And just look at the hideous stuff that pops up when you click "menu". It's an embarrassment.
It appears the sliders display if the widget is wider than some minimum. It's not clear if the behaviour changes between browsers, etc.
Perhaps there's an opportunity to change the default display style system-wide. However, I suspect sliders are one of those things that are context-dependent. Luckily, the pages are editable by anyone and the slider can be displayed on pages where it makes sense.
(1) All the effort people put into collecting copyright-free sound files is drastically undermined by the lack of nice plug-ins; and
(2) The Wikimedia foundation, which collects huge amounts of money from unsophisticated donors, is negligent in spending that money on ridiculous projects that help only a small number of particular types of nerds while leaving things like this that could actually help the typical donor broken.
In other words, when I donate money to the Wikimedia foundation and they don't fix easy stuff like this, I am justified in complaining.
But even if you submitted a "fix" to the foundation, somehow I imagine that it wouldn't be adopted, for reasons.
If you don't like it, stop donating. Or better yet, write a patch, or email them suggestion for a better player. I agree with your original point, but you lost me with this second post.
Finally, those duties are even stronger when the non-profit is the steward of a non-replaceable community commons; there is no way to donate to a Wikimedia Foundation competitor to improve Wikipedia.
> If you don't like it, stop donating
Think about what you're saying. People can't complain unless they donate, but if they don't like what's happening they should not donate. That sort of reasoning is how you get non-accountable dysfunctional non-profits.
> Or better yet, write a patch, or email them suggestion for a better player.
I can't write a patch. It's not in my abilities.
Write them an email? That isn't a serious suggestion, because you know it would accomplish nothing. That's not where these conversations take place.
> Write them an email? That isn't a serious suggestion, because you know it would accomplish nothing. That's not where these conversations take place.
It sounds like you arent really interested in seeing this fixed.
Sometimes, when you want something fixed, merely complaining or commenting to the right person will get it resolved. Sometimes more effort is required. You are right, an email might not get you the result you want.
But have you tried? If you havent even tried an email I dont think you have the right to complain. You havent made even the smallest effort to constructively advocate or try to resolve the issue. Once youve done that, you have a better case.
There is zero chance that they are unaware of this issue. So the question is, first, what is the best way to communicate dissatisfaction? And I don't think emails directly to the Wikimedia foundation are effective (and I don't think you think that either).
More importantly, I'm claiming that the Wikimedia foundation, and the Wikipedia community, are negligent regardless of what I personally do. It's beyond obvious to anyone who has thought a wink about UX that this stuff is crap. "We haven't gotten enough emails about it to divert resources from Wiki-con-for-Slovokian-teenagers" is not a plausible defense.
If no-one ever complains about it, it will be difficult to prioritize over things people do complain about.
If you donated the money without telling them what they have to spend it on, they can spend it on anything they want.
Good luck finding a lawyer to represent you in this law suit and good luck spending many times your original donation on said lawyer all because you don't like the look of the audio player on the web site.
If Wikipedia had revenue-generating potential for companies, it might be a better resource. As it is, it's turned into a money-generating resource for people who freeload off the goodwill.
(I donated to Wikipedia once; never again.)
Btw, the value of the content of a company-based Wikipedia will be none, because noone will trust 'em.
I don't think anyone is saying that. You're absolutely free to complain, and we're absolutely free to point out the lack of value of your complaints. That's all that's happening here.
If you try to make the media player more friendly, you will be given 1000 reasons why it shouldn't be done, such as "It looks fine to me", "People are used to this media player and won't like it to change", "Just go to this page and follow instructions to customize it, anyone can do that", etc.
The easy workaround is just to create a WebExtension. If enough people use it, then maybe the core team will take the hint..
Most (all?) examples on that article are in MIDI format, which is not a trivial sound clip. The MIDI file doesn't contain any actual sound, just 'meta' information on which insturment is used, which notes are being played, dynamics of each note and so on. The rendering of this data into actual sound is left to MIDI player.
Usually the player will have support for 'soundfont', which is the other ingredient needed. It is a bundle of few hundered of instrument samples. To produce music, those samples need to be pitch-shifted, amplified and reverbed using the information from MIDI, and mixed together. The collection of instrument samples requires much work to make it sound well in various contexts. There are precious few open ones and others are burdened with copyright.
The action of 'seeking' through MIDI file is non-trivial because music state/context is collected from events (just as OpenGL is sometimes called a state machine). So to play the last bar of music you always have to fast-forward from start.
MIDI as a standard is considered a bit obsolete, but doesn't yet have the replacement that covers all its different uses (synchronizing and controlling musical equipment, reprograming equipment's presets, capturing musical notation, reproducing music file or from input stream). In 90s the MIDI on web reached its peak because of small file sizes and hardware-accelerated support on sound cards. Since then it is in decline and its future is uncertain.
Being able to just click and hear these music samples on wikipedia, without installing browser plug-ins or hunting for players/soundfonts? Don't take it for granted.
But anyway, I agree. It's a shame. Thousands (or millions) of people have probably had the thought "Why does this player work so badly? Oh, it's some weird open source thing. Why don't they just use a normal player like other sites?"
Makes me think that it's really really hard to come up with a example of a website that is not in general audio focused, and has embedded a audio player for some parts, and the whole thing is well executed and the audio player does not have any problem. There is always something.
I love using a Picardy third when accompanying sung music and the text demands/suggests it. An open fifth is also a good tool for emphasizing certain texts. Just like other strong effects (deceptive cadences, modulations...) it's best effective when used sparingly.
My music knowledge is limited to building major and minor triads (maybe adding a seventh here and there) and I still enjoy his videos.
"Mode mixture" where the minor 4 chord is "borrowed" in a major context however is basically stealing the picardy third sound for an otherwise major piece. "American Boy" would be a pop song that uses this very well.
(the first 3-5 seconds let you know right away)
perhaps a NSFW tag?
I found it by searching for millennial whoop, and thought I'd save anyone else a search.
Seriously, though - this is interesting and I'm glad I know have an additional, identifiable reason why modern pop sucks so bad.
I saw one of the YT commenters said they call it the millennial yodel instead. I think I like that better.
Music is subjective and popular music is always aimed at teenagers. You're always going to think the pop music you liked when you were 17 was the best pop music ever.
C.f. on the other hand blues music, which often digs into the flattened third degree of a major scale to make it a bit more, well, bluesy.
As you do, say this:
"He's a silent guardian. A watchful protector."
Now shift the chord down by thirds (tonally) to play a lushly spaced, unexpected major triad.
Then say this:
"A Dark Knight."
And finally, play the chord again loudly.