Classics Today

[mathias broucek]

Does anyone know what's gone wrong with the Classics Today website?

It's always been one of the more user-friendly online review sites with good search functionality (are you listening, Gramophone?). And whilst I don't agree with all the reviews, they are rarely perverse.

But since a redesign it's all gone horribly wrong! The search function has gone backwards and when I scroll down a review I then get sent automatically to the top.

[Bryn]

I have always found Classics Today a problematic site. The principal problem may be summed up in two words, "David Hurwitz".

[DublinJimbo]

since a redesign it's all gone horribly wrong!

Agreed. No doubt the redesign was intended to add a touch of modernity and to improve what previously was a bit of a visual mess, but the content has been lost sight of in the process. I'll probably give it a miss from now on.

[Curalach]

This is what they say about the new website:

http://www.classicstoday.com/our-new-website/

[PJPJ]

I've bookmarked this page temporarily:

http://www.classicstoday.com/recent-reviews/

[JFLL]

Does anyone know what's gone wrong with the Classics Today website? ....
But since a redesign it's all gone horribly wrong!

The usual thing, alas.. As I said about the Gramophone redesign here: 'As so often with 'improvements' in websites, users have lost essential functionality in the interests of a prettier interface.'

(Glad there's someone else who can't stand Hurwitz!)

[mathias broucek]

This is what they say about the new website:
http://www.classicstoday.com/our-new-website/

And when I click on the link there's a black horizontal line through the heading and my first two attempts to scroll down lead to me being taken back to the top. The site also crashed my Blackberry twice....

I emailed them and David's reply was "Huh? Instructions for searching will be posted later today, hopefully. As to the rest, I'm not sure what you mean."

[amateur51]

I gave up reading this site because of the Hurwitz factor so I thought I'd take a look at the new design to see if things have changed.

I realise now that my fundamental grouse with CT (aside from Hurwitz) is the polar opposite of what I like so much about IRR: it is so inconsistent and almost thoughtless (of the reader's needs) about what goes into its reviews. IRR always tells you how long the CD under review is, what price backet it's in, whether or not there's a booklet with translations as appropriate, etc - in other words a professional job; whereas when I've read a CT review there are so often a handful of quite important bits of information that are missing.

And then there's David Hurwitz

Thank goodness we can use it if we have to wityhout paying for uit

[Don Petter]

Not a site I'd ever used before (though I am aware of Hurwtiz's name), so can't do a comparison.

However, I 've just gone there and asked for orchestral works by composer 'Milhaud' in the search. The result: 'over 500' items found, none of which includes anything by Milhaud, as far as I can be bothered to look. An experience I shall not be repeating, unless I hear better reports here!

[mathias broucek]

Not a site I'd ever used before (though I am aware of Hurwtiz's name), so can't do a comparison.

However, I 've just gone there and asked for orchestral works by composer 'Milhaud' in the search. The result: 'over 500' items found, none of which includes anything by Milhaud, as far as I can be bothered to look. An experience I shall not be repeating, unless I hear better reports here!

I had the same problem. You have to wait for it to offer some guessed composers names as you type. Just typing "Milhaud" and hitting enter doesn't work. (It used to to operate via drop-downs which worked fine.)

[Don Petter]

I had the same problem. You have to wait for it to offer some guessed composers names as you type. Just typing "Milhaud" and hitting enter doesn't work. (It used to to operate via drop-downs which worked fine.)

Thanks, mathias.

Following your advice, I have now made it work. But that reinforces what people are saying about bad interface design. I hate all this 'nanny knows best what you want', predictive completions, and so on. I want to be in control of the operation, not slave to the machine.

[timiambeing]

I just tried to locate Mozart in the list of composers (which was hidden under Music Review Digest??!!) and there are numerous incorrectly spelt Mozart's - MOZART, WOLFANG AMADEUS and a MOZART, WOFGANG AMADEUS and a MOZART, WOLGANG AMADEUS!! Does this 'David' do all the reviews? How useful is this site, I had sort of relied on it (for want of any other classical exploration site out there - they are pretty thin on the ground it seems!).

[Barbirollians]

I have always found Classics Today a problematic site. The principal problem may be summed up in two words, "David Hurwitz".

I agree entirely.

[Panjandrum]

How useful is this site, I had sort of relied on it (for want of any other classical exploration site out there - they are pretty thin on the ground it seems!).

I would still continue to use the Gramophone on-line archive, despite its own discrete failings (notably the use of some kind of optical character recognition technology which throws up some rather dodgy misreadings). Its reviews date back to 1933, and at least until the last decade and a half, has an authority which no other publication can match.

[mathias broucek]

I would still continue to use the Gramophone on-line archive, despite its own discrete failings (notably the use of some kind of optical character recognition technology which throws up some rather dodgy misreadings). Its reviews date back to 1933, and at least until the last decade and a half, has an authority which no other publication can match.

Agreed. The optical sytem falls down with umlauts and so on and any apostrophe gets rendered bizarrely. It's a shame we can't have the archive AND Gramophile (RIP) which had much better search functionality.