 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: C2thew
Date: 2006-10-12 18:37
When you look at the statistics of which "board" has the most frequent posts whether it has to deal with the clarinet or not, much of the information is lost due to new posts. I understand the search function is to help gather the information one needs to make a decision or comprehend an understanding of their instrument, but it's a pain to search through 10 pages of scattered posts.
There needs to be a review section for instruments, ligatures, accessories, and mouthpieces in order to quickly find answers to questions that one might have. And if there question still isn't answered, they can revive the old thread in the past.
The clarinet board is too concentrated and a tad unorganized without the search feature, i just think it would help if there were sub categories since the clarinet board has over 200000 plus posts.
site updates?
Just my 2 cents.
Our inventions are wont to be pretty toys, which distract our attention from serious things. they are but improved means to an unimproved end, an end which was already but too easy to arrive as railroads lead to Boston to New York
-Walden; Henry Thoreau
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2006-10-12 18:46
C2thew wrote:
> There needs to be a review section for instruments, ligatures,
> accessories, and mouthpieces in order to quickly find answers
> to questions that one might have. And if there question still
> isn't answered, they can revive the old thread in the past.
>
I'm sorry, but no, there won't be any such sections now or in the forseeable future, especially reviews, since almost no reviews here are of an unbiased nature. Almost all "reviews" that are posted are of equipment someone has purchased, and the "review" is more of a reinforcement of the decision to purchase rather than a balanced positive/negative review. Not that the reviews aren't worthwhile as generators of interesting posts, but none are even close to being definitive.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mags1957
Date: 2006-10-12 19:33
If the people who run this board decide not to have different sections (reviews, cd's, etc.) because it would be a pain, I completely understand, and I have no argument whatsoever - I love the board the way it is now.
BUT if the reason to not have a review section is because of a bias in the reviews, that doesn't make much sense to me. We're all grownups, we know that people who have a new toy are biased towards it, and would take it accordingly. Many of us would still welcome the reviews, and an easy way to get to them.
The pain about the search function is this: If I want to know from people on the board what they think of their new Selmer Recital clarinet, I do NOT want to be directed to 20 threads where it merely says "so and so plays a Selmer Recital", etc. You do really have to wade through dozens of posts to get what you want. Not complaining - just saying...........
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2006-10-12 19:40
If there are ever any reviews I think are worthwhile they'll be put in the Keepers section. Other than that, no.
The reviews wouldn't even have to be unbiased. But they'd have to be thorough, not just "this one was _sooooo_ sweet".
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: EuGeneSee
Date: 2006-10-12 22:21
I would certainly like to hear more specifics about different clarinets beyond how much the owner loves it. I'm certainly far less experienced than virtually everyone on this BB, so I read not only the first post about an instrument, but also all the added comments . . . the more comments a post receives the broader the base of "reviewers".
Of course, if the horn is a Selmer or Leblanc, and the Buffet mafia showers it with many negative comments -- or vice versa if a Buffet or (insert name) -- I have to try to weigh all that in, too.
Ultimately, I have to decide which ones I lean toward, then go blow them to decide which I like best.
Bottom line -- I don't know how one could handle the reviews any better, as it's pretty difficult to pigeon-hole mostly subjective ratings.
Eu
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ClariTone
Date: 2006-10-13 04:10
Instead of "wading" through the information, you could simply choose the desired thread, and once it has loaded hit "ctrl" + "f" and type in a keyword (in your previous example "Selmer", or "Recital"), and it will quickly find that word which would save you more time so you don't have to read through the thread to find what you wanted.
Hope this Helps!!!
Clayton
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: 2E
Date: 2006-10-13 06:18
I agree that subsections of the board would definetly be useful for finding things more efficiently. The current search function does help but sometimes returns irrelevant information. The sax on the web forum has incorporated subsections seamlessly improving the overall efficiency of the board. Perhaps a vote/poll here would reveal whether the general consensus is for or against subsections? That being said - theres alot of members on this forum and a "general consensus" may prove impossible to determine :s
2E
http://www.saxontheweb.net/vbulletin/
Post Edited (2006-10-13 06:26)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: C2thew
Date: 2006-10-13 07:07
For example: i have a bonade mouthpiece, but when i use the search function for bonade mouthpiece, i get 10 pages of bonade ligatures. i mean what the heck. 10 pages of bonade ligatures?!?!? i've tried other search key words, yet it always came back down to the darn ligatures and the issues people were having with them and all the topics of
"..."reviews" that are posted are of equipment someone has purchased, and the "review" is more of a reinforcement of the decision to purchase rather than a balanced positive/negative review."
thus having subsections would be able to clear up one thing over the next... to a degree.
but still, wouldn't you agree that some organization is better than one? (search function)
i mean this forum is HUGE, with at least 300 people that visit to ask a few questions.
sure there will ALWAYS be a bias towards everything, but even now there are always bias of buffets and what not. you can't love playing music if you can't love the sound that is coming out of the instrument. And thus you will always have a person whos gung ho about their instrument, but new forums have reputation meters which indicate the validity of each posters comments, something which to the stress of clarinet makers, mouthpiece experts, can easily be overcome by someone who chimes in with an irrelevant comment.
With all due respect, one must grant some status to those who have knowledge. otherwise whos to stop someone from making a minor fallacy?
no i'm not angry or even heated in my expression. just trying to point out valid reasoning.
ok maybe a little frustrated, but thats it =)
Our inventions are wont to be pretty toys, which distract our attention from serious things. they are but improved means to an unimproved end, an end which was already but too easy to arrive as railroads lead to Boston to New York
-Walden; Henry Thoreau
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: C2thew
Date: 2006-10-13 07:21
"ctrl" + "f" and type in a keyword (in your previous example "Selmer", or "Recital"), and it will quickly find that word which would save you more time so you don't have to read through the thread to find what you wanted.
Yes i use mozilla firefox to use the search function for key words, yet it still is to a lesser degree of effectiveness.
Let me use youtube.com as an example. People will provide the data and entertainment as long as you give them a format to follow.
------
Instrument
Brand
Price
Purchased from
Condition (1-10)
Pros
Cons
Weight
Approximate Age
Mouthpiece that consistently optimizes the instrument
personal opinion by using comparisons (as not everyone in the world owns a selmer, vito, leblanc, buffet, boosey and hawkes, penzel muller, conn, amati, king, pruefer, yamaha...............etc)
conclusion
------
The point is if there is a strong interest people with personal ties WILL POST relevant information. Look at wikipedia. Let the users decide.
Users should also have the power to nominate posts to accept it into the keepers section. so much can be done in a matter of subsections and html coding and what not so that all you have to do is just be the CEO of the website and just say "yes" or "no" instead of having to dig and pick your choice.
ok it's 12 a.m. i'm out.
Our inventions are wont to be pretty toys, which distract our attention from serious things. they are but improved means to an unimproved end, an end which was already but too easy to arrive as railroads lead to Boston to New York
-Walden; Henry Thoreau
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2006-10-13 11:24
C2thew wrote:
I've already said what I'm going to do. This isn't Wikipedia or whatever. There's no polls or votes here. People can make suggestions: sometimes I act on them, sometimes I don't. It depends on the degree of difficulty.
The who site needs re-organization and updating. I'm very aware of that. There's been a couple of starts and stops, but so far I heven't been able to put in the requisite few hundred hours or so it'll take to re-do the site.
Adding more keywords to the search function will narrow the scope.
There's no polls, votes, etc. on the BBoard. I don't find them useful, though I know some people do. It's my decision.
Wikipedia itself is a political nightmare in certain sections (China, for example, is complete locked) and is so inaccurate in places as to be not a useful reference. It's a grand experiment.
Nominations for the "Keepers" section are always welcome. Again, sometimes I agree, sometimes I don't.
If there's further suggestions or such that would be useful for the BBoard (like a suggestions I received for limiting searches by author - that one I may be able to integrate into the data collection phase for the search engine), please contact me personally rather than bring it up in a thread.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Koo Young Chung
Date: 2006-10-13 23:41
I have a complaint about search function.
When I enter word ,same thread shows many times.Is there some way you can show same thread once.
And search word doesn't highlighted at all.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
