No problem. Glad to help, if I can.
I'm sorry to hear that.
Did they give more specific feedback or specs? Just simply saying "try again with your existing gear and you'll be successful" seems strange : No suggestion of what needs to be different, or why it was rejected?
Were any specifications give to you in advance, with regard to levels/dynamic range etc?
Are you able to share the final audio file that you submitted, for our reference?
If your second submission is rejected could you post that audio file too and the full feedback you received here, please?
If the feedback is vague, like "give it another go", could you ask them what the reason for rejection was?
I just want to be clear because I know you were, quite rightly, keen to reduce background noise, but I guess a submission could be rejected for errors, diction, audible edits, background noise, overall level, dynamic range, clipping...any number of things.
No worries
I'm going to address all of your points:
I already passed the video and lighting test. The last piece is audio test. I used to submit (only once I did that...) a sample to this publisher by recording a real (actual content) version but as it always used to take more time so I changed my approach (with their permission) started submitting sample audio (in that I speak something random), all they need to check is audio quality whether their is any hiss, hum, background noise, have I used good microphone or not or anything which sets apart good audio with bad quality audio. All they expect me to deliver is good clean audio.
First time it was all done in a rush, after reading your forum's reply I recorded overnight and submitted that and also they didn't give me any specific techy reason for it, I guess (speculating...) they were busy as I noticed that while talking to them.
Initially they did tell me audio quality requirements and as far as I remember it was all very basic and easy to follow things for ex: audio quality must be good, it should be clean audio without any background noise, hiss, hum, without any errors and it shouldn't clip, use good studio grade mic, mic shouldn't be too far from my mouth nor too close, use pop filter... something like that. They didn't talk about dynamic range.
Second time, before submitting sample recording, I've taken time, did all the due diligence, taken all the precautions. Did the sample recording at new place for 1 min at 6+ different locations. Logically, I am supposed to submit only 1 sample recording to publisher but I did 6+ sample recordings, each was 1 minute long and submitted all of them (the reason is I wanted to post all those samples, first here in the forum so that members review it but I was bit scared that (I'm afraid), you might said
I'm too concerned about removing background noise) so submitted directly to publisher.
Here's the Biggie: I received their response, they approved 1 sample recording out of 6+ samples but again they didn't give me any long explanation or techy reason (which I expected, at least this time) why other sample recording are rejected, so this time it wasn't even acceptable to me (even before reading your forum's reply I already approached them). I politely asked them to please give me reason:
1. What you found exceptional in approved sample recording?
2. What are the reasons that all other samples recordings didn't pass the test.
I spend almost daily, the whole night doing all this stuff: arranging things, preparing and waiting for quite time and record.
I love it but I need to know from them why one was approved and others were rejected rejected (it'll be helpful to me to know the insights)
Q1) The amazing / strange thing is the one sample recording which they approved is MXL770 raw Part 5 and rejected others which include SM57 (raw) & SM58 (raw) recordings which is strange to me, these are legendary mics so I think there might be a mistake at their end so I approached them with above questions. I was expecting more than one sample recording will pass the test especially SM58 & SM57 & MXL770 raw recordings. If this happened I had much broader options to record at different times rather waiting for the right moment.
Only Part 5 is approved (and I'm waiting for their next response)
I may be completely wrong so I request You ( [MENTION=43272]Steenamaroo[/MENTION] ) and other members ( [MENTION=89013]TalismanRich[/MENTION] [MENTION=94267]miroslav[/MENTION] [MENTION=193247]bluesfordan[/MENTION] [MENTION=57292]Chili[/MENTION] [MENTION=89697]ecc83[/MENTION] [MENTION=39487]mjbphotos[/MENTION] [MENTION=196982]keith.rogers[/MENTION] )
Please have a look at the below sample recordings (Part 1 to Part 7) this is exactly what I submitted to them:
Dropbox - for_review.mp4 - Simplify your life
Please share your opinion:
1. Is Part 5 sounds better than all the other Parts?
2. Which of other 'Parts' sound good (acceptable in your opinion for educational video course so that I raise an appeal at Publisher's office)?
BTW Part 1, Part 2 and Part 5 are raw recordings, just shared with you, as I haven't told them.