Website update – 3rd July

  • 12
  • Announcement
  • Updated 3 weeks ago
  • (Edited)
Hi folks,

We've got a few changes to talk about today:

Back in November we released improved versions of our artist, album, and track pages to subscribers, these changes are now visible to everyone. You can find a detailed breakdown of what's changed in our original announcement https://getsatisfaction.com/lastfm/topics/website-design-update-rolling-out-today.

A few artist pages features such as top listeners and past events will be slowly rolled out to all users over the next few days.

We're also experimenting with a new bookmarking feature, subscriber only for now, this is a button on artist, album, track, and tag pages:

Bookmark icon

Clicking it will add the item to your personal list of bookmarks (https://www.last.fm/music/+bookmarks ). This should help you keep track of music recommendations that you want to check out later, but we'd quite like to know how else you plan on using it, and how we might make it more useful.

Lastly, you can now find your recommended events on the main events page https://www.last.fm/events by selecting 'Recommended events' from the 'All events' dropdown menu at the top. This gives you more control over the date and location events are returned for, compared to their previous home https://www.last.fm/home/events.

Love,
Team Last.fm
Photo of Thomas Hooper

Thomas Hooper, Web developer

  • 59 Posts
  • 24 Reply Likes

Posted 2 months ago

  • 12
Photo of Patrick

Patrick

  • 1299 Posts
  • 932 Reply Likes
Has anybody noticed that when you visit the top listeners' tab, last.FM recommends you follow people that you already follow? Is this a bug? I noticed this three days ago.
(Edited)
Photo of Cornel Diaconu

Cornel Diaconu

  • 836 Posts
  • 361 Reply Likes
Errr... when I visit top listeners of the band Germind, for instance, (https://www.last.fm/music/Germind/+listeners ) I see zero users that I follow;
but, frankly, it wouldn't be strange for me even if there are. I mean I don't see it as a bug if some of those users are already in my follow list.
Am I wrong, or this should only display users that happen to scrobble this artist, more or less intensively, in the recent history ? (can't say if it's that last day, or the last week or what time frame).

Or ... perhaps I misunderstood the meaning of your question ? :-)

Photo of Jon

Jon, Community & Customer Services

  • 4785 Posts
  • 3576 Reply Likes
Yep, that looks like a bug. Thanks for reporting.
Photo of den_laden

den_laden

  • 4 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Where are the song lyrics? I see only following message: "Unfortunately we’re not authorised to show these lyrics". You added separate subpage /+lyrics to song pages, but you have no rights to show genuine song lyrics, or what?
Photo of WiktoRozrabiaka

WiktoRozrabiaka

  • 54 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
A collaboration of last.fm and Genius would be a good thing imo
Photo of den_laden

den_laden

  • 4 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
they chose Musixmatch instead
Photo of Patrick

Patrick

  • 1299 Posts
  • 932 Reply Likes
I noticed this too, the lyrics are gone.
Photo of cocieto

cocieto

  • 47 Posts
  • 78 Reply Likes
lol, another feature bites the dust. I'm sure it will come back like, you know, in 10 years
(Edited)
Photo of Hans-Jürgen

Hans-Jürgen, Moderator

  • 2277 Posts
  • 1183 Reply Likes
they chose Musixmatch instead
Only for other countries than the UK and the US, and only for the snippets on the track pages. The full lyrics are only available by Metrolyrics for these two countries.
Photo of rancky

rancky

  • 8 Posts
  • 37 Reply Likes
Okay,  besides the whole "Track name - Artist" orientation switch that everyone else has already shown their dismay for, my biggest problem is the padding in between scrobbles. lt just makes the whole page longer for no reason and makes it more difficult to compare if you're looking in the list view.  Also "Top Tracks" are just a mess now since track name is on top of artist  and as a list it's so unreadable now.
Photo of von Nachtmahr

von Nachtmahr

  • 82 Posts
  • 73 Reply Likes
The User didn't want the Songtitle-Artist Thing in 2015... and they didn't want it today. Why are you stubborn and didn't get it?
Photo of Kougeru

Kougeru

  • 159 Posts
  • 228 Reply Likes
Switch it back to Artist - Song. That's how the VAST majority like it and want it ...and it's simply more logically. You say most "music players" have title first? what...? I've literally  never seen that illogical layout.

I would literally PAY to have the the old interface back. That's how much I hate this "Title-Artist" crap.


Also why is everything so big? I feel like the "Boxers" that the recently played tracks are on got "Taller"? Or is the font just bigger? Either way, I literally have to scroll over twice as much as before. It's a huge waste of space - that's the opposite of user friendly. Having to scroll more to see the same amount of info is bad
(Edited)
Photo of Cornel Diaconu

Cornel Diaconu

  • 836 Posts
  • 361 Reply Likes
Oh, you did not see anything like this, have you ?

Okay, let me help you with this:
- here's a image capture with the Spotify desktop player:

(the web player uses the format Track ABOVE artist name, with the track in bold font:



- here's another capture, from  Deezer (web player):


- here's another one, from Google Music (web player):


Shell I continue with more ?!?
What do you know .... ALL of these services have this order : Track - Artist !!!

Hell, even my desktop music player (Clementine) have this same order (of course I can change this, but I am so accustomed to this, it's more useful to me like this).
I bet virtually all desktop music players (winamp included) have the very same order by default ! Can't judge about Android or iPhone apps (don't use any myself), but I'd guess even they have the same default order.

So, what are you talking about there ?!?

Why are you so obstinate into something that seems to be isolated ?
(it looks like last.fm was the last, or among the last online service that kept this alignment of artist - track).

I'm not defending this option (in fact, if this would be something you can chose from in your user settings, I may very well adopt the Artist - Track format myself), but common, why are you so fierce into this particular option ? ... this is already so ridiculous !

There are plenty of other situations where the site works not-so-optimal, or even plainly bad, so all these complaints about such a minor change, simply do not make any sense !
Photo of Kougeru

Kougeru

  • 159 Posts
  • 228 Reply Likes
Streaming players are irrelevant.  Anyone using last.fm should know this, considering how they get tags wrong so very often. They're not worth using for that reason alone, audio quality aside. I'm talking about proper media players which listed Artist-Title, things people used a lot back in the 90s to the late 00s. Winamp for example had Artist-Title https://repository-images.githubusercontent.com/26149893/956fcc80-612f-11e9-9c6a-cd120bc50de1 so you're wrong there.This is how the vast majority did things. itunes was the main outlier from what I can gather in my search just now and I believe streaming sites copied them. As I said, I've personally never seen a player list Title before Artist, I never said I used any of those services you screenshotted.Not sure what the point in you posting them is. I didn't say their statement was wrong. just simply that I personally never saw any have it that way.



Why am I so obstinate? It's an illogical change. The only time having Title first makes sense is when you're looking at an album list that has the same artist for every song. Having the artist first in those situations could be seen as redundant since you already know they are the artist. That's not what last.fm's "recently played" is. On database where you mix multiple artists quite often, such as "recently played", it makes zero sense to do things that way. Artist-Title is the only logical format.

Also the term is "Come on", not "common".

Why is it "ridiculous" to dislike an illogical change? Or even a logical one if the user simply doesn't prefer it. It's not ridiculous at all. What is ridiculous is your reaction to other people simply stating they'd like the OPTION to go back to the old layout. Why do you want to your force you preferences on other people? That's dehumanizing. God forbid people have different tastes than you.

And it is not a "minor change" to me and many other people. Whether it's "minor" or not, is a subjective thing. Normally I'm content as long as scrobbling works, but this just makes it irritating to even look at the site.

And I'll state it again, but the layout overall is bad because it simply takes up far more space. Having to scroll more than twice as much as before is terrible design. My "edit" button is even getting cut off now cuz everything to the left of it so much bigger than before.

Overall, I think a better version would be to put the artist above the tracks. Then have it so if songs are played by the same artist, it would only need to show the artist name once - above the most recently played track played from the artist in a row. Basically "bundling" tracks from the same artist together if they're played in a row. This would look nicer and also save space since the artist wouldn't need to be displayed every time. Obviously this would only affect situations where you marathon the same artist, but as I said before, that's also the ONLY time it makes sense to have the format Title-Artist. I think it's a good compromise. It makes it easy to see artist and titles, while also saving a lot of space to the right of the - space that could then be used for more information.


Anyway, I see zero harm in simply letting the users (especially subscribers choose the layout the prefer. Many other sites allow this because there's very little downsides to doing so.
(Edited)
Photo of Artur Ost

Artur Ost

  • 240 Posts
  • 320 Reply Likes
@Cornel Diaconu all GOOD music players this days have settings that can be changed by users at any time how they want! You can set up the layout as you wish, change skins, colors, fonts, etc. And the most important thing - their developers constantly on connection with users at the forums and listen THEM (even if it's free software). Just look at MusicBee.
Photo of End_y

End_y

  • 15 Posts
  • 99 Reply Likes
@Cornel Diaconu Streaming players are irrelevant - I second this. Tomorrow somebody will press the big red button and there won't be internet at all. What are you goin to do then, dig for them tapes in the closet?
And I can't remember a single music player on Linux that has "track" before "artist". I might've never tried that Clementine of yours, of course. The last time I was forced to work on Linux I ended up with cmus -  a great console player, with (surprise-surprise) "artist-track" default order.
And on Windows absolute best player is foobar2000, and the default order there is "artist - album - track". That is the best order for the people who listen to not-so-mainstream music (the nerds, if you like).  If one listens to Kanye West, or Britney Spears then "Hit me baby one more time" is all that's needed. But dig a little deeper and track names become irrelevant without the name of the performer.  
(Edited)
Photo of Cornel Diaconu

Cornel Diaconu

  • 836 Posts
  • 361 Reply Likes
Huh ?
Streaming players, irrelevant ?
What year are you leaving in ?!?
I'm in 2019, btw...

Let's see if you are right, shell we ?
Judging from this compilation list with windows apps (music players):
https://fossbytes.com/best-free-music-player-windows/
I see that Foobar is the ONLY one piece of software that uses this peculiar order (artist - track) ! And even foobar does this when you chose to display the main window with "simple list", (I mean this one:
https://www.foobar2000.org/images/img/main-simple.png) and I guess this is not the default setting anyway  - I'm only guessing, since I did not use this software.


So ... what are you talking about ?

Do we need to further investigate the plethora of music players available out there ?
I can bet we shell see the same results as in the list above.

I accepted it, despite my personal preference for the format artist - track.
Why can't you ?!?

It's not horror, not ugly, not even counterintuitive; it's just a change, and a minor one. It emphasizes (a bit) on the track, which is not so bad an idea, after all (again, you are scrobbling songs, not artists).

P.S Yeah, I just (re)tried Winamp on a Windows system, and indeed it had this order artist - track name (probably this is what made me prefer it, if any other thing...)


Photo of Cornel Diaconu

Cornel Diaconu

  • 836 Posts
  • 361 Reply Likes
@Kougeru

wait a second ... where did you got this impression that I need everyone to align to my personal taste ?
If you read carefully my previous statements, you surely find that I already said that I am one of the users who would prefer this Artist - Track order.
But on the other hand I find this a so minor change that it's not worth this fuss, at all !

I mostly listen to whole albums in a row, so in some way I could benefit from your idea of presenting Artist only once, and then all songs listed until the next artist comes into play.
BUT .... this is the main reason I gave up the player Amarok in my Linux system: it groups tracks this way, and believe me, it's very annoying to have them like this !
Current situation is  much more useful, despite the redundancy.

Probably my current personal setting: the maxim allowed number (50) of displayed tracks in recent tracks, artists, tracks and albums in their respective top,  makes me scroll the most, according to the problem you are complaining (larger spaces around lines with text - right ?)  ... what can I say, I'm not that much bothered by it ... I scroll until I find what I need.
I even can't find current layout so much "white space padding" as a lot has described ... can't explain why, it simply do not bother me (and it's not a forceful choice, just to bug you all with it).
There was a complaint about large white space at the right side of the page (?) ... maybe this part is reserved for future re-implementation of the long awaited "About me" section ?


P.S. I managed to find more players that defaults to this "artist - track" format in my Linux :-)) than when searching for Windows (okay, some of these tried to copy winamp, at least in the layout).
Am I right to assume this is the current preference around media players ?
I'd say yes, but you say it's rather otherwise ? :-)
Photo of End_y

End_y

  • 15 Posts
  • 99 Reply Likes
@Cornel 
First of all. I'm living in the same year as everyone, and in this year of 2019 I prefer to have my music in a form of actual files stored (and backed-up) on my PC.  It's just more practical, albeit a little harder (the files got to be downloaded first). I value my collection, chosen and selected throughout the years way too much to be reliant upon web connection. And  I'm not alone in my choice, that's a fact. Not a "bet", which you seem to do too much. 
As much as it is a fact that foobar2000 is the best software to listen and manage your collection on Windows, functionality-wise. You can distrust me on that one, but as someone who's been using Windows since 96 and listening to mp3s since 98 I'll stand firm by my statement. Foobar2000 IS the best music player, rest is negligible. 
And if I remember correctly, when last.fm plugin is installed into Windows system there're 3 musical players considered as the "default" - Winamp, Foobar, Windows Media PLayer, 2 of which got the "artist-title" order as we found out already. Can't say anything about WMP though (apart from its' visualization possibility. Such a hypnotic  thing to watch).  

Next to what we are actually scrobbling, artists or tracks (or maybe albums?).
Can you tell me the artists who did such "songs" as, say:
  • Jah Love Dub
  • Etude in C-minor
  • Maqam Nahawand
  • Untitled
  • Engorged pestilence
Just as an example. You won't be able to name the perfromer just due to a sheer number of artists who can name their tracks like that.
We don't even need the artist name for "Hotel California", "Stairway to Heaven" or "Nothing Else Matters". But the more obscure and non-mainstream music one listens to the less relevant track names became. Even the album title is more important then the track title.

But all this text would be unneeded if Last.fm took a page from those who develop the music players and allowed  customising that thing to one's liking. 
 But that would only be possible if "team last.fm" had a person who is actually competent in web development. After observing what's being done (and, for the most part, NOT being done) for the past 5 years - it's clear that such person is lacking. 

(Edited)
Photo of Ivan S.

Ivan S.

  • 5 Posts
  • 38 Reply Likes
Basically all desktop players i've ever used had Artist-Track order, that includes AIMP, foobar2000, Winamp and some others. Also on Windows you obviously have Artist-Track filenames of songs (unless they're in the folder of an album of a single artist)

But the main thing is, just because last.fm jumped on the bandwagon of streaming services' Track-Artist order doesn't mean that it's a better choice. Most people who actually listen to a lot of artists prefer usual logical order of Artist-Track. I can see why some people prefer reverse order, and as many have mentioned it's because a big part of them is just listening to a bunch of pop songs for which they need the name of the song first.

I think the main part of last.fm community are people who listen to a lot of different artists, and they won't benefit from the reverse order. Someone already wrote it somewhere in this tread, i'll just reiterate: last.fm owners don't understand what majority of the userbase of this site is. And most of their questionable decisions derived from that
Photo of Ivan S.

Ivan S.

  • 5 Posts
  • 38 Reply Likes
Basically all desktop players i've ever used had Artist-Track order, that includes AIMP, foobar2000, Winamp and some others. Also on Windows you obviously have Artist-Track filenames of songs (unless they're in the folder of an album of a single artist)

But the main thing is, just because last.fm jumped on the bandwagon of streaming services' Track-Artist order doesn't mean that it's a better choice. Most people who actually listen to a lot of artists prefer usual logical order of Artist-Track. I can see why some people prefer reverse order, and as many have mentioned it's because a big part of them is just listening to a bunch of pop songs for which they need the name of the song first.

I think the main part of last.fm community are people who listen to a lot of different artists, and they won't benefit from the reverse order. Someone already wrote it somewhere in this tread, i'll just reiterate: last.fm owners don't understand what majority of the userbase of this site is. And most of their questionable decisions derived from that
Photo of Ivan S.

Ivan S.

  • 5 Posts
  • 38 Reply Likes
(nice, for a singe click of "submit" my comment has been posted twice, and i couldn't  delete the second one)
(Edited)
Photo of Cornel Diaconu

Cornel Diaconu

  • 836 Posts
  • 361 Reply Likes
@End_y
the one with the year, it was a joke, of course, and hope you considered it as such.

I'm not a full-online-streaming person myself, you know ?
In fact I didn't reach more than 25% of online listening (mostly from Spotify); the most part of my scrobbling are still from local computer, with that Clementine player (given that I don't regularly use a Windows computer, you realise I could not be on your side with foobar being the best player around :-) )

But there's something I don't get about your example:
when you have those song titles, you also have the artist name aside them, so, frankly I don't get the point with them. 
In fact I could counter that example with this: imagine the same list, but only with the corresponding artists, without those song titles .... tell me what you understand of this new list :-)

I do ground my last.fm library on the artist list, and this is probably the key figure for the vast majority of the users.

Maybe the difference between our opinions is based on the music players themselves ?
I use my player just to add a few artists, one album after the other, and just listen to them
I don't compile large playlists, don't care about tags, genres (other than the ones that generally describes the music -- sometime I listen to Rammstein and the likes, some other times I listen to Loreen McKennitt and similar), and thus the important factor is the song title, despite the playlist is ordered by artist/album.

For my personal reasons, the titles and the songs (sadly, album names are not quite so, at least until now) are almost equally important.

My main point on this subject is this: there is no diminished importance of artist in you homepage, and even more on your library, with this change from Artist - Track, to Track - Artist.

On the first attempt of the similar switch, yes, I had a lot of missed clicks because of the change (clicking on artist, instead of the song title !), in the beginning . Of course it disrupted my experience with last.fm, for a while.
With this new attempt, I had no such mistake, zero ! From the very first switch of the layout ! In fact I didn't actually noticed the switch in the first attempts to inspect the scrobbles of some song and/or artist ! I'm not joking or exaggerating this.
And thus I consider now the complaints to have no real grounds (other then stubburnnness in demanding some detail).
Photo of Ensor

Ensor

  • 86 Posts
  • 236 Reply Likes
@Ivan S.:
...i'll just reiterate: last.fm owners don't understand what majority of the userbase of this site is. And most of their questionable decisions derived from that
Absolutely correct. Since the last of the people who started last.fm left the site has been on a downward trajectory. There seems to be no clear vision about what the site should be or where it's going.

These days LFM could best be described as a ship without a rudder!

(nice, for a singe click of "submit" my comment has been posted twice, and i couldn't  delete the second one)
Yes, that's a really annoying bug in the forum software. Not only can you not delete the extra post but you can't edit it either.
Photo of Ensor

Ensor

  • 86 Posts
  • 236 Reply Likes
@Ivan S.:
...i'll just reiterate: last.fm owners don't understand what majority of the userbase of this site is. And most of their questionable decisions derived from that
Absolutely correct. Since the last of the people who started last.fm left the site has been on a downward trajectory. There seems to be no clear vision about what the site should be or where it's going.

These days LFM could best be described as a ship without a rudder!

(nice, for a singe click of "submit" my comment has been posted twice, and i couldn't  delete the second one)
Yes, that's a really annoying bug in the forum software. Not only can you not delete the extra post but you can't edit it either.
Photo of Ensor

Ensor

  • 86 Posts
  • 236 Reply Likes
@Me: IRONY!!
Photo of cptchi

cptchi

  • 140 Posts
  • 201 Reply Likes
I've always had TRACK - ARTIST in all of my desktop and phone music players and even then the fact that Last.fm had a different format than what I'm used to didn't bother me, so seeing people sudden unable to function because of this change is kinda funny.
Photo of Artur Ost

Artur Ost

  • 240 Posts
  • 320 Reply Likes
@cptchi you can't imagine how we are all happy for you! Just keep in mind "What is normal for the spider is chaos for the fly"

Photo of Bogdan Makarov

Bogdan Makarov

  • 40 Posts
  • 246 Reply Likes
Just saying, that if every streaming service is using this format, doesn't mean it's a good choice. I'm absolutely sure that it started from one service, and others just copied it without thinking. Last FM made the same bad decision jumping to bandwagon. I can now clearly see where they copied the layout and huge padding. Bad choice. For one attracted user they will use two more.
P.S. never used any streaming service and I won't. All my music is on my phone or PC, and that's where I'm streaming from. Both players have Artist-Title, because it's the only right format. P.P.S. I also a huge hater of MM/DD/YYYY date format, so guess it's coming from there :P
Photo of Bogdan Makarov

Bogdan Makarov

  • 40 Posts
  • 246 Reply Likes
Just saying, that if every streaming service is using this format, doesn't mean it's a good choice. I'm absolutely sure that it started from one service, and others just copied it without thinking. Last FM made the same bad decision jumping to bandwagon. I can now clearly see where they copied the layout and huge padding. Bad choice. For one attracted user they will use two more.
P.S. never used any streaming service and I won't. All my music is on my phone or PC, and that's where I'm streaming from. Both players have Artist-Title, because it's the only right format. P.P.S. I also a huge hater of MM/DD/YYYY date format, so guess it's coming from there :P
Photo of End_y

End_y

  • 15 Posts
  • 99 Reply Likes
@cptchi How long is your "always"? Mine is 20+ years already, and before phones became capable of playing music i've had a few portable MP3 players (not made by Apple). And every MP3 player had a simple file browser, and having folders named after albums inside artists' folders seemed like a most logical and easy approach. So having my "artist - album - track" preference stems from most logical and common way to organise files in one's system, without a help from software like iTunes. 
Bogdan Makarov Was also thinking about the american alien format  MM/DD/YYYY in regards to last.fm latest downgrade. How about instead of time format 7:39:27  we'll use 39:7:27. Would make so much more sense....
Photo of End_y

End_y

  • 15 Posts
  • 99 Reply Likes
@cptchi How long is your "always"? Mine is 20+ years already, and before phones became capable of playing music i've had a few portable MP3 players (not made by Apple). And every MP3 player had a simple file browser, and having folders named after albums inside artists' folders seemed like a most logical and easy approach. So having my "artist - album - track" preference stems from most logical and common way to organise files in one's system, without a help from software like iTunes. 
Bogdan Makarov Was also thinking about the american alien format  MM/DD/YYYY in regards to last.fm latest downgrade. How about instead of time format 7:39:27  we'll use 39:7:27. Would make so much more sense....
Photo of cptchi

cptchi

  • 140 Posts
  • 201 Reply Likes
Artur Ost, thank you for being so happy for me. I am equally sad for the people rioting about this change.

@Endy_y I am mostly talking about PC and phones. I honestly never used portable mp3 players that much. I organize my music folder as artist/album/track but I've always had track/artist/album as the order shown while the music is playing and playlists (currently using MusicBee)
(Edited)
Photo of End_y

End_y

  • 15 Posts
  • 99 Reply Likes
@cptchi It is my firm belief that operating by the means of logic (especially when "deciding" for others) if slightly more practical than anything else. And if logical file structure for most (and for you as well) is "artist - album - track" 


then having playlist organised similary is the most practical way to do 



and an assumption that people use most logical and practical approach is safer (for software and web developers in particular) than trying to guess the habits&personal preferences. 

Logic should come first. But maybe I'm just delusioned.

Photo of Cornel Diaconu

Cornel Diaconu

  • 836 Posts
  • 361 Reply Likes
@End_y
Hmm... why do you insist in calling these logical structure ? :-)
They are your personal preference about organizing the files inside your computer. Which is very OK .... for you :-)

On my own disk I save them somewhat different:
- Artist name
   -- album name (includind year, ahead of the name; ex:  2018 - Greatest hits)
       ---- each track here, having position number ahead (ex: 01 - First track no.mp3)
I do not use artist name, and/or album name for each track file ! (in fact I just hate to have these repeated on every file;
for instance, when I buy an album from Bandcamp, after I download the ZIP with the album, first thing after unzip-ing the files is to edit their names, which, of course, contain the name of the artist and album in these files !).

So, this is the logical file structure ... for me :-)
If this is making me a bit inclined to favor track before artist, yes, I accept this :-)

Your organize method is not at all practical for me.
Here's a small reason for this: I have a database (and a related software to use this database)  with all my DVDs with music; when trying to find some particular track name it is more useful, practical to have the files with my naming scheme - if I have them the Bandcamp way, mostly the name I'm searching is hidden behind the header with artist name + album name ... and it's annoying.

Mind you, I'm not under the influence of anything from Microsoft, Windows and anything related to them (even 15 years ago, when I was still using Windows on my computer, I pretty much used the same method of keeping my music files).

P.S. I for one, will not explode in anger if they finally decide to switch back to Artist - Track alignment :P
I'll continue to use it just as well, since it's pretty much the same for me.
Photo of dandelion

dandelion

  • 7 Posts
  • 54 Reply Likes
I'm the person who said before that the people behind Last.fm don't understand their userbase and what the best features of their website are. I admire the passion you're all showing in this debate, but it's fruitless and for the same reason: Last.fm is not a streaming service. It does not matter how any music players out there are organized, because Last.fm is not a music player, so it should not base its design on music players.

Yes, I am aware that you can listen to music there, but why would anyone bother going to a different service and setting up a profile just to listen to music from youtube? If that was the point, I'd go straight to youtube. That's not the point of Last.fm. We are all there to see our charts, because we want to see interesting information about our listening habits in a nicely set page that I can use to know more about the music that interests me and to show other people what I'm into. If I'm there to see data, the logic thing is to have it presented in a way that is both pleasant and easy to read. Unfortunately, that's clearly not what they're doing.
Photo of End_y

End_y

  • 15 Posts
  • 99 Reply Likes
@End_y File structure is exactly what you described:  Artist name
   -- album name (includind year, ahead of the name; ex:  2018 - Greatest hits)
       ---- each track here, having position number ahead (ex: 01 - First track no.mp3)

The name of the file matters not, it can be
[track number - title]
[artist - track number - title]
[album - artist - track number - title]
[artist  - album - track number - title]
[album - track number - title]


 The rips I got were are done by different people and its just too botheresome to change all file names to [track number - title] order. 
Whatever the filename is the only thing that matters is [track number] before [title], so tracks are sent into playlist in the right order (into original positions). If the tracklist is in the wrong order than i change the filenames so it is "right". 

And year for me is not all that needed when there's only one album in the collection. If there's more than one album then I sort them by relese year, just like you. 
Should've picked more clear example than Buddy Guy.

In the end we both do it the same way.
Because its logical.



Photo of rammyass

rammyass

  • 1 Post
  • 6 Reply Likes
This is the WORST I could expect from such and "UPDATE" :(

All the details are mentioned by other users here already.
Just another HUGE step back in design, features, etc...

I'm a user for 10 years already and can certainly say the site is moving in completely wrong direction, totally ignoring the users needs.

Unfortunately.
Photo of Inseut

Inseut

  • 23 Posts
  • 26 Reply Likes
By the way, the new artist pages look at the same time empty and full, and confusing.

Look at that much white space. It looks horrible. A waste of space into the blank nothingness. Look at that hideous space under "Years Active". This section could easily fit over the biography text.
The tags are giant. Taking so much space. That "Similar To" box is redundant, there is already another "Similar To" box in the bottom - but to make it to the bottom you have to scroll the page so much.

Artists who had a number of listenings in the week ("""popular this week""") or latest releases avaliable are shown with a big image:
(Edited)
Photo of Inseut

Inseut

  • 23 Posts
  • 26 Reply Likes
Fuuuuuu................ The comment can't extrapolate any more. I was just trying to argument that lastfm looks now unwelcoming to obscure, unknown artists, and too popular-centered. I tried to edit this lots of times and it simply cut all I've written. Too tired to write again, but please consider this. FFS.
Photo of Inseut

Inseut

  • 23 Posts
  • 26 Reply Likes
I was trying to show how artists who had no listenings in the week or latest releases have their images cut and it looks weird. Take a look at https://www.last.fm/music/Asdfasdc. Those who had are shown with the full image.
Photo of Inseut

Inseut

  • 23 Posts
  • 26 Reply Likes
And the play buttons are weird when shown separated like this. Artists whose songs aren't in the last.fm database for any reason look now kinda "incomplete". In the previous design it would show only if you hover the mouse over the thumbnail. It looks very cheap now.
Photo of Cornel Diaconu

Cornel Diaconu

  • 835 Posts
  • 361 Reply Likes
Hmm...@Inseut   
If the artist has some listeners in the previous week, then it does have an image in that "popular this week" link in the header;
if  there are none, there will be no such link !
Your complaint about this does not make any sense to me.
What would you display there, if no user scrobbled that artist these last 7 days ?
That spot of the page is designed to display this particular information, and if there is none ... what could be displayed there ?

You're picking at the wrong things, it seems.

The opinion about "artists whose songs aren't in the database for any reason look nou incomplete" seems pretty confusing to me ... I assume you are referring to situations where the songs do not apparently belong to some album, and thus they are not shown with image aside, right ? (this could also be if those songs are all right to an album, but that album does not have, yet, an image added to it's proper page).

I just listened to an artist that have both situations (with and without images):

(it's from the band https://www.last.fm/music/M%C3%A0nran ).
I think you may find, on occasion, this similar situation with very popular artists, like U2.

Also, the "Years active" it's not at all hideous :-)
At least in my eyes... It's not some empty space for nothing ... there is almost no information to be displayed there in that spot ! I'm not rushing to have a "why is that" ... maybe they don't have anything else useful about that particular band to display there.
Referring to U2, here it is, more info available:

this is not that empty now, is it ?
There are other bands/artists with even more info displayed.

That spot in the page is destined to display this information (titled "Years active") and that's what it does.

To quote some saying, "the beauty is in the eye of the beholder", right ?
If you want to see this as ugly, on purpose, than there you are, seeing it as ugly !

I don't find this as ugly ...
(in this particular case, I just wish there would be more info available to be displayed there -- can't recall now what are the sources for this info).

I would like, though, the initial WIKI info included in main artist page to contain more than these 5 lines of text; this limit is somehow annoying.

If there is something that I find indeed too large is not at all any space around any element in the page; I find rather too long the graph alongside the tracks names in the Top Tracks part !
It would be more useful if the song title would let be longer, and the part with nr. of scrobblers and the graph under the numbers would be smaller.
Photo of Inseut

Inseut

  • 23 Posts
  • 26 Reply Likes
I was trying to show what happened but unfortunately the comment broke.

Take a look at this artist:
https://www.last.fm/music/Asdfasdc < look at how the main image for the artist is "cut" in half. you can only see his eye and top of his head. this happens because there is nothing to show below (no listens in the week/no new releases)

But look at this one:
https://www.last.fm/music/Garfo < see how this one had listeners in the week + a release. and this is what makes the main image for him look complete. it doesn't cut.

Sorry if I didn't make myself clear in the first place, I wrote a lot but unfortunately the comment simply cleared what I've written after trying to upload more images, and English is not my first language, I'm not sure if my wording is ok.




Photo of Inseut

Inseut

  • 23 Posts
  • 26 Reply Likes
They could at least make the images proportional to the space...
Photo of Bogdan Makarov

Bogdan Makarov

  • 40 Posts
  • 246 Reply Likes
I tried to mess around with Chrome "inspection" feature and I think I did a better job than design staff of LastFM. Maybe hire me? :3

(Edited)
Photo of Cornel Diaconu

Cornel Diaconu

  • 835 Posts
  • 361 Reply Likes
Looks quite all right, indeed.
I wouldn't mind at all having something like this.

Go ahead, and apply for the job: https://www.last.fm/about/jobs#designer
:-)
Photo of Inseut

Inseut

  • 23 Posts
  • 26 Reply Likes
Way more pleasing.
Photo of KatyLB

KatyLB, Moderator

  • 456 Posts
  • 379 Reply Likes
I prefer the new design. That looks squashed and cluttered.
Photo of Artur Ost

Artur Ost

  • 240 Posts
  • 320 Reply Likes
@KatyLB really? Most of us say the same about the current one - it's really BAD! At least Artist - Track Title looks more logical for 90% of last.fm users according to posted comments through all this years.
Photo of Bogdan Makarov

Bogdan Makarov

  • 40 Posts
  • 246 Reply Likes
@KatyLB maybe you prefer it, but the majority of people are not. But last fm will never care, they always know best.
Oh and I just got an idea. Since we have different vision on how it should be, how about LastFm would make a possibility to switch a compact mode view of this list? I personally like it compact an cozy, not spread around. For example I use compact mode in Gmail. But anyway, the "title-artist" thing must be gone for good.
(Edited)
Photo of Patrick

Patrick

  • 1299 Posts
  • 932 Reply Likes
 < I hope you are planning to return this one day. The navigation bar in the new design doesn’t exist. It requests too many clicks to find what you need. I more prefer to return this because it was much easier to find what you want than clicking multiple buttons to navigate yourself while you are visiting an Artist page.
Photo of Cornel Diaconu

Cornel Diaconu

  • 836 Posts
  • 361 Reply Likes
A little correction: this bar does is missing in the main page of the artist; 
if you check albums (for instance) for that artist, the navigation bar is again visible, but when returning to the main page it's gone again.

I also long for this bar in the main page, so please consider returning it !
Photo of Ensor

Ensor

  • 86 Posts
  • 236 Reply Likes
Just noticed that "Listeners" have made a reappearence on the artist pages.

However...are they shown in the sidebar on the right, where logically they should be? Not on your nelly! They're stuffed in below the "Albums" section making the page look even more untidy than before... :-(

Well done Last.fm...very well done...   -slow clap-

Photo of Bogdan Makarov

Bogdan Makarov

  • 40 Posts
  • 246 Reply Likes
Everything takes so much space now. I wish they would make it much more compact.
Photo of kuzronk

kuzronk

  • 6 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Where is the correct tag feature? Not like much gets done though.

https://www.last.fm/music/Songs:+Ohia/The+Magnolia+Electric+Co.
https://www.last.fm/music/Songs:+Ohia/Magnolia+Electric+Co.

Like the latter should have been combined years ago.


Photo of Sonnycz

Sonnycz

  • 4 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
This is shit. Please revert back.
Photo of WiktoRozrabiaka

WiktoRozrabiaka

  • 54 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
It's nice to see the listeners back, but in my opinion it should be on the right side

Oh, and You failed polish translation

"Listeners" is "Słuchacze" not "Słuchaczy"
Photo of Artur Ost

Artur Ost

  • 240 Posts
  • 320 Reply Likes
They have failed the whole new design, actually... Oops...
Photo of avocado

avocado

  • 16 Posts
  • 16 Reply Likes
You know a website has gone to shit when you have to keep it at 80% with 2 adBlocks and several different style sheets to be somewhat functional and pleasing to the eye.

Can at least one of the two staff members please explain the reason for the "track - artist" crap and why you are catering to mobile users, as if there even are any. Who uses this on mobile? There are so many relentless ads on this site it is virtually unusable to non-subscribers, and I don't know if you realize those are few and far between these days since there is no incentive.

However, I did purchase a one-off the other day and you want to know what I got? The inability to scrobble for the last 23 hours. Thanks a lot, last.fm, you owe me a coffee.
Photo of They Call Him Mr. Z

They Call Him Mr. Z

  • 11 Posts
  • 58 Reply Likes
There's little to no staff interaction here on the forums. I'm afraid all our questions/suggestions/ideas/problems will fall on deaf ears. I've seen posts with legitimate concerns outright ignored, and others with no updates. Seriously, the username change was "in development" four years ago because it was the "top rated feature". Haven't heard one damn thing about it since then. Instead, they wasted resources on redesigning the website, which, quite frankly, didn't need any improvement.

Something I mentioned to some of my friends: if it wasn't for the music statistics, I would no longer use last.fm.
(Edited)
Photo of Ensor

Ensor

  • 86 Posts
  • 235 Reply Likes
People have been asking for the ability to change their username since at least 2010 when the support forums were hosted on the last.fm website itself.

Always "under consideration/we're working on it", but nothing ever happens as they'd rather work on pointless website refreshes...
Photo of flux.ist.rad

flux.ist.rad

  • 1 Post
  • 4 Reply Likes
Boldface for tracks and for artists was such a bad idea. It looks plain ugly and makes it hard to read through the list. And this coming from an avid user of this site (+10 years) - never have I been this unhappy with an update.