I need your opinion on a project for my future partner. His website is Jammr, a website for unsigned bands to make webpages and post their music (Think Myspace Music, but not horrible.)

I don't know what the interior of the main pages will look like yet, so refrain from commenting on the arrangement or font inside of the body. Also, the blue lists will probably be white with blue rollover.



Also, I made one for Anovis.

Everything screams "OMG! WEB 2.0!"

It's nice, but could probably could use some more functionality, like "find music" (search for a particular sound or genre) etc. Stuff like that is probably already planned, so here's my input on the layout. Overall, the layout looks nice, I suppose. I don't know if all the backgrounds have to be black. Maybe mess around with some other shades for the side panels or something. Something to distinguish them, basically.

Yeah, that's some awesome Web 2.0 you've got going there. I'll add the beta launch date to my Calendr.

I forgot to add something to my sidebars that I had intended to. I've updated the image for contrast.

And Jon`C's comment about Web 2.0 is valid, but useless. That's the nature of the site.

Myspace music is really awesome, I think you might be on drugs. So many bands are getting better known because of myspace music.

well I'd suggest getting rid of the unnecessary reflections (or rflections if you prefer). and then consider telling your friend to change the name to something that isn't rtarded.

You should also consider integrating advertising into the layout since that website's hosting bill is going to be colossal.

Myspace music is awesome if you want to know about every crappy screamo band on the planet.

There will be adspace within the main body. And I don't convince clients to change their site name. Sorry, not my kind of thing.

i actually really like it. maybe cut down on the reflections on the little side bars, but the one on the title is kind of nice and eye catching. its very clean looking which is refreshing.

Your text is still too dense and tedious to read. But it's better than usual.

Like I always said, the text is easier to play with in web form

That little glow thing that separates the panels makes it look a lot better. That's just what that needed. It still fits EVERY single Web 2.0 cliché out there, which I, personally, find annoying.:colbert:

It screams iTunes ripoff, which may or may not be a good thing.

It's got maybe one or two elements of web 2.0. It hardly screams it. I also think it's original enough to not garnish too much criticism.

Kirby whenever you ask for opinions here you always make excuses to everyone instead of changing anything

Because people don't really give very good criticism. No "It'd accomplish this if you changed this." Instead people just don't like Web 2.0, or they want the gun to look cooler with this. No one givess suggestions for improvement, they just suggest that it doesn't look the way they'd make it.

I think a problem here is the presentation of the site--the conservative fonts, and shiny clean design (not to mention the gray-blue color scheme) seem more to say "PHP script downloads" or "banner ad for anti-spyware software that actually puts more spyware on your computer." The thing should seem more raw and alive for a music site. Like I said, the "Jammr" at the top would do well to burst out of its frame looking something like the 300 logo:



At the same time, you don't want to look like you're catering to one genre of music by making it all "gothic" or "street" or "introspective"--try to blend human, striking, and welcoming, with less sci-fi.

Okay, this complaint is just so retarded that I have to refute it right here and right now.

1.) "We hate [x]" is a valid comment because we hate 'x'. We're not saying it looks ugly because it's not the way we would design it, we're saying it looks dumb because it's a goddamn ridiculous cliche.

2.) "Nobody is telling me how to make it look better! Waah!" Well golly the **** gee. What the hell kind of designer are you if you need other people to tell you how to do your job?

2.5.) You don't have to be a designer to know something is ridiculous and hideous and could basically double as a parody of Digg.

3.) Given your resistance to criticism you didn't come here for criticism, you came here to be fellated. If you can't handle people criticizing your work you shouldn't be posting it at all, let alone asking people for their opinions.


Seriously. Make the changes we suggested or don't, that's your business... but shut the **** up about the "quality of advice" you're getting. Seriously.

Why does it have a copyright at the bottom when the text is lifted directly from Wikipedia?

q F t

I hardly came for the good comments. I came for comments like Thrawns. That and the one about bringing out the sidebars were both helpful. MB also gave me some awesome advice before I posted that really mellowed the design out from the stark it was before. I didn't come here to hear about how you don't like Web 2.0. Some people do. My client does. End of discussion.

But I'm probably going to redesign it based on some of Thrawn's suggestions in AIM. The site really doesn't fit an indie music scene feel. I never really looked at the site like that, so I'm totally going to come at it from a different angle and see what I get.

Stafford: sigh. It's a mockup. I'm laying things out to see how they will look. A footer will be on the page, so I made one.