Classical Music Directory

One of my larger projects on this site was to create a music directory that communicates with our new upload system. A problem this new upload system brought to us was that it didn't organize or order music the way we were used to in the past. Hence, I started work on a directory back in July, which at first launch looked primitive, unusable and received much criticism. So I went back to the directory and finalized it to look more like the forum results. I also paginated the results, ordered results by latest review/submission/movement upload/composition update, added dynamic icon cues for each of the 12 major categories, and made the urls search engine friendly so that we can now rank in Google.

Not only does the directory mimic our old way of uploading music, but we can now view pieces by keyword tags by narrowing down results even further. For example, we can now search by composer, unit of time, most commented, least commented, by specific genre, or view all music as a whole. The power of this directory is that each "sectioned" view is ordered by latest review/submission/update.

Finally, I've added upload buttons to each main category section regardless of what sub category you are in. For example, if you have Piano Music chosen as a main category, and you are narrowing down through the results, an upload button will be present at the top for your convenience.

Let me know your overall thoughts of this new enhanced system, as I plan on making this directory the main way to navigate through music, and I plan on advertising it as well.

I know you're trying your best Mike, but all you did was put the same flawed structure under a new coat of paint. Granted, the paint is quite lovely to look at, but once you get in to the directory, things become confusing.

First, the main forum page's music directory is actually *less* useful than the ugly multi-colored one before. At least before you could see several pieces at once. Now you can only see one from each category.

Why are the categories not being revised anyway? Some are redundant, and they're just there because of tradition. Cut out the fat and clean it up! I've already given you my suggestions.

Second, why are there two ways to do the same thing? This and this are the same information being just shuffled a different way. What's the rationale for this?

Third, on this page, why is that ugly green bar there all the time? Perhaps make *that* look better? And again, for the love of God, PLEASE revise the genres. They're ridiculous right now.

First of all, I want to point out the painstakingly efforts you make, in order to make YC a user-friendly site. Kudos to you for that.

My main concern is that, given the continuous stream of newly uploaded works, things can get buried really quick. This is not a trouble only for individual composers who enjoy just a very short 'window of opportunity' for everyone else to notice their new works - but also for those of us (like me ;)) who are 'reviewers' chasing these very new works all over the place. Nothing can kill a composer's self-assurance as quickly as perceived indifference.

Personally I'd like to see the new works in an easier way - but also to have some 'major works' more prominently featured as well, so that the newcomer can quickly find high-quality compositions that make him/her more interested in joining. (Currently I have to make a lot of clicks to find out the best-rated or most discussed piece).

Thanks for both your efforts and your attention.

The major works thing is in progress. That is, if Mike is cooperative.