Blogger Updates

RSS Christian Carey

RSS Jay C. Batzner

RSS Lawrence Dillon

CD Reviews


Cast and Crew

Editor:
Steve Layton

Managing Editor

Christian Carey

Contributing Editors:
Galen H. Brown

Chris Becker
Armando Bayolo
Garrett Schumann
Wes Flinn
Rob Deemer
Paul Bailey
Polly Moller
Ilona Oltuski
Elliot Cole
Ed Lawes
Scott Unrein
Iván Sparrow
James Holt
Lanier Sammons
Rodney Lister
Jerry Zinser

Zookeeper:   
Jerry Bowles
(212) 582-3791

Founding Publisher:
Duane Harper Grant

Send Review CDs to:
Chrisitan Carey
218 Augusta Street
South Amboy NJ 08879




Featured Release


BRIDGE
3 Disks
For Christian Wolff
Morton Feldman
California Ear Unit

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Music Blogs

.............................


Listen Online:

RSS Scott Unrein’s Nonpop Podcast


Kalvos & Damian!
& Noizepunk and Das Krooner

The longest-running New & Nonpop music program on the web.

Counterstream Radio
Streaming radio from New Music USA.

Q2 Music - WQXR
New York-based online station devoted to the music of living composers.

Admin

So, What Do We Think?

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

Comments

Comment from Paul H. Muller
Time: September 27, 2008, 6:29 pm

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.

Comment from Galen H. Brown
Time: September 27, 2008, 6:43 pm

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.

Comment from Jerry Bowles
Time: September 27, 2008, 6:50 pm

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

Comment from everette minchew
Time: September 27, 2008, 8:07 pm

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

Comment from Jerry Bowles
Time: September 27, 2008, 8:21 pm

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

Comment from Galen H. Brown
Time: September 27, 2008, 9:03 pm

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?

Comment from Galen H. Brown
Time: September 27, 2008, 9:05 pm

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.

Comment from Steve Layton
Time: September 27, 2008, 9:06 pm

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.

Comment from Rob Deemer
Time: September 27, 2008, 11:24 pm

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!

Comment from david toub
Time: September 28, 2008, 7:58 am

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)

Comment from lawrencedillon
Time: September 28, 2008, 8:10 am

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?

Comment from Jerry Bowles
Time: September 28, 2008, 8:25 am

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

Comment from lawrencedillon
Time: September 28, 2008, 8:52 am

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!

Comment from David Toub
Time: September 28, 2008, 11:05 am

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

Comment from lawrencedillon
Time: September 28, 2008, 11:29 am

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

Comment from Paul H. Muller
Time: September 28, 2008, 12:27 pm

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.

Comment from Mary Jane Leach
Time: September 28, 2008, 1:43 pm

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.

Comment from David Toub
Time: September 28, 2008, 2:44 pm

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.

Comment from Jerry Bowles
Time: September 28, 2008, 5:52 pm

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.

Comment from David Salvage
Time: September 28, 2008, 6:56 pm

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

Comment from David Toub
Time: September 28, 2008, 7:01 pm

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.

Comment from Tom Myron
Time: September 28, 2008, 9:08 pm

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.

Comment from Steve Layton
Time: September 28, 2008, 9:41 pm

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…

Comment from Jerry Bowles
Time: September 28, 2008, 10:33 pm

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

Comment from Galen H. Brown
Time: September 29, 2008, 11:29 am

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.