How many times did you click on it? Because I know more than twenty users with the same problem…
You won. Clicked a couple of times and changed the views. Now I’ve got your Karajan.
Danny, can you clarify one question, so we all know what the actual intention of the designers is?
All versions of Roon have had two treatments for artist photos, based on size/resolution, going back to 2015. One had a wide image behind the text, and one is the smaller image in a box. That has always been the design intent. We did not re-design the artist screen for 1.6.
There’s definitely a problem where the wrong treatment is being chosen–that may be related to 1.6 changes (either the cropping improvements, or the fact that we started keeping artwork up to date in your databases instead of letting it “freeze” the first time it was downloaded). We are investigating.
Brian or Danny,
OK, and I assume the same bug would apply to the artist detail examples that I posted of Wayne Shorter, Stan Getz and Randy Sandke?
So all of those artist detail images are wrong as well?
Again, if so, that is great news. We all thought that was your actual intention, and you can understand why we questioned your design sanity.
I just went through a bunch of artists in my library and this all seems to be working correctly.
The Roon team has already confirmed they can reproduce the problem. Try some of the above examples. I bet you’ll get the same bug. Two or three clicks and then “things get ugly”…
BTW, I don’t get this problem very often. I usually add my own pics anyway…
I get the bug. Small square image on first viewing, On subsequent viewings it changes to the large style image.
However, I’ve just discovered that if I leave that artist alone (so to speak) and then return to the same page, the picture reverts to the small square image and the cycle starts again.
Yes, same here.
Brian, which of those would apply with regards to the examples I posted of Wayne Shorter, Stan Getz and Randy Sanke? Are the photos supposed to be in a box, or behind the text? You report that you have had both approaches in version 1.5.
I don’t recall seeing photos behind text in the artist detail view that was as objectionable as in those cases.
I am not going to pick these apart one by one–not enough hours in the day. Need to save some for actually getting people going on investigating/working on this.
We have always had text behind artist photos on the artist detail page. You and I are not going to agree about whether it’s OK to put UI elements over a background image…that is an aesthetic choice. We may continue with that in the future, or maybe we’ll change it next time we redesign the screen. Either way, there is no immediate action being taken about a UI decision that is four years old–it isn’t a bug, and it isn’t really on point in the 1.6 feedback thread. When we next redesign the artist page, we’ll take your ideas about that into account and maybe we’ll change (or maybe not).
The now playing page and search pages are in the process of being adjusted. I don’t think I am going to discuss those further until we are all looking at the same thing. Plus, we are working on this bug that was identified earlier.
It really helps when we can keep feedback factual and specific, without veering into things like telling us what is/isn’t easy, trying to dictate our priorities/release schedule, trying to diagnose the problem, dictating how it gets solved or what the performance metrics should be, when it should be done, etc. No-one outside of Roon Labs has the information to make informed decisions or proposals about that stuff, but having problems described clearly and specifically is really instrumental to getting stuff done.
Roon’s handling of 1.6 Feedback
- Artist page (nothing playing). Picture is normal size
- Artist page (something by that artist playing). Picture is blown up
- Playing now (something by that artist is playing). Picture is blown up.
The behavior seems to be triggered by playing something, in which case both the playing now and artist page will have a blown up, heavily cropped image that may or may not work.
Anxiously waiting the “now playing” page fix.
Kinda my point. I think expectations were a little too high. Not saying we shouldn’t expect the best from Roon. Just saying the realities of software development just slapped us all in the face with this update.[quote=“hifi_swlon, post:1172, topic:58664, full:true”]
Certainly that was true for me. But not in the way you’re implying.
I don’t think 1.6 is an improvement overall on the UI front (although it certainly has design aspects I like in isolation). Then there are specific areas I think are worse. I do think it will improve over time but don’t think that’s the best plan - I would have much preferred a polished, finished UI update all in one go.
What we have in 1.6 (in my opinion) is something much less ‘together’ than previous versions, and Roons aim of providing ‘the best user experience’ has really got a bit lost here (in the UI sense) I think.
But I have high expectations.
The criticism you received was directly based on the flawed software that you sent out. You may not like the criticism, but when you distribute software with bugs, you get complaints based on what you send us.
I really don’t appreciate the condescending tone.
I first posted on this in a separate thread, and no one from Roon responded. That thread included similar examples based on this bug, which you ignored and did not respond to.
tripleCrotchet or Tony posted all of the examples you cited – and he posed them two full days ago – and you ignored them.
You then asked for more examples, directly based on what Tony and others posted:
So I complied with your request and provided them.
Now you post a condescending response that there is not enough hours in the day for you to respond.
That is precisely what I did. For what it’s worth, it was my criticism of your buggy software that finally got your attention and caused you to focus on the fact that you have a bug.
You could have saved all of us a considerable amount of time if you had read the thread from a full week ago, or Tony’s post two full days ago, and focused on the examples that he posted. Then none of this would have been necessary.
You think we are wasting your time? Well, ditto.
I am close to asking for a complete refund of my lifetime subscription, not that you would care.
Roon’s handling of 1.6 Feedback
I’m not getting into a fight with you over this. I’ve said what I need to. The actionable parts of your feedback are being acted upon. I’m moving on.
23 posts were split to a new topic: Roon’s handling of 1.6 Feedback on Artist images
my name is Tom and I like 1.6, at least because it adds the Qobuz functionality. It is software and it should be treated like this. It is an ongoing process and not everything can be tested in a lab. The real challenge comes after a rollout!
I work since 30 years in IT and have decent knowledge in software architecture and coding. However I do not know many forums where the CTO of the company is participating in chats. I like that and I am happy to have a chance to raise my questions or wishlists to decision maker.
BTW, is someone old enough to remember Win 95 oder ever worse Vista? This was developed by an enterprise company.
I am happy camper and I like the effort of the guys @Not_Roon. They created a brand new experience with my music collection.
Go ahead guys - you do a terrific job.
This is just me guessing, but IMO, Sandke should go the boxed image, Getz should go to the wide, bleed image, and Shorter’s an edge case (which makes the point that there are numerous other photos of Wayne available, e.g.,