Blindfold Tests online listening; please read and respond

[tkeith]

Hello folks,

This is really addressing the frequent flyers for the BFT.  I'm trying out a new interface for the BFT and I'd like to get some feedback on it.  It's a LOT more work, so I may still look for an easier work around, but the current BFT (#143) can be checked out here:

http://thomkeith.net/index.php?cID=136

Any reaction is good information.  Thanks in advance.

[Jim R]

Looks (and works) great, Thom.  I've generally been downloading rather than streaming, but a player like this where you can scroll forward or backward, repeat a track, etc, is sweet.

I've said this before, but just want to say it again:  the convenience you're providing us is tremendous, and much appreciated.  When we started this whole thing, people were mailing CDRs all over the country and all over the world, and timing the whole thing was a chore.  Of course, we were barely into the 21st century at that point, but it was so archaic compared to what we have now.  Also, people used to have to make decisions about whether they would have time to participate, and signing up for BFT's was more important and more necessary for planning.  Now, anybody can just jump in right away and hit the ground running.  So thank you again.

[mjzee]

I like the interface a lot.  Very sophisticated, yet easy to use.

[Hot Ptah]

Wow, that is very easy to use. I like this a lot.

2 hours ago, Jim R said:

Looks (and works) great, Thom.  I've generally been downloading rather than streaming, but a player like this where you can scroll forward or backward, repeat a track, etc, is sweet.

I've said this before, but just want to say it again:  the convenience you're providing us is tremendous, and much appreciated.  When we started this whole thing, people were mailing CDRs all over the country and all over the world, and timing the whole thing was a chore.  Of course, we were barely into the 21st century at that point, but it was so archaic compared to what we have now.  Also, people used to have to make decisions about whether they would have time to participate, and signing up for BFT's was more important and more necessary for planning.  Now, anybody can just jump in right away and hit the ground running.  So thank you again.

Yes, Thom is providing a great service for us!

[Dan Gould]

What Thom does is fantastic, however I do have some thoughts. </Austin Powers>

Play buttons didn't work right away and left me wondering if I needed some sort of update, then on the third try track 1 started up.

So maybe some sort of notation that play isn't supposed to be immediate? It seems as though the old server buffered much quicker.

[mjzee]

2 hours ago, Dan Gould said:

What Thom does is fantastic, however I do have some thoughts. </Austin Powers>

Play buttons didn't work right away and left me wondering if I needed some sort of update, then on the third try track 1 started up.

So maybe some sort of notation that play isn't supposed to be immediate? It seems as though the old server buffered much quicker.

When I tried it, the tracks began playing right away.

[Hot Ptah]

The tracks played instantly for me with this new system.

[Dan Gould]

8 hours ago, Hot Ptah said:

The tracks played instantly for me with this new system.

And so they did for me - at work. 

Guess I need to look into what update(s) might be lacking - or since I'll be working from home starting Feb 29 and will be bringing my workstation to the new house, I can just make the workstation computer the one for BFTs.

Good work, Thom!

[NIS]

Looks great and works perfectly.  Will this be in place of the previous streaming and download?

Bottom line for me is, I will be very happy with what ever works best for you.  You are doing the heavy lifting.

[felser]

Does not play the  tracks on my work PC.  I'll try on my home PC later today.

18 minutes ago, felser said:

Does not play the  tracks on my work PC.  I'll try on my home PC later today.

OK, second time in it did start playing tracks.  But I had waited 15-20 seconds the  first time in, so I guess I am hitting whatever issue Dan hit.  

[page]

Never mind, forget it. I don't want to make a fuss, I understand that is not wanted. I was just being honest.

Edited February 13, 2016 by page

[Eric]

I think it's great.  No an attorney, but by virtue of it being a blindfold test, hard to see how a particular artist may be harmed.  Not a legal defense, but my guess would be our BFTs have the net effect of increasing sales for artists, however puny the numbers.

[Hot Ptah]

Thom if this method is what you want to use, it seems to work for us, except on certain software which some people must have on their computer.

Edited February 13, 2016 by Hot Ptah

[tkeith]

Thanks for the feedback, guys!  After much effort to simplify the method of creating the playlists, I decided this was untenable (not so much for these tests, but for all the audio player applications I had throughout my site).  I wound up purchasing the updated version of the player we were using and have it up and running here.  You're welcome to check and comment on this, as well.  This WILL be the interface moving forward. 

For those who want the information, the real issue for me was the time required to create a playlist.  The first page I posted required me to upload the files and create a line of code for each song.  Not the end of the world, but on my site I have literally thousands of songs.  For a BFT, it meant the difference between an easy upload and a 30 minute project just creating the links (add in upload time, page time, etc.).  The player we were (are) using automatically parses the files using a PHP (dynamic code) page.  The difference?  From the time I receive your file to the time you get your links can be as little as 30 minutes soup to nuts.  Also, I think moving forward I'm going to try to host links and listening on the same page.  I can change the "skin" (appearance of the player) so if that doesn't work for you, let me know.  I'll go with majority rules as the point is to make this as user friendly as possible.

[tkeith]

I should note, the archived tests are still uploading.

On February 12, 2016 at 2:22 PM, page said:

Never mind, forget it. I don't want to make a fuss, I understand that is not wanted. I was just being honest.

Missed the original post, but fuss is what I'm looking for -- it's beta testing.  Don't worry about hurting my feelings -- I asked for feedback.  (I once included some of my own music in a BFT and my father was concerned about the feedback I might receive; I told him the same thing.  People who didn't like the track apologized later, but I didn't feel that was warranted.  I put it out there, I'm opening it up for criticism.  That feedback is how we improve, IMHO.)

 

19 hours ago, Eric said:

I think it's great.  No an attorney, but by virtue of it being a blindfold test, hard to see how a particular artist may be harmed.  Not a legal defense, but my guess would be our BFTs have the net effect of increasing sales for artists, however puny the numbers.

I make a point of telling guys when I include their stuff.  They want the feedback, as well.  One of the things I do when I make the tests up is convert them to a lower-fi mp3 (can only speak for myself).  In addition, the download feature will be disabled.  One more thought:  when I did the radio show, we posted our shows online for 8 weeks.  During that time, we did NOT post our playlists.  Once we posted the playlist, the shows were taken down.  Musicians did not complain.  Ultimately, speaking as a musician, I agree that the affect will, if anything, lead to more sales.  

[page]

Hi Thom, I have and still really appreciate what you have done for us all this time, it had nothing to do with that. HP replied to me and now I feel I was making a fuss. It had to do with rights of musicians and I still have mixed feelings about it. I was just plain honest and told how I feel about it. I'd prefer to not discuss it on a thread. I'm happy to hear you make a point of telling people/musicians, I had planned that myself. Since you are a musician yourself, I know you will understand my hesistance regarding this subject.

Edited February 14, 2016 by page

[tkeith]

Absolutely.  No problem.  Ultimately, I see both sides of the issue.  For me, it's easy:  I have a day job.  That's why I always tell them.  If anybody ever requested that I NOT include them, I would oblige that.  Mind you, that's only the folks I know.  If I were ever contacted by someone in the test who I didn't know, I would also oblige.  I don't want to make it seem like I'm hanging with the folks in the test, but I DO try to include some of the folks I know to get out the message.

[sidewinder]

Great work - this will hopefully allow me to participate a bit more than I have been able to in the last few years. I totally hear you re: the 'day job' issue.