PDA

View Full Version : Tail-end banner



Barry
30-09-2010, 12:54
Just noticed the new banner at the bottom of the page. I like it - well done Nick (good to see the Nagra again)!

Regards

Beechwoods
30-09-2010, 13:02
Thanks Barry! Top marks for being the first to spot it. It's only been in for about an hour!

I'd appreciate your comments, and those of our other members, regarding it's placement. It's not too obvious where it is and loses some of it's impact. It could go below the Quick Reply window and still not be in the way. It's important it doesn't get in the way, but at the same time it'd be nice to see it occasionally!

I was pleased to be able to include some other pictures and types of gear that couldn't make it into the main banner. Thanks to you and everyone else who has contributed images for this and the original banner redesign.

Stratmangler
30-09-2010, 13:21
Well I like it, although I do not think it'll get seen too often.:rolleyes:

Marco
30-09-2010, 17:40
Looks superb, Nick, and is a nice addition to the existing banner :)


It could go below the Quick Reply window and still not be in the way.


Personally, I'd go with that, as it's a little bit too 'far away' at the moment.

Marco.

DanJennings
30-09-2010, 18:15
snazzy!

Mark Grant
30-09-2010, 18:20
Looks great but is a bit low down.

Beechwoods
30-09-2010, 18:43
I'll shift it up so it gets some eyes when people are Quick Replying. It's not like there's much immediately above the QR box, other than the Google Ads, which could do with some pizazz ;)

Reid Malenfant
30-09-2010, 18:48
It's not like there's much immediately above the QR box, other than the Google Ads, which could do with some pizazz ;)
Google Ads, what's that :eyebrows:

Says he who uses Adblock Plus :)

I like the banner to, pity it isn't full width but then saying that niether is the top banner. You could have more pics.....

:eyebrows:

The Vinyl Adventure
30-09-2010, 19:03
Eh, am I missing something

Marco
30-09-2010, 19:10
Such as? :)

Looking good now it's been moved, Nick! :cool:

Marco.

The Vinyl Adventure
30-09-2010, 19:14
Ah, there it is... Was it not there for a period just then?

Beechwoods
30-09-2010, 19:15
Google Ads, what's that :eyebrows:

Says he who uses Adblock Plus :)

I like the banner to, pity it isn't full width but then saying that niether is the top banner. You could have more pics.....

:eyebrows:

Thanks Mark... The width of the banners is purposefully limited to ensure that they fit properly in most typical browser / monitor setups. You'll find most webpages limit themselves to a width of around 1024 pixels, some smaller, and then you also have to allow some of that space for browser 'chrome' - the edges of windows, scroll bars and the like...


Ah, there it is... Was it not there for a period just then?

Hamish - given the time of your initial post, I'd guess you caught me in the middle of moving it about! It should be a lot easier to spot now :)

Reid Malenfant
30-09-2010, 19:20
Thanks Mark... The width of the banners is purposefully limited to ensure that they fit properly in most typical browser / monitor setups. You'll find most webpages limit themselves to a width of around 1024 pixels, some smaller and you have to allow some of that space for browser 'chrome' - the edges of windows, scroll bars and the like...
That makes perfect sense Nick ;)

I had to alter settings on another forum recently, surprised that they had this tweek though i'll be honest. Every page was over the width of my browser window, knocking it down to 1024 pixels did the trick ;)

Looks very nice exactly where it is now :)

The Vinyl Adventure
30-09-2010, 19:33
Designing for every browser and every screen is nigh on impossible, there are always sacrifices and limitations, the skill is to make the compromise as though it is intentional
We work to a width of 960 for our designs, that gives a bit of breathing space on a 1024 screen

Beechwoods
30-09-2010, 19:40
It's a pain in the ass, but a necessary pain... when a page doesn't look like it's rendering properly it reflects badly on the designer - even if 75% of the audience don't see the issue on their setups!

I try and work within the same kind of standard as you Hamish. The Google Ads could do with being a bit slimmer width-wise, but unfortunately they come in standard dimensions so I live with them looking slightly uncomfortable at 1024...

Techno Commander
01-10-2010, 11:31
Could the ads not go below the reply box?

Please. :)

DSJR
01-10-2010, 12:07
What's a Walkman (W@nkman) pro doing in it?

Marco
01-10-2010, 12:19
'Cos we like tape decks and analogue on AoS, Dave, and the Walkman Pro pisses all over any freakin iPod! ;)


Could the ads not go below the reply box?


In a word, Andy, no :)

Marco.

Alex_UK
01-10-2010, 12:26
'Cos we like tape decks and analogue on AoS, Dave, and the Walkman Pro pisses all over any freakin iPod! ;)


Have you actually compared the two, with lossless files on a ipod and decent headphones Marco? I'd be extremely surprised if it was that cut-and-dry, although if we are talking highly compressed MP3 files then of course not. :)

Marco
01-10-2010, 13:03
Hi Alex,

I haven't done a direct A/B, but I've heard lossless files on an iPod with decent headphones a few times, and it's ok if you like that sort of thing. It's fine for a 'quick blast' of music when you're on the go, I guess.

However, I find it a rather cold and tinny sound in comparison to my Walkman Pro (using NOS TDK SA-90 tapes recorded from my Techie on audiophile grade vinyl, via my CR-7) through AKG K701 headphones (can't stand ear buds), which is altogether a richer and more organic sound that is vastly more to my taste, and IMO, more representative of how real music sounds :)

Sound quality aside, though, I dislike the whole iPod culture thing (you know my feelings on this), and so wouldn't own one if you paid me... That's just me, though, as a purist and diehard analogue boy! :cool:

I believe that David Price wrote an article on this a few months back in HFW, and he had the same views on this subject as me.

Marco.

Beechwoods
01-10-2010, 13:23
A limiting factor in iPods is the DAC and headphone amps. Which is why some of the more high end system integrators out there utilise a digital out via the dock, rather than relying on the innards of the iPod to do the job. A Sony Pro Walkman can sound amazing; and it's a nice picture representative of cassette tape in general… well done for spotting though Dave!

DSJR
01-10-2010, 14:32
So none of you can hear the "tearing" flutter on all the Walkman Pro's (quite a few actually as we used to sell them and two friends had them 'cos they were fashionable in the "Flat Response" days) I've heard when running on batteries then? I didn't think they sounded much better than most good low-budget cassette decks and the fashion for using them without Dolby was a joke, as in those days I found the tape-hiss most objectionable.

By the way Marco, there are PMP's and PMP's. Some will drive headphones much better than others and feature superior audio amps inside I gather..

Alex_UK
01-10-2010, 17:25
Interesting, thanks for the info, Marco. I've never listened to high end cassette (I was always a vinyl boy, only recorded to tape for the car and a lowly Aiwa personal) so I can't really comment on the direct comparison, but I certainly don't find the ipod "cold and tinny" with proper 'phones, but I guess it is a culture thing as much as anything. Maybe I'll get to have a listen to a Pro one day and I can make my own comparison.

StanleyB
01-10-2010, 22:44
.

DSJR
03-10-2010, 09:58
Cassettes can be very good. It's just that the Walkman pro was too much of a compromised novelty when running on batteries. used on the mains, it was very much better, but cost more than full sized equivalents. A baby Nak (BX100E) ate it alive and was more durable as the hours went up..