In shock about this 'redesign". This is tragic.

  • 105
  • Problem
  • Updated 6 years ago
  • Acknowledged
I'm not at all pleased with the change. It seems like tearing down a palace to build a McMansion. The look is cheap. I loved the old site. It was superbly designed and economical.

This looks like it's going the way of the old 'Allmovie' that was superior to IMDB but something I stopped using after the 're-design'. I'm horrified, to be frank about what feels like a desecration to my most valued and beloved sites on the web. This looks like a shameless commercialized compromise to appeal to the youngest possible (newer is always better!) demographic.

Let us have an allmusic classic please. Don't you guys realize how valuable this site has always been?
Photo of Bob

Bob

  • 14 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
  • angry, frustrated, disappointed

Posted 8 years ago

  • 105
Photo of Zac Johnson

Zac Johnson, Official Rep

  • 3331 Posts
  • 189 Reply Likes
Hi Bob,
Sorry to hear you are not in favor of our new design. We really felt as though after 6 years an update was in order to display more content and offer more ways for users to discover music.

We spent a lot of time running surveys, performing user interviews and holding design discussions to offer our information to users in ways that are engaging, updated and informative.

I honestly hope that you can spend some time with the site and find that the information you have come to appreciate is still available to you (with a new coat of paint).
Photo of Alexandre Napoli

Alexandre Napoli

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
It's a huge lost... i don't feel like visiting the new site at all. It looks cheap, vulgar and of terrible taste. And I have doubts about its appeal to teenagers. It looks so clumsy I think even a 12 year old justin bieber's fan would beg for the classic design
Photo of JS

JS

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
What a disgrace. Thank for re-chiseling the Pieta' into Kim Kardashian holding a Rockband guitar.
Photo of Ron Witt

Ron Witt

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
It couldn't be worse. Wholly dysfunctional. The new coat of paint simply obscures the useful, accurately organized site. This is a piece of crap that is just shilling for the record companies. Abysmal.
Photo of Yoma Ma

Yoma Ma

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
A new coat of paint? It look more like diarrhea hit the proverbial fan!!! USELESS!!
Photo of Chrysta Cherrie

Chrysta Cherrie

  • 731 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
Hi Yoma,
We're sorry to hear you're not feeling the redesign, but can you provide any more detail as to why? Examples and actionable suggestions help the dev staff get a better sense of what AllMusic users want from the website.

Thank you for using AllMusic!
Photo of Michel

Michel

  • 27 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
Yes Bob, I have the same feeling : this re-design is a major flop, a genuine web-site killer. It's not a matter of being in favour or not, the useful AMG has gone and been replaced by a gizmo for teenagers, i.e. a consumer tool more than a reference for music. It's a sign of the times. Time to look for a replacement.
Photo of joeyheadset

joeyheadset

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Could you be a little more specific? I don't understand what aspect of the new site you consider a "web-site killer". How is it that you feel you can no longer use this site for reference purposes? All the content is still available. In fact, it's more accessible due to the fact that they improved the search functionality. Being able to access audio samples or (in the case of the Spotify links) full tracks is certainly a welcome feature. They also fixed some annoying aspects (you no longer have to reload a page just to "read more"). I'm not sure an allmusic site design can be expected to cure a general sense of angst about teenagers, gizmos, these modern times, and consumer culture.
Photo of Michel

Michel

  • 27 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
Hey Joey,

As explained in a parallel thread, first-time use of the beta site is a nasty experience: can't see the discography when landing on an artist page, have to guess page-down will bring it up, the bio shows first and each time you wanna look for an album by the same artist, the track listing doesn't fit in one window, must scroll continually up and down to check an album track by track (they're not always in the same order as what I have), widgets that are not song attributes crowd and separate song-specific data (e.g. funny things separating title/duration). Specific enough for you? :)

Using AMG on a regular basis has become a serious pain in the basement. Sure I _can_ do it but, honestly, I'll take every opportunity to use an alternative and more user-friendly reference site, particularly since AMG ignores about 90% of the music I listen to. Since the re-design, AMG has become a plan B in case I don't find the info elsewhere. It used to be the opposite. That's what I call a killer.

There are indeed some nice new features but they are somewhat useless if the effort to get to them is such that users prefer to opt for another website. I'll give you an ice-cream if you walk on glass shards barefoot. No thanks, masochism ain't my cup of tea.

As to angst, I'd probably use another word. Having been a software designer/developer for the past 30 or so years, I'm surfing the wave of new technology and gizmos on a daily basis and actually enjoy that stuff. I've got nothing against good gizmos, there are some, but experience helps build a critical view and separate the useful from the less useful.

As to modern times and consumer culture, you're absolutely correct, some of us happen to reject mediocrity. Not quite sure it's a source of angst though... I'm a big boy now and free to choose any reference site I wish for music. It used to be AMG for american stuff but that new design sucks mud and I would have quietly jumped ship if Zac and his team hadn't requested feedback. Since they ask nicely, I'm voicing my opinion, hoping it will help them in some way.

Having said that, I welcome a good debate anytime and don't wish to sound too contradictory.
Photo of Michel

Michel

  • 27 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
Take 2, thanks to Joey who's managed to make me think hard about that angst issue in relation to teenagers, gizmos, etc. As it turns out, it wasn't angst after all but rather related to physical strain and discomfort.

Our modern times have seen the advent of the mouse and, along with it, that of a condition called carpo-tunnel syndrome (chronic pain in the wrist), caused by repetitive use of a mouse. Another peripheral was invented, a big rolling ball pointing device, which doesn't cause such problems and is actually used mostly by people who've had wrist problems arising from using a mouse. The problem is that such devices are not easily transportable and usually stay at the office.

That's where the concept of generation comes into play. If you're an adult who has been working in an office for a few years, in our modern times, you're very likely to use a computer or a telephone as your main work-tools. Phones have been made comfortable and non-invasive by the simple addition of headsets. Computers, on the other hand and with the advent of the web, require more physical effort via mouse moves and clicks than before.

So when you access the web on your free time, from home, in the evenings or during week-ends, you don't really want anyone to tell you that you must click, scroll, or make any effort over what is strictly necessary in order to get access to the data you're seeking. In that sense the new design is highly unfriendly.

To tell you the honest truth, I've been a software developer for the past 30 years and never had wrist problems arising from working non-stop with computers, as I merely use my mouse to switch focus from one text-editing window to another, i.e. ten times per hour at the most.

I access the web from home, on my leisure time, where, strangely enough, the requirements for mouse activity are multiplied by a factor of at least two (a few hundred times more than office frequency, when not a few thousand).

Younger users, teenagers in particular, have no professional occupation requiring the constant use of a computer for the duration of an entire workday, week, month, or year. They are therefore not subjected to the risk of contracting that carpo-tunnel syndrome (unless they use a mouse to play games but Wee and playstations have seen to that problem), as they click and scroll a lot in short bursts, in the sole context of leisure.

That is, now that I fully understand my original motivation for using such words, why I think AMG is gearing its site toward a teenage audience and this new design is perceived as a nuisance for adults working in an office environment.

There exists a science by the name of ergonomy, with practical applications in the field of computer use. The problem is that most self-titled web-designers haven't studied ergonomy, just like most automobile drivers haven't studied mechanical engineering and can't therefore compete in F1, for lack of theoretical knowledge. When economical reasons take over ergonomy, we users become the victims of consumer culture, thrown upon us without our consent, yet physically affecting us. It's not even sad... it's sick.
Photo of jas

jas

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Something got lost on the way to the redesign and it was the simple value of what you had.
I don't know who you asked but the true disciples aren't happy !!
Maybe the music lovers are not a breed you understand because you had one of the best sites on the web, simple to use, concise, strong creditability, easy trailing that allowed expanded minor and magor related topic search.
It will be sadly missed.
Photo of Michel

Michel

  • 27 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
The actual root of the problem, as I see it clearly now that I've been using the beta site long enough to get over the negative first impression, is an erroneous design decision:

Someone had the excellent idea of adding sound to text but... did so in such an invasive way that access to text has suffered a substantial setback. The development team placed so much emphasis on a feature intended for the ear that it incorrectly took away features intended for the eye.

Why incorrectly, might one ask? Simply because that time-ticking gizmo, associated with a listening action triggered once in a blue moon, takes permanent real-estate away from information that is accessed much more regularly, such as track-listing.

Put much more simply, one first needs to see the bloody song title before one can feel the desire to press play. Here we have a major case of: "lookie, we now know how to make nice graphic gizmos and will re-design our site to show the world how creative we are... er, and the next re-design will focus on actual usability of the site for other purposes but we're not yet sure when that'll happen".

That is, put is a nutshell, my humble opinion about this re-design.
Photo of Gary Smith

Gary Smith

  • 9 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Whilst it's off topic, for what it's worth, I stopped using Allmovie after it's redesign.

Zac, I know you've got your hands full with this beta, and you're doing a great job dealing with some heated opinions, but you might like to pass some of this feedback to the allmovie team too.
Photo of Michel

Michel

  • 27 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
Zooming out a bit, I'd also wish to point out a serious anachronism in that new design: IT (Information Technology, aka computing, for the neophytes), since its inception, has geared its efforts toward replacing sequential access to information by various forms of more direct access, in order to help humans save time.

There are various schools of thought, such as direct access (hash tables), indexed access (index tables), or more generally data organized in a tree-model, which is a compromise between the latter two approaches, but everyone agrees that sequential access is the least efficient and therefore most costly method.

So what do you guys do, along the likes of Google? You re-invent sequential access to data! :)

A user typically wishes to navigate a hierarchy in order to find an item. In the case of a reference site for music, one would think of a layered model similar to:

genre -> [subgenre ->] artist -> album -> track

with selection mechanisms (list, expansion widget, rollodex-type field, etc) at each level, thus enabling users to navigate a site efficiently/comfortably and find what they want quickly. The faster the better, particularly if the task is repetitive (see loops, profiling, bottlenecks, performance improvement, i.e. the meaning of life for any software designer).

Any design preventing such "binary" form of access by saying: "wait! before you can pick the next level down a hierarchy (binary access), you must first revert to sequential browsing in order to use our selection mechanism..." is going against the course of history and the essential reason for using computers in the first place, to bypass the sequential drawbacks inherent to large collections of objects.

Anyone who's attempted using Google, or any similarly designed web search engine, to gather information about something not for sale on eBay, Amazon, or iTunes, will testify to the fact that sequential access is unpleasant and extremely time-consuming. As though sequential look-ups weren't tedious enough, some designers make the task more difficult by peppering our visual field with irrelevant data.

In the case of Google, it's writing up to ten times on each returned results page that a reference was omitted for transgressing some stupid and very local Millenium Act which, at the scale at which the web operates, is utter nonsense. The planet doesn't and will never live under American rule. It's pure utopia, or an extreme case of near-sightedness. Don't get me wrong... I _am_ an American citizen, so it's not a silly question of being pro or anti anything.

In the case of AMG, it's all them graphic gizmos getting in the way of direct access to information. Nice and sometimes very useful features, that's not the point, but implemented in the form of hurdles to efficiency. Both AMG and Google, wannabe leaders in their field, are taking us back to the middle ages of IT. I'd like to stand up and simply say no, in the name of computer users who, to put it bluntly, prefer freedom over slavery and information over propaganda, be it commercial or political.

One might ask: and what does politics have to do with that re-design? Everything. In a society, one either chooses to share culture and knowledge with the rest of the planet or, as is the case since showbiz was invented, to exploit the masses by force-feeding them mediocrity in order to make a personal profit (see hit parades, high-frequency advertizing, Microsoft, McDonald's).

If, like Amazon, AMG considers that artist A is "similar" to artist B in the sense that consumers who bought a CD from A also bought a CD from B in a statistically substantial way, AMG is diffusing commercial information under the guise of a cultural service. Either you really inform the masses and help them develop a musical culture, or you promote a market. That is a political choice when dealing with an audience as global as that reached by the web.

[zoom-out mode off]
Photo of Michel

Michel

  • 27 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
Since there are lots of doubters out there, I've just gone through the effort of looking for a practical example to substantiate my claims. Look-up Blondie. It may not be the crux of musical quality, your mileage may vary, but at least it's a band and a musical genre (late commercial punk/rock) I know decently well. Each of us was a teenager at least once in their life...

Now anyone a bit versed in that style of music will have heard of another band, Divinyls, also known as... the Australian Blondie. Should it be on a "similar artists" list, above anyone else and, in particular, far above the Clash (not commercial whatsoever) or Bananarama (not punk/rock)? You bet your booties!

Does your site even mention Divinyls under artists similar to Blondie? Take a wild guess... :)

Does that feature provide us with what it claims to do? Not even close. It is nothing more than a commercial tool, useful to the record industry, and an invaluable source of misinformation for users seeking cultural knowledge.

In conclusion, AMG and its user community would benefit infinitely more if some of that cosmetic re-design effort was re-directed to improving the accuracy and completeness of your database. About 70% of my music collection (80.000 titles and growing) is missing from what you dare call a reference site for all music and, to make things even worse, the little you have in store is too often incorrect.

First things first: if you're gonna play the part of a serious reference site, get data, lots of it, and make sure it is more often correct than not, or perhaps consider changing that name to ShoppingGuideForTheMusicallyIlliterate. Only in the latter case would flashy and invasive gizmos make so much sense, as would a "similar to" relationship based upon commercial criteria.

There's a saying in French to describe this kind of situation: you're trying to sit across two chairs, i.e. you're likely to land on the floor unless you pick one. Would you please make up your minds and pick a chair for AMG? Or are you saying you've already picked one and some of us are hard of hearing, or confused by so many false pretenses (reference site, all music, guide, informed reviews)? I'm not harsh and judgemental, at least not yet... merely asking whether this is chicken or turkey.
Photo of Zac Johnson

Zac Johnson, Official Rep

  • 3331 Posts
  • 189 Reply Likes
I just wanted to point out that we do list The Divinyls as "Followers" since they were clearly influenced by Blondie but came later:



Additionally, on the Divinyls page we indicate that they were influenced by Blondie:
Photo of Michel

Michel

  • 27 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
Er... that's probably why I couldn't find them in the first place. I'm not saying the data ain't there... it obviously is in this case, only misplaced and in a somewhat confusing way. What criteria do you use to decide who goes as similar, follower, or both?

I mean, why are Nena and Divinyls only followers when they happen to be the most musically similar? For having started their career after Blondie? Then Eurythmics, who started well after Blondie and can hardly be considered similar in style, other than for having a female lead vocalist making out with her lead guitarist, should follow the same logic.

If you mention Adam Ant as similar, then why not Ultravox? Both bands started with hard-punk-rock and climbed the steps of the new age movement, just like Blondie and at the same time. How'bout Siouxie & the Banshees? That's yet another contemporaneous similar/follower band missing from them lists.

So you have a little more data than I originally thought. Surprise, surprise. It doesn't mean there is much: at least half of the planet's musical production is still nowhere to be seen on the site and, thanks for confirming my point, the little there is needs serious re-organizing and correcting before it can become useful and reliable. At the moment, what really charaterizes AMG is the random nature of information discovery: the info might be there but not necessarily correct, nor where you expect to find it, and the new design makes it even harder to find than before.

If you ask me, someone's got their priorities mixed up with that cosmetic re-design.
Photo of Michel

Michel

  • 27 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
On second thought... WHAT?!!! Am I to interpret your answer as: "a follower may not necessarily be similar"? Sorry, it took me a while and a shower to spot the nonsense in that statement.

I beg to differ, Zac. A follower has by definition a style similar to that of the followed artist, or it wouldn't be a follower, and Divinyls should therefore appear under the similar heading. Saying it's somewhere else is playing on words: it's not where it's expected to be found by users who take column headings at face value.

If your definition of similar varies to the point of making Divinyls dissimilar to Blondie, you probably need to explain it clearly to dumbnuts like myself.
Photo of Michel

Michel

  • 27 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
Here's another example in point. Earlier in the day I was listening to a song, from some compilation album: "bei mir bist du schön", which roughly translates to "I can see your home clearly from space-station MIR", or something along those lines. Didn't know who was playing but it sure sounded like the PRO (Pasadena Roof Orchestra). T'was in fact Dr Zoot. So I looked-up the latter on Wiki and eventually checked AMG for discography & similar bands (notice the order, it says a lot).

Same style (retro swing), same repertoire (bei mir bist du schön), same time period (contemporaries). Only one notable difference: Dr Zoot is a US band, whereas the PRO is UK-based (next galaxy to the left). You'd think AMG would at least list the PRO as similar to Dr Zoot... no Siree!

We're not talking about some obscure one-time wonder from South-Eastern Bengladesh. I've got a dozen albums in stock by the PRO, who've probably released at least twice that amount, toured the US and Germany, and are a reference when it comes to retro swing orchestras. Okokok, their groupies come in wheelchairs but... other than that, they're as unmissable as the Beatles in their category. Er, you've heard of the Beatles, right? :)

What must a band do to be considered similar on AMG? Undergo plastic surgery and change their name to OriginalBandName 2.0? Anyway, what do you think resulted from that observation? I simply gave up looking for bands similar to Dr Zoot on AMG, with the comment: these guys have no idea what they're talking about, let's not waste anymore time on such a useless feature.

I don't mean to say it's fundamentally useless, naah. Merely that AMG too often turns a very useful feature into a useless one, by lack of data or accuracy. Do you guys still wanna compare widget sizes (cosmetic issues vs. the meaning of life itself)? Suit yourselves... in the meantime I'll go learn about music elsewhere. Any tips would be greatly appreciated.

And please don't tell me I could find about the PRO being similar to Dr Zoot by going on the PRO's page, like you did about Blondie and Divinyls not long ago. It's funny the first time around but only works if you already know the answer.

PS1: nothing personal Zac, this is rather aimed at the Cincinnati-based editorial staff.
PS2: I've got nothing against Cincinnati, it's just an expression.
PS3: for our younger readers, PS stands for Post Scriptum... not PlayStation.
Photo of CM

CM

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Great. Here we go, time to butcher another great site like you did with AllMovie. I stopped going there and now I'll probably stop coming to AllMusic. It's prettier but a lesser site.

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
Rovi butchers another web site. Hooray..
Photo of mike

mike

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Unfortunately the new design - which I saw this morning for the first time - looks like a Target or WalMart ad. It took a small eternity for me to find some of the features I look for when I come to the site (and others I just gave up trying to find) and like I said: when I finally did find them they resembled advertisements to the point where I did not bother viewing them for more than a brief moment.

Other than those horrible huge drop down advertisements on the old design, the old design was easy to use and not offensive to me as a music lover. Meaning: I felt like I was navigating a music site that informed me and answered questions I had about bands or albums. Now I feel like I am navigating a huge advertisement that wants to sell me something...
Photo of boredingilbert

boredingilbert

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Wow, what a disaster. Why do you wish to convey so much less info so much more slowly in such a kludgy manner?
Photo of Ron Witt

Ron Witt

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Here, here!!
Photo of Genius Bar

Genius Bar

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Michel makes some good points above...
Photo of michael mascioli

michael mascioli

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
This is horrible! Cumbersome, difficult, time-consuming, and every other bad thing. What was once a valuable resource is now, as someone else said, "a gizmo for teenagers, i.e. a consumer tool more than a reference for music." Who is making these horrible decisions? Zac Johnson, an "official rep" claims, "We spent a lot of time running surveys, performing user interviews and holding design discussions to offer our information to users in ways that are engaging, updated and informative." Well, NOBODY uses this site more than I do. I use it CONSTANTLY. And *I* wasn't solicited for MY opinion. Why wasn't a general notice posted to allow ALL users to give feedback? It would not have been difficult to develop a long series of yes or no-type questions that could tell All Music what frequent users did and didn't like or want. Rather than undergo this useless, bogus revamping, they should have devoted time and enegy into cleaning up some of the errors in the site, making it even more useful and accurate. I am thoroughly disgusted....
Photo of Gustavo

Gustavo

  • 5 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Yes, for more than ten years I have been using AMG, daily, all day long. A few years ago there were, like this one, a major site revamp. In that ocassion I was invited to participate in the then new design at least giving my oppinions (the Previous...Next... links to aid navigation across Discography entries was one of my suggestions that were considered and included in that update). The result of these user involvement politics was the site that today we all like and don't want to lose.

However, this time nobody asked for my oppinion. even though I still went on using the database as muh as before. I simply don't believe they spent such a time running surveys ot whatever means of communication with users. This is a corporate decision and there is nothing that we, simply users, can do. The site sponsors, I mean, those who put the money in order to this site continues its existence, decide another thing and the result is this...
Photo of Zac Johnson

Zac Johnson, Official Rep

  • 3331 Posts
  • 189 Reply Likes
Hi Gustavo,
I'm sorry that you doubt that we ran surveys but we really did.

We had a banner at the top of AllMusic for over a month encouraging users to visit the beta site and give feedback. We reached out to the AllMusic Insiders and everyone who receives the AMG New Releases Newsletter asking for feedback. We ran a survey on AllMusic late last year and thousands of people responded.

These were the people that we took in their feedback and acted upon their requests.

Additionally, we have listened to the feedback in these threads and have been making changes based on your feedback. (The list thus far is here: https://getsatisfaction.com/allmusic/... )

Have we implemented everything everyone has asked for? No of course not.

Are we done making updates and changes to the site? No, of course not.

I certainly can't guarantee that we will make everyone happy with our choices, but we are taking in feedback and making changes based on that.

I sincerely hope you'll stick with us and see how we can keep improving the experience from here.

Zac
Photo of Ron Witt

Ron Witt

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Sorry Zac...it's utterly dysfunctional and wholly disorganized. I will never use it again.
Photo of Michel

Michel

  • 27 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
Sincerely I don't understand that trend to consider software, be it a program or a website, as the possible result of a democratic process. If such was the case, automated teller machines would be dispensing ice-cream and condoms alongside banknotes. Besides, if such a process could work, I'd be among the first informed, along with all professional software designers/developers.

The all-important question, which apparently was neither asked nor answered properly, is "who will use that site and for what purpose?". The incorrect answer was "everyone and for every use under the sun", pleasing the largest number who don't have to return to AMG on a regular basis and won't give a whoop-dee-do anyway. This forum, visibly fueled by power-users, is very clear and vocal about the issue of usability vs. fashionable attractiveness, saying in various yet unequivocal ways that a compromise is a terrible idea.

In the restaurant business, people know that a return customer is worth ten tourists and therefore cater especially to the former. They are the ones spreading the news to potential customers. You could see it as common sense but, taking into account that our web designers don't seem to know much about music (nor web design in fact) and their music editors not much about computers (nor music either), it's not really surprising to see this site go bonkers.

I've got an idea. Why don't you select user proposals by the number of vowels it takes to express them? It's as silly as your democratic process and has no reason to produce worse results, at least from a statistical perspective. You guys are really giving the world of IT a bad name you know? :)
Photo of Zac Johnson

Zac Johnson, Official Rep

  • 3331 Posts
  • 189 Reply Likes
We had a banner at the top of AllMusic for over a month encouraging users to visit the beta site and give feedback. We reached out to the AllMusic Insiders and everyone who receives the AMG New Releases Newsletter asking for feedback. We ran a survey on AllMusic late last year and thousands of people responded.

These were the people that we took in their feedback and acted upon their requests.

We are in a position where we are trying to be cognizant of our "power-user" audience but also be attractive to more casual users and the "non-research" crowd.

Choosing new features by the number of vowels used in the request is certainly an interesting proposal. I appreciate that request. I don't know that we're necessarily giving the world of IT a bad name, but I certainly appreciate the idea that our site could hold that much sway in the world!

Take care,
Zac
Photo of Ron Witt

Ron Witt

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I never saw it because I'm a music fan. What you got and bought into is feedback from computer geeks who like websites to be like cleverly designed and useless videogames. You should not have listened to them. You should have organized the site like a good reference BOOK (which AMG once was). This is the worst thing ever for someone who needs your site for work purposes. Sadly, I will never use it again and acquire a used copy of one of your old books. You guys are idiots for listening to the beta testers (who are far greater idiots).
Photo of Genius Bar

Genius Bar

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Yeah perhaps you should have considered that only certain types of people would even bother 'clicking on a banner' ; everyone else was too busy reading valuable, accessable information
Photo of Michel

Michel

  • 27 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
Hey Zac, it's good to have you here.

Since you seem interested in original proposals, here's a winner for you: how'bout two distinct and separate shells for the same data? I mean different websites, each with a design geared toward its specific audience, yet both accessing the same database.

Please don't tell me it's twice the work, as you already have both versions already in place and functioning. Soooo, now that we've come to the bottom line and you have a solution pleasing everyone... what objection are you going to imagine this time?

As to my comment about the world of IT, just read the threads on that re-design and you'll see what I mean. These people complain about technological issues which are easily remedied elsewhere, i.e. it's feasible but you've managed to chose otherwise. When I say you, I mean those two poor designers who fell for peer pressure, for lack of knowing better, not you Zac. Who's responsible in the eyes of such users? Not the music editor, not shareholders, no... web designers, i.e. IT people who are supposed to resolve problems in the first place. Well, at least some of us.

Any website is by definition accessible globally. Any stupid mistake appearing on the front page of Google, MSN, Discogs or AMG is potentially seen by dozens of millions. It doesn't mean AMG (or the rest) holds any sway, nah... simply that more eyes are looking at your site than at that of the local gazette in Petaluma, CA (hi guys!). In short you have more weight on your shoulders for claiming to do what you ain't really doing: calling your site _all_music. Not sway... coverage and visibility, which is very nasty when you've got Picasso and Van Gogh in your web design team.
Photo of Zac Johnson

Zac Johnson, Official Rep

  • 3331 Posts
  • 189 Reply Likes
The old site was built on a lot of older technologies that were in constant need of updating/bandaging. More info here: http://www.allmusic.com/faq#change

Part of the purpose of this redesign was to move away from a lot of the older (struggling) processes we needed to maintain to keep the old site running. We won't be able to keep the old version going, I'm sorry to say.

While there certainly have been folks being verbose about their issues with the redesign, there are many users who have been in favor of it, both here: https://getsatisfaction.com/allmusic/... and on Twitter https://twitter.com/#!/search/realtim...

It has been a mixed bag, and to be honest I was anticipating much more vitriol and outright rejection from a number of our power-users. To my surprise (while there certainly have been negative reactions) much of it is positive which makes me breathe a sigh of relief (at least we didn't cheese EVERYONE off).

That said (as I usually say) this is still a work in progress. We've added many features based on user feedback, particularly in the areas of Classical music and offering more abilities to sort lists.
(see the whole list here: https://getsatisfaction.com/allmusic/... )

We're still working on it.

Your comments about "too much white space" and "It takes too long to scroll down a long discography/track list in the layout" are not falling on deaf ears.

Thanks as always.
Photo of Michel

Michel

  • 27 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
Thank you Zac
Photo of Ron Witt

Ron Witt

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Ah...an admission that you were just making the jobs of the computer geeks easier. Your job is to make it easier for USERS.
Photo of mike

mike

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I am not a poweruser. But I do use this site about 10 times a day on average. MANY times when deciding if I want to buy a particular record by a band I am unfamiliar with or not. Your site was the deciding factor on a ton of stuff I have purchased over the past decade.

And today I got the new email detailing new releases. I wanted to read about 6 of them. I gave up trying to find any useful info on every single one of them after clicking on each link. It was just too frustrating and even one album took up so much space on my screen that I was scrolling all over the place just to see a page layout that gave me a headache just looking at it. WAY too much superfluous garbage on each page.

The new site is horrible and I have neither the patience nor the inclination to figure out how to use it. And that means I'll probably be sticking with the tried and true where my future music purchases are concerned. As far as newer bands etc... the effort that it appears I will have to make on this new version of the site is just plain not worth it to me. So newer bands will just get ignored by me from now on I suppose.

The new site is awful. Seriously.
Photo of Howie

Howie

  • 23 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
No matter *what* you do it's still a sluggish, JAVA laden site that's just not as responsive as the old AllMusic. And you *can* offer both "views" if you wish. If the data is still there you just need a interface written without all the JAVA sluggishness to pull from the same backend. From what you've stated both here and on the all-but-abandoned AllMovie feedback site the impression I get is that it was primarily a back-end database redesign/upgrade that seemingly necessitated the poor decision to change the front end in such a detrimental fashion.
Photo of Skip

Skip

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Yesterday (5/29), I received a prompt reply from Zac in regard to my concern about the new site. He encouraged me to give it a try. Well, I have and I dislike it intensely. He advised me that the old site would not be able to continue without offering a technical reason as to why that is true. So, Zac, is it possible to offer both views? If not, I'll be going elsewhere.
Photo of Daniel Boulanger

Daniel Boulanger

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Well he did mention that they were technical reason, which i understand (who would carry old programs that u constantly need to patch) but that doesn't explain the change in ...everything. They could've migrate to a more powerful program without sacrificing everything that was good with the old site. I hate the "out with the old, in with the new" philosophy. I prefer, if it's not broken, why fix it!
Photo of Nguyen Hoang Ha

Nguyen Hoang Ha

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
It is awful if you look at the classical music album tracks. I can't tell where one specific track belong to which of works. You guys put a track which is not a part of specific work in the same column. eg: 1812 Overture is not a part of "Symphony No. 4 in F minor, Op. 36" but to put it the same column makes me misunderstand that 1812 overture is one part of Symphony No. 4 in F minor, Op. 36. Don't make it worse, make it better. For 5 years I've been your fan, please don't let me leave your website
Photo of Zac Johnson

Zac Johnson, Official Rep

  • 3331 Posts
  • 189 Reply Likes
We'll take a look. Thanks.
Photo of Diogenio Pithari

Diogenio Pithari

  • 0 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Come on now guys, don't tell me that also allmusic has been taken over by hipsters?
We really liked the old school allmusic.com site, because the importance of this service is in the originality of the information provided by the music-lovers album reviewers, and not the marketing crap. Ok now it is full of advertisements all over the place and it looks like bloody Pitchfork and Last.fm
Photo of Seth Derrick

Seth Derrick

  • 2 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
I've been using allmusic for over ten years. I was even contacted years ago by allmusic to be part of some beta testing and opinion giving (you guys sent a pretty cool poster for my participation). This site has, in this redesign, gone from something very easy to use and find TONS of information to a flattened out catalog. This isn't just re-skinning; this is a drastic alteration to the ability to find relative information. I used to be able to stumble across things here because of all the mapping of information between bands and genres. So, for instance, I could see what bands most likely influenced a band and see what bands were being influenced by the band I was looking up. I don't need allmusic to just look up one band and get its discography. There a thousand websites that already do that. Allmusic used to be a research tool. I am very very sad to see this unique research tool so gutted and neutered.
Photo of Zac Johnson

Zac Johnson, Official Rep

  • 3331 Posts
  • 189 Reply Likes
Our Similar Artists, Influenced By and Followers information is still there. Take a look for the "Related" tab on an Artist page:
http://www.allmusic.com/artist/the-ro...
Photo of Seth Derrick

Seth Derrick

  • 2 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Zac - thanks for pointing out where it got buried. I was looking at bands this morning and, granted they were somewhat obscure but they had discographies and bios and star ratings for albums but that whole "Related" tab (uselessly ambiguous label btw) wasn't even there. This one for instance:

http://www.allmusic.com/artist/portal...

I have never seen a band (and I listen to a LOT of obscure stuff) with no Similar Artists, etc.

Anyways...okay, I'm a little less sad. Still FAR less friendly a design. Very cold and overly "designed". It looks like a sample in a book that teaches web design instead of a site crafted by years of feedback from users. Too bad. This used to be one of my favorite places on the 'net. Now I might as well just Google and go to Pitchfork or Wikipedia or wherever else AdWords takes me.

Cheers and thanks again for the quick feedback.
Photo of Zac Johnson

Zac Johnson, Official Rep

  • 3331 Posts
  • 189 Reply Likes
Thanks Seth,
We're working on a better title for that tab. Maybe just "Similar" would get the point across.

I know the design is pretty foreign, but we continue to make changes to try to make the interface more useful (even if it does look more "cold" and less "homey" as another user put it).