Loading Profile...
Shuffle features for playlists, "loved" tracks, and library
The queue isn't enough for managing the music I'm listening to. I'd like to be able to play in a 'queue-less' mode that simply flows through a list of music that is currently visible in the interface - my library, a playlist, an artist, an album, "popular" tracks, my "loved" tracks, etcetra. This way I could shuffle over a group of *more* than 200 songs (which isn't really a lot).
I’m confident
1
person likes this idea
I like this idea!
Tell me when this idea gets some attention.
The more people who like this idea, the more it gets noticed.
The more people who like this idea, the more it gets noticed.
The company has this under consideration.
The best point from the company
-
Hey Elliott,
Thanks again (and again) for the feedback. I definitely see where you're coming from--one of the things we've seen the most requested, as well as something we've wrestled with/debated/been planning for a long time, is a more intelligent, intuitive, and easy way to manage large catalogs of music. Specifically in regards to organizing things like Favorites, playlists, or any other way you might want to sort/tag your relationship to a song.
I think in simplest terms, it sounds like you're requesting a way to sort of "Add to Queue" for any set of music you could think of. We do have a shuffle feature (to the left of the Autoplay button), but making this more accessible/visible/useful is definitely not a bad call.
This is such a large issue to address, I can only honestly say that we'll have to get back to you on details! Though, as I said, it's something a lot of people ask for, so I'd imagine it won't go unaddressed for too long.
Also, just a sidenote: you can have more than 200 items in your queue at a time--the limiting factor is that you can only *add* 200 items at once. So you could have a really huge queue, you just have to add in those increments.
Anyway, thanks again, man. Your feedback is awesome.
-ben
I’m thankful
The company and 1 other person think
this is one of the best points
Create a customer community for your own organization
Plans starting at $19/month
-
Inappropriate?Hey Elliott,
Thanks again (and again) for the feedback. I definitely see where you're coming from--one of the things we've seen the most requested, as well as something we've wrestled with/debated/been planning for a long time, is a more intelligent, intuitive, and easy way to manage large catalogs of music. Specifically in regards to organizing things like Favorites, playlists, or any other way you might want to sort/tag your relationship to a song.
I think in simplest terms, it sounds like you're requesting a way to sort of "Add to Queue" for any set of music you could think of. We do have a shuffle feature (to the left of the Autoplay button), but making this more accessible/visible/useful is definitely not a bad call.
This is such a large issue to address, I can only honestly say that we'll have to get back to you on details! Though, as I said, it's something a lot of people ask for, so I'd imagine it won't go unaddressed for too long.
Also, just a sidenote: you can have more than 200 items in your queue at a time--the limiting factor is that you can only *add* 200 items at once. So you could have a really huge queue, you just have to add in those increments.
Anyway, thanks again, man. Your feedback is awesome.
-ben
I’m thankful
The company and 1 other person think
this is one of the best points
1 Comment Add a comment
This is one of the best points
-
My problem, I guess, isn't specifically with the 200 number. It's with the concept of the experience design, overall. The queue is a good idea as a feature, but Grooveshark is entirely *centered* around it. We should be able to play tracks in a more "traditional" way as well. The queue works well when you have three or four songs you want to play, and then have Autoplay running - you just see what's playing, and the next few items to play. However, when you've got a set of a few hundred items to play - for instance, all of the works of a single artist, or an entire playlist of a certain genre, or (as above) all of your loved or all of your library... the Queue is just messy and incapable.
My personal, specific desire: To have the "play" button on a song (since there's both "play" and "add to queue") stop the queue playing, and start playing that song - right in the list that is currently open. When that song finishes, the next song in that list plays. The queue doesn't get involved at all in this "mode". When you want to go back to playing your queue, you click the play icon on one of the songs in your queue, etcetra. The shuffle button should still be enabled when you're not playing your queue; the autoplay button should (obviously) be disabled.
If you implement this, there should also probably be a way to quickly jump to the "current location" - think the ⌘L feature of iTunes. If you've browsed around, searched for other stuff, and so on while listening in "list mode", you might want to quickly jump back to the album/artist/playlist/whatever that is currently being played through, so that you can choose a different song from it.
I don't want to sound demanding - Grooveshark is pretty awesome! It's just that without a "normal playback" mode, it's not very versatile. I have to jump between it and iTunes when I want to switch between "unmanaged" music (if I'm across the room working on homework) and "managed" music (when I'm at the computer, and capable of coaxing the Autoplay/Queue into playing what I feel like hearing). -
Inappropriate?Hi Elliott,
I'm the backend developer for the Grooveshark app, so maybe I can add some insight into why things are the way they are right now.
One of the major overriding principles of the design is that navigation should never break playback. That's why we introduced the concept of a queue; to decouple navigation and playback. If you can play through a list in-place, then you can't click around and look at other things while you are listening, which we feel would be a major detriment to usability.
We are certainly open to ideas if you can think of a way to all this sort of functionality without breaking the user experience or making it more complicated. -
Inappropriate?(You might want to use Get Satisfactions' comment replies instead of starting a new thread, heh!)
Nice to meet you, man. You've got a good system, I respect that.
To simplify my ideas regarding playback, let's consider it as the following: Instead of having two visual elements, one of which is capable of playback (the browser, and the queue); you have three elements, two of which are visible, and two of which are capable of playback: The browser, an invisible "currently playing list", and the queue.
At any given time, you're *either* playing from the queue or from the hidden "currently playing list". At all times, when you are browsing music in the browser, your current location is stored - if you start something in the browser playing, that location becomes the "currently playing list". As you browse around, the "currently playing list" doesn't change - it's still the list that you previously had one, the one that contains the song you're now listening to. When your current song finishes (let's say you're still browsing around), it starts playing the next song in that list.
Use scenario: I'm playing a queue with some songs that I've collected while browsing, four or five random songs. Not really similar in any way, just things I felt like trying out. I get bored, and decide to go do some homework. I want to start playing stuff that I know that I'll like, so I don't have to come back to the computer and get off-track on my homework; I go to the home page and search for one of my favourite artists. I click through the search results to "Artists > TheArtist", and click the little play arrow on the first song *in the list*.
This stops my queue playing where it was, and starts that song playing. I leave the computer. When that song finishes, the next song that would be visible in that list - whether or not the list itself is actual open, it's contents are still the same, and are stored - is played. (i.e. the next song in the album).
This prevents me from having to populate and "deal with" the Queue unless I want to.
If this still doesn't make sense, I could try to make a short screencast demonstrating it.
I’m undecided
-
Inappropriate?Hi Elliott, nice to meet you too. A screencast or even some simple images might help a bit. I think the main thing I'm having difficulty visualizing is how a user will control playback of a list once they have navigated away from it. The nice thing about the queue is that it is always there no matter what else you are doing.
There may also be some technical limitations that would come in to play here, depending on what exactly you are visualizing. When you close a panel or navigate away from it, it is destroyed in order to prevent memory leaks. Sure, we can keep a copy around when you are playing it, but if you navigate back to the list by clicking on it, it may be a lot of work to make the interface reflect where you are in that list, etc., since they are two separate objects (I'm not a front end developer, so this is purely speculation). Just some things to keep in mind. :)
EMPLOYEE
EMPLOYEE
