I like the wider length.   Shall I fix up the rest of the pages and go with the new look?  

25 Responses to “So, What Do We Think?”
  1. Paul H. Muller says:

    Wow. Quite a change.

    On my browser (IE 7) the left margin is too narrow, almost non-existent.

    I sort of liked the old layout with the columns of stuff (contents, sponsors, etc) on each side and the articles in the middle. But a change of artwork on the top header would be nice.

  2. In some ways it’s cleaner, which is nice. But the font is way too big, it no longer shows who wrote what, the two colums of ads and things on the right get cluttered and wierd down low, and we need a proper logo.

  3. Jerry Bowles says:

    The type size looks fine on my IE7 and Firebox and Google Chrome. What browser are you using, Galen? Can you change the type viewing size? I can fix the by-line thing as soon as I remember how. Let’s get more comments. The other pages are still in the old style

  4. I agree with Galen. I like the clean look and I think we need a proper logo.

  5. Jerry Bowles says:

    Ok, I changed it to a 3-column split. How do we like this one?

  6. 3 columns is better. THe font sizes weren’t huge, just too big. I’m guessing they’re set at 12pt whereas before they were 10pt?

  7. I guess part of the question is whether we want the body of the messages to be in a serifed font or a sans serif font.

  8. Steve Layton says:

    The font sizes vary wildly, and there are all kinds of alignment problems with stuff in the columns. The earlier, wider version was actually better for posts; it was just a mess for all the rest though. The three-column lets the posts get lost in the stuff crowed around it. Having no-border columns makes it much more chaotic, especially just importimg what was in the old into the new.

  9. Rob Deemer says:

    I like it overall…it’s a little cramped/chaotic (as Steve mentioned) and at least on Firefox there are some alignment problems on the outer columns. The top of the page looks great!

  10. david toub says:

    I’d like it better if

    a) bigger font (and sans serif)
    b) it didn’t look like a blog template
    c) there were less scrolling
    d) less clutter (this has always been a problem—with so much dreck on both sidebars, the site looks like a billboard on Times Square. Ditch some of the ads and banners and spend more real estate on content)
    e) you moved up the links and more important content on the sidebars and place the banners, ads and other static content lower down (in other words, deemphasize the ads)

  11. Hey Jerry,
    I like the way you keep tweaking a good thing to try to make it better.

    I’ve been taking a much-needed break from blogging this month, but I expect to get back to it before long. Looks like your new format really de-emphasizes the individual blogs, though, dropping them about 849 miles down the right column. Is that intentional, or is this still a work in progress?

  12. Jerry Bowles says:

    This is a work in progress. I’ll implement many of the suggestions today.

  13. Okay, then here’s a suggestion. Blogger updates in the left column, either above or below the cast and crew OR, piggybacking on David Toub’s comment, alternate right-column ads with Blogger updates, comments, more comments, etc. — right now there are seven ads in a row before we get any content. Maybe that poses a real formatting conundrum, though.

    Good luck satisfying all of us!

  14. David Toub says:

    just want to offer my favorite surgical dictum: the enemy of good is better

  15. Thanks, Jerry. Always puts a smile on a composer’s face to feel like he’s been heard.

  16. Paul H. Muller says:

    The three-column format is a big improvement. I agree with David Toub that a sans serif font might be better, but I think that the ads actually give a certain credibility to the site and sponsors might reasonably expect to be seen on top.

    This looks cleaner and I agree that a logo on top would be an improvement.

    Keep up the good work. The problem with website design is that everyone has an opinion but nobody wants to do all the grunt work needed to make it look good.

  17. I like the general layout, like the links at the top, itt looks cleaner, but the font in the body of the posts is too big – makes it hard to focus my eyes on it. Maybe it’s the font and not the size. The space between the lines is also too big. I’m using Safari.

  18. David Toub says:

    I guess I’m having trouble understaning how this is significantly different from the previous site. I assume this is just another 3-column CSS template in WordPress. It’s still cluttered.

    I don’t know at all that it’s a matter of “nobody wanting to do the grunt work.” Just like the last site redesign (which was much more significant from this one), Jerry took it on himself without discussing it with anyone first. At least I wasn’t aware that a minor redesign was coming; maybe others were. And that’s fine; it’s his site. But I’m not sure any of us with admin privileges feel at liberty to do serious “grunt work” to male this more effective. Nor have I been asked to. Buy we all have been asked for feedback, and have provided it.

    Having developed a few Web sites and having worked closely with some solid Web developers, I’m looking at this redesign in terms of functionality and less in terms of my own design taste. Functionality-wise, I don’t see any major improvements from what came before. The last design was much more useful than what preceded it; this redesign I view as a minor tweak that perhaps has less functionality and utility than the previous version.

  19. Jerry Bowles says:

    The functionality is the same but what is different is that this template is optimized for larger screens and new browsers which many people have these days. You can see the difference by clicking on the Composers Forum tab, which is still the previous theme. I think this one is less arty but more readable in some ways–certainly the comments. I don’t think Paul was casting aspersions, merely trying to give me a compliment.

  20. David Salvage says:

    Jerry–
    This is a big improvement. Sexy stuff, yo. Thanks so much.

  21. David Toub says:

    Not to belabor the point (no Sarah Palin pun intended, mind you), but I’m really not seeing a significant benefit even compared with the still-old-theme Forum page. Both are fine, and yes, this theme is a bit wider. Keep in mind, though, that the momentum is for people to be viewing Web pages through smart phones and other devices. Wider is fine on my MacBook Pro with a 15.4“ screen, but isn’t noticeably better on my iPhone. Just my $0.02.

  22. Tom Myron says:

    Very nice. I dig the Aaron Siskind-esque banner.

    I’ve always thought it would be cool if the Sequenza21 logo itself were done in the old Universal Edition black-on-white font like on the original Berio scores.

  23. Steve Layton says:

    Tom wrote: I’ve always thought it would be cool if the Sequenza21 logo itself were done in the old Universal Edition black-on-white font like on the original Berio scores.

    It wouldnt take long at all for UE’s lawyers to slap S21′s hands for that, I have no doubt…

  24. Jerry Bowles says:

    Many thanks, Steve, for improving the logo. The proportions look a lot better now.

  25. Hm, I’m afraid I’m not a fan of the new logo. Something as significant as logo selection really needs to be undertaken as a special project rather than on an ad hoc basis. . . But we DO very much need to have that discussion and settle on a real, permanent logo and some other branding issues.

  26.