Fun Stuff > BAND
It's not April 1st. (Is it?)
michaelicious:
Remember when Pitchfork used to be brown, guys?
Spluff:
Adblock is an awful program - the ads are rarely intrusive, if ever, and you are stripping each of the websites you view of the revenue they need to stay operational.
Hat:
--- Quote from: Ptommydski on 08 Mar 2009, 21:28 ---HOLY SHIT STEVE EARLE IS MAKING A TOWNES VAN ZANDT TRIBUTE ALBUM
--- End quote ---
Dude, you should have read the article, Tom Morello is playing a guitar solo on it what the fuck
Inlander:
Christ, I don't even know what to look at on that page. Shit's all over the place!
rynne:
--- Quote from: Jeans on 09 Mar 2009, 01:28 ---
--- Quote from: rynne on 08 Mar 2009, 21:32 ---As far as the layout, it looks terrible. There's what, like 1/20th of the front page devoted to daily reviews? I guess they've decided that being a music portal is more important than reviewing records.
--- End quote ---
What are you talking about? The Reviews tab is the first one on the menu, and the reviews are placed front and center with about one third of the top column dedicated to it.
--- End quote ---
Here's the daily review section in relation to the front page.
After thinking about it more, what really irks me is that you have to mouse-over the review thumbnails to see the band name, album title, and summary blurb. I can't just scan the page to see if there are any albums I like. Oddly, the reviews page has the band and album names but doesn't have thumbnails or blurbs.
From the overall layout, it seems like the mouse-over feature was added to reduce the size of the reviews section, and increase the size of the news and pitchfork.tv bars at the top of the page. That’s why I felt that Pitchfork was looking more like a music portal than a music-review site. Which is fine if that's what they want to do, but it seems to me like it's another step away from what the site was at its heyday.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version