A good feature for V123 would be...

Amy Snively

When voice seekers place a listing, it shouldn't automatically end on a certain date. Apparently voice seekers are told "You will receive submissions until ______" which is a week away (I think).

Instead, the voice seeker should be asked "When do you need to receive submissions by?" And the date that the audition is open should be adjusted accordingly.

It appears that voice seekers routinely do not close their postings when the gig is cast, or it it falls though. They just let the listing expire.

When talents are auditioning for jobs that no longer exist, it not only wastes their time and effort, but also makes their batting average worse, making them less-likely to be satisfied with the service-- and less likely to renew their membership.

Thanks for listening!

Freddie Molina · Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007, 21:21 (GMT) Post subject:

Really good suggestion. Thank you Amy, for a fact we’ll send this to development for assessment. daumen rauf

Wendy Brown · Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007, 22:14 (GMT) Post subject: Shady Voice seekers

I also would recommend some sort of screening process for Voice Seekers. I received a private lead from someone who Voice 123 said to watch out for because the phone number wasn't verifiable. On my info, it didn't even come up.. only an email address. I contacted the lead by email and got a response. Then after I sent 2 examples of the lead, I waited a day to follow up. The email came back to me saying the address was no longer good. It was a hotmail address which should be a red flag. Luckily, I only did two examples. But now I can't help but wonder if my voice is being used. I've never had to watermark before and don't know if my Adobe Audition has the capability.

Just be careful out there!

Wendy Brown
http://www.wendybrownvoicetalent.com

Phyllis K. Day · Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007, 22:33 (GMT) Post subject: Re: Shady Voice seekers

Freddie Molina · Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007, 22:34 (GMT) Post subject:

Amy Snively · Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007, 22:42 (GMT) Post subject:

Many clients find watermarks distracting and it can hurt your chances of winning the audition in some cases. An alternative is to read the spot, then fade out nicely at the end so that it is unusable, but they still have an unobstructed view of your talent. JMHO.

Bobbie West · Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007, 04:02 (GMT) Post subject: JMHO?

Amy, for the hip Impaired, does JMHO mean, "just my hot orifice"?

Bobbie West · Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007, 04:03 (GMT) Post subject: JMHO?

Amy, for the hip Impaired, does JMHO mean, "just my hot orifice"?

Amy Snively · Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007, 04:09 (GMT) Post subject:

Just My Humble Opinion. Good guess, though!

George Karnes · Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007, 04:15 (GMT) Post subject:

Well I for one am going to refrain from making any hot orifice jokes....

This is killing me..... Laughing

Tom Greenlee · Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007, 04:25 (GMT) Post subject:

I really like the way Bobbie thinks. hahahahaha

James Donaldson · Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007, 14:35 (GMT) Post subject:

I as a matter of course pick a section of the audition and record that a couple times and loop them...always omitting the tag line...or just move a couple of sentences around....never record the whole thing...risky and a waste of time.

As a producer who also auditions voices I find watermarks distracting. Just for the record.....

Jim

Also wondering - I see a lot of AA references here (I am also up to speed on ENCO's DAD system) ...but what's the general opinion of using GarageBand for these voiceovers. Seems to me a good system. Have it on my MAC tower.

Mark Jeffries · Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007, 23:25 (GMT) Post subject:

What I'd like to see is..

The budget amount listed when you're on the "answer with" pages. I find myself hitting the back button every time!

Thanks