique, they have been there, done that at a level we have not reached yet...pro critiques worth their salt will always put your feelings to the side and discuss the issues with the song , good or bad, hopefully focusing on the bad, that's the part that needs fixing...unless you are a great writer these pros could always pick up your song and make it better...the cool part is for a few bucks they, with their in depth critique, will teach YOU how to do what they would have done to it if it were their song...that's what you're after...get a few dozen of those lessons under your belt and you are a better writer as you approach your new songs. be well...mj

Since I have never had a song cut, or even come close, I am not sure about the answer to this question.
I think Professional critiques, paid or not, can certainly help a new songwriter. In some instances they might help a veteran songwriter if only to get an opinion on the Commercial viability of the song.
You can get a pretty good idea of a songs value by playing it for folks and just watching their reaction and that doesn't cost you anything.

What I would ask would be why you need a paid for professional critique. Are you writing to get cuts, to play for your family get together's, do you plan on being an artist performing your own songs.
If you are looking for cuts I'd say a pro would be a good idea. IF that pro is up to speed on what the current market is and IF that pro works within the genres you are pitching to. If that pro has had a cut in the last few years.

I don't think a pro should be paid to critique a lyric only. A lyric set to RAP might be VERY different than a lyric set to Country. What works really well for one may not work for the other.

My own experience? Moker did music for my song "I Got A Phone Call Yesterday" I had that song critiqued by two Professionals. I was told by one the song was "too confusing and they didn't understand what was going on, it lacked structure, had no focus,and had no rhyme scheme".
I was told by the other Pro "This song has so many thing wrong with it I won't even offer any suggestions on it. I urge you to buy Jason Blume's book and read it." That was by a well respected organization that many folks here belong to, and pay a yearly fee to.

I played that song for a group of folks that had nothing to do with the music industry. They thought the song was good. It took a few of them a couple listens before they "Got it" but once they did they liked it.
I have since made two minor changes to the lyric to try to clear up any confusion in the song. Most folks have asked "Why did you change the song, it was fine?"
So who is to say?

I had another of my songs 'One Hell of A Good Storm" critiqued by Two professionals. I was told by the first it needed a "Little work" I rewrote the song and the person critiqued it again. The response was "Wow, this is very good, I would get it demo'd and pitch it."
The second critique was simply. "Demo this one and Pitch it". that one was also a well respected organization that many folks here pay to belong to.

So far neither song has had any interest by publishers. One Hell of a Good storm has been rejected because it "Might be a great bar song played live but won't get cut".

One last thought.
I had a song critiqued by another Pro. They said my song had a few cliche lines and REALLY jumped me on an OVERUSED rhyme.
30 minutes later that same person played one of their own songs. It opened with one of the most common cliche's I have heard and the third and forth line had the SAME OVERUSED rhyme as my song.

Bottom line.. I don't pay for critiques anymore.
I know what a good song is and when I write one I will know it.
That still won't get it cut.

One thing above all needs to be reminded here.

One song does NOT a career make. Careers are made from dozens and hundreds of songs written alone and with dozens and hundreds of people. It is an overall approach to music that makes a career, not just getting opinions, paid or otherwise, on just a song or even a couple of them. In the real world you might have a great song but the doors are simply not open to you. By exploring relationships and building a network, primarily by co-writing your way into those networks, you write other songs that possibly get you in the back doors. That might bring all your existing material into play. It is about the order of getting your songs in the doors.

I recently had a dinner party with several writers. We ate and then everyone played songs. Three of the guys sitting right next to each other, who had never met, played their songs. Not only did they have the same subject, they had almost the same title and the same LINES! That is what much of this is about.

Getting comments and opionions from people in the industry in any form, TAXI, NSAI, workshops, seminars, paid and non paid critiques, are all part of evaluating not only the song but other elements of the song. Sometimes a song on it's own might be just fine. But there might have been a recent hit on a similar song. That doesn't devalue the song, but does make it inneffective as a pitch because we "just had one."
Elements of people involved in the industry are that they hear more songs. Period. We often hear things that will be coming out a year from now. We get a sense of timing in addition to simply the song.

Examples right now could be songs on the economy. Everyone is writing them because everyone is going through economic problems. Right now in the country market, there are two out, "Closing Detroit Down" by John Rich, and "Red White and Pink Slip Blues" by Hank Williams Jr. There will be about two more major artists that take this on and do well with them. From there, interest in the subject will wane in the public eye. Everybody will still be writing, pitching and recording these types of songs for a couple of years. But as far as impact with the public, chances for success,etc. if you are not in the forefront of any movement, you are a day late and a dollar short.
The public is very fickle, and gathers a "Been there, done that".. type attitude. Then moves on to something else.Also economies have ways of turning around or someone finds another way of approaching that subject, say the "I've made it through the bad times, now am back on track." And then everyone will be writing that kind of song.

Now, I do song critiques, both paid and free almost every day. I do them online, through my "songwriter "tours" of Nashville, workshops, seminars, my involvement with NSAI and others. And yes, many people from here contact me. Now people have been bringing these songs in continuously. They do this not only to get a more educated opinion than they might have themselves, but to find out what they should invest money and time in, and for a great deal of what they should focus their efforts on publishers, pluggers, other co-writers etc. I tell them all the exact same thing:

You write first and foremost for yourself. If this is a statement that you feel strongly about and means everything for you, by all means, do it. If you want to put it on your web site, sell it on your CD, promote it for your own purposes, great. Make it sound wonderful and go with it. But if you are doing it with the intention of pitching the song to the current music market as it relates to Nashville, you are going to get it turned off at the title, no matter how well it is written because while we all may be feeling that way, it is now a "Oh no, ANOTHER save the world, it is all terrible" song! Great, just what we need." (Roll the eyes here)
Now I am an overall career coach when it comes to people's musical careers. I am responsible on helping them make wise decisions as it relates to their money. If it is a choice between spending $500-$1000 on a single demo, and taking that same money, spending $100-$200 for a very nice smaller production demo, and the remainder of that to spend on a trip to Nashville to meet and write with other people, take one of my tours, go to a Barbara Cloyd event, NSAI, meeting with Rand Bishop, etc. I am going to pitch the trip every time.

So that is part of the paid evaluations that I do. It is about more than the song. It is about a lifetime of writing, promoting and marketing songs. It is about a lifestyle and choices that make for an overall career instead of just one song.

That is my perspective.

MAB

That sums it up. A single song critiqued by a pro won't do much for anyone.
Mike Dunbar also has a great piece of advice. BUILD A TEAM.

Marc would be a good addition to that team.

Thanks Bill, good to see you.

You came to one of my dinners. The point of that as you saw is to get people together,share ideas and perspective. And you heard the way I try to critique songs from a variety of perspectives outside of just "Is this song written well?"
What you experienced is pretty typical. Songwriters get what I call "Songwriters tunnel vision." That is that THEY get EXACTLY what they are saying, have the mini movie running through their head, and are totally tied into the song. But a person listening to it on a writers night, open mic, in the back ground, on the radio, etc. might not have the same impressions.
Sometimes people do things they don't even see. They change characters in the song or the tense. It goes from Me and Us, to you and them and there is no explination of when the characters changed. They leave out small pieces of information that relate to the song and unless you have a lyric sheet and can go back and look, you miss it. They get into "She said, He Said, I said" implied information, that are confusing to the listener, while the writer knows exactly who is saying what because in some cases, the lived through it.
When I do my "tours" I listen to a Lot of songs. Sometimes up to fifteen to twenty. What I am looking at, and what most publishers look at are patterns in writing. Some writers will write the same songs over and over, without realizing they are doing it. They often write too long, saying the same things in four or five verses, they could say in three and a bridge, get too redundant in musical patterns, etc.
On a reverse note, I myself have had critiques (yes, I pay sometimes too) that someone would point out something I didn't even see, just because I missed it. Has helped me at times in
the studio before I made what could be a very costly mistake.
Sometimes we have melodies that are part of very famous songs or titles that we didn't realize. I think that outright song theft is a myth, but it is easy to cop on a melody without realizing it. So getting an informed opinion on those aspects can sometimes save a LOT of money by spending a little up front.
Look, I am not trying to promote my business, or those of other people on this subject. Critiques are only a small part of what I personally do. But a lot of times people get in forums like these and paint things with a broader brush than need to be. There are less than savory characters in any field of endevor. But insinuating that getting critiques for money is a some shady endevor is simply wrong. It is a tool that some peole find useful and others don't. That should be a personal decision.
But just like the conversations on Song pluggers, i ask that everyone keep some open minds on things and do a little research before they start saying "This is crap or that is crap." There are people who just want to make a fast buck off of people. That is a human trait I sure could do without. But there are some of us, primarily on threads like these, that really have their hearts in the right place and are genuially trying to help. Because some of us get paid for those services does not denigrate our character or intentions.
I'm always around for any of you that need me.

MAB

Marc, it seems that, as usual, you have a very realistice perspective on this topic. There seems to be a place for a paid critique. It is not a magic solution but can be one piece of the process.

Tom

Marc
I hope you didn't get the impression I thought you or anyone who gives critiques for pay are just in it for the money.
I did not mean that at all.
What I was trying to say is individual song critiques are minimally important. Most are simply one persons opinion of a song on a first listen. And the other thing is all Song Critique Professionals are not created equal.
The one I got where I was told to just Buy Jason Blumes book was an insult. There was no attempt to critique the song at all. The only thing I can figure is the critiquer didn't speak English very well.
Another time in a critique session the critiquer said a song was very confusing. I was in a room with 20 other songwriters. I asked for a show of hands who understood the song. Only one person said they were confused, the rest said it was clear to them.
That does not mean the critiquer was bad it just means that person did not understand the song.
I don't think the critiquer was very happy with me. I don't think I will be very welcome at that persons event in the future.

Of course there are songs submitted that lack focus, are unclear, folks mix pronouns to the point that you can't figure out who is who, who is the singer or the listener.
New songwriters often make the mistake of writing songs that only the writer understands. Other folks are not mind readers. That is certainly where a pro critique can help on an individual lyric.

But I also think that it gets oversimplified at times. Why can't we write something that actually makes people think. I know songs are supposed to be entertaining but so are children's Nursery Rhymes. But that's another subject. I recall many of those Nursery Rhymes we are so fond of were actually very controversial political parodies and satires cloaked in metaphors.

There is a number one song on the radio right now that I had to read the lyric several times before I figured it out. Without a written lyric I don't think I ever would have got it. Maybe I would have eventually. I thought it was just me so I asked some other folks about it. They don't get it either.
But we all agreed one thing, The song sounded great.

I’m of two minds about professional critiques.

I’d certainly turn to an experienced and qualified critic for input if I had a lyric/song that I felt was reaching a pitchable stage, but at the same time I wouldn’t depend entirely on that feedback, especially if it were contrary to overwhelming input from other objective sources as well as to one’s own gut feeling.

I recently had an interesting situation. As a NSAI member, I’m eligible for 12 “free”
professional evaluations a year. A couple of months ago I submitted a song that my co-writer and I felt was worth doing something with (as did the 30 or more other people who’d made suggestions and given valuable feedback). However, I first wanted to have what I perceived to be professional feedback, so I submitted the song (MP3 plus lyric) to NSAI.

Imagine our delight when the evaluation came back with “WOW”, “fantastic”, “beautiful”, “great hook”, “nice imagery”, etc. The evaluator then went on to say that if we did the following three things, he would have no hesitation about forwarding the song at the next NSAI publishers’ luncheon meeting.
1. Create a new bridge that (he felt) would tie in better to the verses;
2. Change one line in the chorus (I’d suggested an alternative, though didn’t like it as well as what I already had);
3. Reverse the order of verses 1 and 2.
He instructed me to submit the revision and address it to him specifically.

I immediately changed the line to what the evaluator wanted, and then spent 3 weeks sweating over – in the end – a much better bridge. I opted not to reverse the verse order, however, as my co-writer and I agreed it would have weakened the initial impact considerably. I wrote a cover letter explaining my decision.

In the next round, although there was the usual “great hook”, “beautiful music and vocals”, “WOW”, etc., the evaluator made no mention of the new bridge (which was clearly much better) or of the other change I’d made, which he’d requested (but which I didn’t like myself). Instead, he selected a couple of further areas that he wanted changed. There was no reference at all to the cover letter.

This was disappointing, of course, and I was hesitant to use up a third evaluation
on the same song if the evaluator was going to keep finding things that he felt needed changing, to the extent that the original lyric – that had so moved him initially – would be lost. Thus, I arranged to have a paid (my co-writer and I shared the cost) one-hour, one-to-one consultation with him via Skype. One of the first things I asked (pleasantly, of course ) was why, after first responding in such an encouraging and effusive manner, he found further fault with the lyric in the second evaluation, even though two main requested changes had been made. (He was apparently OK about the verse order remaining as it had been.) He said this was one of the problems with evalutions: Often you can hear a song and the impact is tremendous and you get carried away with how great it sounds and how it makes you feel but then if you look at it again and again there are things that will stick out that you’ll think should be changed. “We’re only human”, he said. He then pointed out even more areas that he thought should be revised.

By that time I’d lost confidence in his evaluative capacity. We finished the consultation by having a pleasant discussion about songwriting in general.

When I related the event to my co-writer, we decided the only further modification we’d make would be to put back the original line in the chorus that the evaluator had advised we change. We kept the new bridge, however, as it is better. (And I’m grateful the evaluator suggested I re-work the bridge.)

(Shortly afterwards, my co-writer submitted the song to a publisher for a certain artist. The publisher wrote back – amazing in itself – to say that although not ideal for that particular person, the song was lovely and he’d keep it on file for future reference. Not much, I know, but at least a response.)

I guess what I’m saying with all this is: Do the best you can; get as much objective and critical feedback as possible from songwriters’ forums; revise accordingly as necessary; and then see what a professional evaluator has to say. (I agree that their knowledge and expertise can be immensely valuable.) However, I consider that in the final analysis it’s important to go with one’s own feelings and instinct. I don’t mean simply attachment because it’s your own “baby” so to speak, but because you’ve striven carefully to incorporate as many of the elements as possible that contribute to making what you feel is a noteworthy lyric/song.

I have a twofold question, though, that perhaps Marc or Rand can answer.
1. Of what use is a one-off professional evaluation if in the course of the 20-45 minutes or so given to it an evaluator will fail to see the (perceived) flaws that might only be visible/audible after a second or third or even fourth reading/hearing? (I concede that evaluators are “only human”. )
2. In terms of whether a song can be deemed pitchworthy, how important is that first positive impact and a visceral response to a song?

Donna

Doug,

I may go over the top on this, and perhaps Im not your usual suspect, but I approach this very business like. Just like any company putting out products, Id like to make sure the quality is up to par with market expectations. If you write songs for the markets, you are not allowed to decide what is quality or not yourself, as you want to supply consumers on a market with what they are asking for, so you have to rely on others informed opinions to determine what quality is in that respect.

I often go through several layers of critique with my songs.
Mostly I post early guitar/vocal worktapes here at JPF, and collect the critiques before first rewrite. If Im happy after that, I sometimes still get a paid critique, before demoing. And after demoing, I sometimes post another time here at JPF, and often also get another paid critique, often with particular emphasis on the mixing and broadcast quality. First after all of these layers of feedback and rewriting/adjusting, I enter the marketing process pitching etc. And if you're with Taxi and other places, you even get one more layer of critique to consider.

I think of all of this just like the product development process in any company. You want to make sure you got the best possible product by involving other professional people, and for most people a level of investment like paid critiques are neccesary in that process, I think.

Then you may ask - why go though so much trouble? Do I not believe in my work? Yes, absolutely, on the contrary! I select my best songs to work through these processes, that is the ones I feel is based on great ideas and that I believe in all the way. And when I have something I believe in, a great idea in a great lyric with great music to it, I will do anything it takes to help this song reach it's highest potential.

So how industrial or business like it may sound, I approach this like a business. And a tactical bonus from using paid critiques from the best people in the business, is that you might get recognized easier, when they sit in the chair selecting songs for a project, next time.

A good businessman acknowledges the win-win of getting business as well as creating business for others. I have been trained to think so having my own business for years, and I approach the business of songwriting likewise. You won't be promoting your own business thinking like a cheapskate - you'll want to get in the give and take of things.

That's my two cents, anyway!

Some people have spoken about getting a pro critique before getting a demo done. Well that is all good and well. However regardless of reason why you are demoing a song I fail to see a need for a paid critique. If you are demoing it for own amusememnt and not to pitch then what does it matter if you get a critique or not. If you are doing it to pitch then you should have done your homework and produced a song to spec knowing exactly what is required and a pro critique is not needed. Either way I see little or no benefit in getting a pro critique. Terry summed it up..... if you are a time served bricklayer do you really need to pay another bricklayer to appraise your work.

I wouldn't be so preoccupied with the 'paying' issue. It just so happens, that people with the best credentials is s sought after, that they can make a living from their services. I can think of no better people to pay? I wouldn't pay someone without credentials to critique my songs! Credentials are earned, not stolen or given.

So money goes around yes, but it is really about creating a good relationship that'll work for you. Nothing can beat an environment of mutual trust, so if you think of the person you approach for the critique as 'just another bricklayer', then you probably won't have the right attitude to develop the neccesary trust with that person.

Professional critics should have credentials, and you should respect these credentials too. Then you would have a basis for a professional mentor relationship. If you don't consider yourself a student anymore, you must have the credentials, and can beging to engage in citiqueing fellow songwriters work, and lear from that. As a teacher I know that there's no better learning than the one that comes from teaching others.

And again, you should not stare yourself blind on the money issue - noone is omnipotent, and eveyone benefits from learning. Both those who invest their money, and those who recieve'em. We all change roles sometimes, and soon the giver will become the taker and vice versa..

Thats really how the world goes around, I think..

so far i've never done to get the cd reviewed
except for a few sonicbids submissions that granted a review but the review was not the thing in foucus. On a general basis i've found most of specialists in my genre are willing to hear new stuff, guess a few would not, but they're not offering pay-per-review either. I've gathered hundreds of reviews of the album in press, webzines, fanzines, magazines, and i've spent the package or the time, but not a journalist fee so far

I've gotten many critiques by Jason Blume and other professional critiquers. My songwriting process is to get peer critiques & pro critiques.

I don't want to demo a song that has fixable mistakes, I can ID many of them but sometimes I'm still in the honeymoon & too close & in love with a song to have proper perspective.

I also don't want to demo weak songs and ones with fatal flaws. Sometimes we need to step away from a song to gain some perspective.

Jason doesn't critique songs for new clients, but he still does mine, so an advantage of folks cowriting with me is I'm happy to spring for a Jason Blume song critique. then we can consider his suggestions. I'd like to add that when folks send a song to jason, he has excellent folks he works with who critique for him.

Taxi provides critiques on unforwarded songs.
SongU provides critiques.
http://SongU.com/ifs

All this is useful for writers who are attempting to write commercial songs with the goal of getting cuts.

If I were an artist about to cut a CD I'd get every new song critiqued.

At the end of the day it is "horses for courses"...some folk will always want&look for 2nd opinions..and there is a market out there to oblige with this desire...ok.whatever is your bag..perhaps it will in the long term make you a better songwriter...but it will in my honest opinion,... never make you a great songwriter...you may be guided or advised,but in the very long term Songwriting cannot be taught,it comes from within.
You can read books till you are blue in the face,but if it aint within,it aint gonna come out...Songwriting is an art and craft that is very demanding,it takes soul searching to new horizons from within a deep well of creativity,looking for that line or hook,or whatever..but the most important discipline i have learned from my Songwriting is patience...it aint gonna happen overnight...but all one can hope for is..that it will happen...critiques for me personally, are not an option..even free one's...iam my own worst critic...but we all take different paths,hoping to reach the same destination...who say's this game is easy!......Regards to All My Friends on JPF...Terry Moore.

Again MAB you make very strong and valid points. Thanks for taking part in this discussion.

Doug

Good points Bill.

I am agreeing with others here. Paid critiques can be a useful tool but before one puts out the money one should sit down and look over their creation with a different eye and maybe use any of the many 'lists' out there to first critique themselves, then post it on sites like this one then take it from there. Paying someone for their opinion should be a last resort. IMVHO.

Douglas

Hello Donna

"He said this was one of the problems with evalutions: Often you can hear a song and the impact is tremendous and you get carried away with how great it sounds and how it makes you feel but then if you look at it again and again there are things that will stick out that you’ll think should be changed. “We’re only human”, he said. He then pointed out even more areas that he thought should be revised."

Again not taking away from the possible positive direction a critique might send you why would you pay for someones opinion? Yes, we are all human and what I like you may or may not like and so on....

Just an opinion.

Douglas

Hey Magne. Thanks for stopping in and sharing your views. As a business, it would 'pay' for you to get the best critique for the dollar BUT lets say this person at this company for what ever the price says do this and do that and then we'll talk. You talk and get the go ahead and then the person that is going make the decision based on his or her criteria doesn't agree? I say cut out the middle man and go to the last one for your critiqing needs.

Douglas

Exactly Jim. I was going to send you this post first as a PM to get your opinion. Seems I was right in my thinking of what you would say.

Do your homework, prepare what is being looked for and submit.

Simple enough and you have just saved X amount of dollars.

Doug

So that brings up the question as to what one must have to be a professional critic? What are the requirement??

Doug

Hello Priscilla. Good points. Thanks for sharing.

Doug

So Andy does that mean you would pay?

Doug

Thanks Terry. Right on.

Douglas

Perhaps you folks might like an opinion on this subject from someone who actually charges for song evaluations and coaching.

I'm a 40-year music-biz vet with well over 200 cuts, including a #1, a Grammy nomination and multiple BMI Awards. Throughout my career, I've found that getting professional, constructive feedback on my work-in-progress is essential to my songs being the best and most competitive they can be. However, finding people who have the talent to provide this kind of quality input is not easy. Still, when you can find it, getting some objective tough love can make all the difference in a song becoming bullet-proof. And, believe me, we all need to write bullet-proof songs.

Now, you may say what makes a bullet-proof song is a matter of opinion -- and, you'd be right. But, whose opinion do you value? Your mom? The drunk sitting in the front table at the club? Or somebody with some real industry experience and success under his or her belt?

If at all possible, it's always best to play your songs one-on-one for somebody you trust and respect. In those circumstances, you not only get the benefit of hearing what that person has to say, but you can observe body language (which can often actually tell you more than words).

That's not always possible, especially if you live outside of a major music capital. So, getting feedback and coaching on-line is usually the most expeditious and accessible way to go about it.

Writers have to be keenly aware of who is giving the feedback. Beware of feedback you get from live performances -- because there are certain kinds of songs that will always get good response (humor, irreverance, boisterous or pseudo soulful/passionate songs) and because your friends will always tell you they loved your songs. (Again, observe body language.)

Songwriting is a craft. How do people learn a craft? -- first by observing master craftspeople, then by trying things out and getting instruction and coaching from a mentor or mentors. Why should the craft of songwriting be any different?

Songs are about communication -- if one of my songs is not getting the response I intend, it's not the listener's fault. It means that I have more work to do. Writing. Getting feedback. Rewriting. There is no room for ego or pride here. If a writer wants to get better, qualified, objective, professional feedback and coaching can accelerate the process dramatically.

Now, I'm not suggesting that you accept and apply every bit of feedback you get. Far from it. But -- we all have lingering doubts about our work. When we get a couple of comments about a phrase or a piece of music we already feel unsure about, we know for certain that those things need to be readdressed. We all emerge from our writing sessions hyped and energized by our own "creative brilliance." But it takes more than our own enthusiasm and excitement for a song to become a hit. And, unless you're writing purely for self-expression, you have to admit you eventually want to create a little bit (or a whole lotta) commerce with your songs. Right?

When members of my website submit their songs, this is my process:

1) I listen to the song through with my eyes closed.
2) I listen again while reading the lyric.
3) Then, I grade the song -- according to concept, rhyme scheme, opening line, first verse, chorus, second verse, bridge, dynamics, phrasing, etc.
4) Then I point out what is working, where the song is succeeding.
5) Then I point out where the song might be falling short and offer some specific suggestions as to how the writer might go about making those parts better.

This process usually takes between 15 and 20 minutes. How much do you think my time is worth? If I was acting in the capacity of a recording engineer, applying my talent and experience to making a production of your song sound great, would you have any trepidation about paying me for my time? I doubt it. I get a lot of personal fulfillment from helping writers improve their work. But, I pay a site administrator to keep track of the song submissions and credit card companies and gateways, etc. -- and this business rarely breaks even.

But here are the kind of testimonials I receive from my members:

"Your evaluations and your wonderful book have so fortified my writing and confidence." Jim Waxenberg, Phoenix, AZ

"Please pass our thanks to Rand for helping us improve our song and pointing us toward more possible improvements." Jim Berryhill, Nashville, TN

"I just wanted to Thank You Very Much for all your help. I really appreciate it Rand. Thanks Again." Bill Warrington, Nashville, TN

The writers who take advantage of professional feedback and coaching find real value in it and feel like these services are helping them improve their craft, thus giving them a better chance at success.

The pros who evaluate songs for Jason Blume, SongU, Barbara Cloyd, etc. are qualified. Although I am a huge believer in NSAI and that organization's work on behalf of songwriters, the song evaluations there are often done by writers who have not had a great deal of success themselves. So, those evaluations can tend to be just opinions with little real credibility. You get what you pay for, folks.

The members of my site seem to be very satisfied and grateful. They understand the value of feedback and coaching. And, I believe this kind of understanding and self-awareness gives them a distinct advantage over writers who refuse to seek coaching and apply constructive criticism.

Here's to all of us writing better songs...

Rand Bishop
songwriter/producer/author - Makin' Stuff Up, secrets of song-craft and survival in the music-biz
www.makinstuffup.net

Thanks Moker you also make valid points. The opinions are definetly back and forth on it.

Douglas

I once received an E-mail from a noted publisher/writer in Nashville offering to critique songs, I think it was maybe 45 dollars for 3 songs. I E-mailed him back and said I didn't need critiques but was always looking for places to submit my material. He said send some. I sent 3 songs. He jumped on one of them and signed it to a publishing contract. It didn't get cut but I was happy to know my songs were getting some attention out there.

I have received invites to send anytime and un soliciated letters praising my songs by producers I submitted to. Also some have called me to send more material.

I have never paid for or asked for critiques from anyone. I let my songs do my speaking for me. Nuff said.

Nuff said is right Ray.

Douglas

Just a simple comment without getting into the pros, the cons, etc. I think it depends upon how much confidence the writer has in his/her craft.

Keep in mind that confidence does not necessarily translate into skill. One compliments the other, but they are not one-in-the same.

Some of the most skilled craftsmen in the world had little confidence in the work. they needed the affirmation that they were, indeed, taklented. other folks have the ability to recognize and fairly evaluate their own skills.

If you think you have the ability to honestly evaluate your songs, do so and submit without a professional critique. Go with your gut. However, if you don't have that same confidence in your ability to self-evaluate, look to a pro for that evaluation, and if necessary or desired, further assistance. In my opinion, it's not a one-size fits-all subject. Some of us have a worthy grasp of our skills; some of us don't. Proceed accordingly.

Alan

Just a simple comment without getting into the pros, the cons, etc.

I think it depends upon how much confidence the writer has in his/her craft. Keep in mind that confidence does not necessarily translate into skill. One compliments the other, but they are not one-in-the same.

Some of the most skilled craftsmen in the world had little confidence in the work. They needed the affirmation that they were, indeed, talented. Other folks have the ability to recognize and fairly evaluate their own skills.

If you think you have the ability to honestly evaluate your songs, do so and submit without a professional critique. Go with your gut. However, if you don't have that same confidence in your ability to self-evaluate, look to a pro for that evaluation, and if necessary or desired, further assistance. In my opinion, it's not a one-size fits-all subject. Some of us have a worthy grasp of our skills; some of us do not. Proceed accordingly.

Alan

I believe if they think it's good for them, they'll pay you...I mean the songwriters...if the songwriters think your critique is good for them, they'll pay you.

Critiquing, I mean really fine critiquing, is a craft, skill, art and science. Some folks can really nail what would make a song better, or be able to articulate why a song is perfect. They can explain why a song could be a "hit." Of course no one can say if a song will be a hit, but many critiquers can accurately predict certain songs will have very very little chance of being a hit. And they can save you money, if not your bruised ego.

Can someone teach someone else how to write a hit? No. But a good critic, paid or not, can help you develop skill, form, and technique.

The big myth is that a good songwriting critic needs to be a hit songwriter. The truth is, they are two different skills. Tiger Woods has a swing coach. Do you wanna bet Tiger's better than him? He pays that coach too. On the other side of the coin, I'm not sure if Dennnis Rodman would be the best P.E. teacher. Teaching, coaching, critiquing, are all skills separate from the subject. A really good teacher can teach different subjects, even subjects out of their expertise. Some of the best songwriting critics I've met personally have been publishers who don't write. I've also met truly genius songwriters who couldn't even tell you how they do it, much less how you should do it. Of course, there are also folks who do it all. Rand Bishop comes to mind.

So, should one pay for critiques? Only if they think it is good for them.