• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). There are daily reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Welcome to the New Review Index!

xaviescacs

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
1,309
Likes
1,556
Location
La Garriga, Barcelona
That is really wacky. I have this on 4 browsers.. you may pick your user agent ;)
ok... fair enough... With mine it works fine :) That was a way of asking browser version, FF for instance, and OS version, etc. that is, they way the server sees you when you make a request. The fact that happens with all browsers doesn't eliminate the need of an example to try to reproduce the issue.
 

voodooless

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
5,597
Likes
9,194
Location
Netherlands
1653470841161.png

This is part of the problem. It sets the main content to not display when you lower the width of the window.

@xaviescacs. It's rather strange that you would not have these issues. It's rather obvious that this has nothing to do with OS or browser version, it's just a plain and simple CSS mistake. This and my previous posts should have more than enough information to find the issue and fix it.

One other possibility is that this is a caching issue at the cloud level (I think there is some Cloudflare stuff in between). Due to my geographical location, I might be serviced an older version of the content? Just tried from a US VPN, and I get the same thing, but that's just a small sample.

Occam's razor tells me it's a simple CSS issue.
 

kschmit2

Active Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2018
Messages
134
Likes
154
I also tried the "clear page" issue in Chrome 102.0.5005.61 (official build) beta (x86_64) on macOS 11.6.6

My findings: a clear page is displayed at any window size below 993 pixels wide, but also at 995, 997, 999, 1001, 1003, 1005 and 1007 pixels.

At 994, 996, 998, 1000, 1002, 1004, 1006 and 1008 pixels wide and up the frame works fine.
 

xaviescacs

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
1,309
Likes
1,556
Location
La Garriga, Barcelona
View attachment 208790
This is part of the problem. It sets the main content to not display when you lower the width of the window.

@xaviescacs. It's rather strange that you would not have these issues. It's rather obvious that this has nothing to do with OS or browser version, it's just a plain and simple CSS mistake. This and my previous posts should have more than enough information to find the issue and fix it.

One other possibility is that this is a caching issue at the cloud level (I think there is some Cloudflare stuff in between). Due to my geographical location, I might be serviced an older version of the content? Just tried from a US VPN, and I get the same thing, but that's just a small sample.

Occam's razor tells me it's a simple CSS issue.
In my experience, cache can happen everywhere and anywhere... so I wouldn't be sure it's not the cause.

This issue that with the addition of the sidebar-collapse class to the body it disappears is exactly what I've observed this morning, then it was fixed when I refresh the cache. This, exactly:
I also tried the "clear page" issue in Chrome 102.0.5005.61 (official build) beta (x86_64) on macOS 11.6.6

My findings: a clear page is displayed at any window size below 993 pixels wide, but also at 995, 997, 999, 1001, 1003, 1005 and 1007 pixels.

At 994, 996, 998, 1000, 1002, 1004, 1006 and 1008 pixels wide and up the frame works fine.
But since I refreshed the css cached on my browser, as @Nonick requested, it works fine. Also, this is not a traditional html + css static page, here everything is rendered by js, so one can't discard the possibility that the behavior is user-agent dependent.
 

voodooless

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
5,597
Likes
9,194
Location
Netherlands
so one can't discard the possibility that the behavior is user-agent dependent.
We clearly can if three different render engines (I'll exclude Tor here because it used FF) produce the same outcome.

The best way to avoid most cache issues is to package all the js and CSS into single files and give them random names. That way you rarely have issues with caching. Fewer files also load faster and can make better use of compression.

Just for the hell of it, here are the MD5's of the files my Brave browser loads:

MD5 (OverlayScrollbars.min.css) = 84d2d24e7ca3b710cd48145b0099da70 MD5 (adminlte.css) = 31ebf932a41aa9511dee780bb8d107d2 MD5 (adminlte.min.js) = e96344659a890f7173c887202ee9379f MD5 (all.min.css) = 3720bbee0ca1964cbaed0258264f680c MD5 (asr.min.js) = d3d6022798e871e5d5d7d88e71b546c7 MD5 (asrcore.min.js) = c5cda96ae75a4d2e61219d2cd72a0c0f MD5 (asrdata.css) = 1cc948410635beb48aac099f5234df10 MD5 (asrdatetimepicker.min.js) = a607d97a1b4521948d05d57212dc48b4 MD5 (asrlogo.png) = 64cfac9b166eac6f5fbb987156bcff36 MD5 (bootstrap.min.js) = addf4af66877d68da719cd7257a33346 MD5 (colorbox.css) = 332b616f23f674c1a790e96af6e18a92 MD5 (element-internals-polyfill.min.js) = 69407e3edcf4abe0c25a148358abd3c0 MD5 (jquery-3.6.0.min.js) = 0732e3eabbf8aa7ce7f69eedbd07dfdd MD5 (jquery-ui.min.js) = ca100a5c27c5eb76eca6861a9ac2bb4f MD5 (jquery.colorbox.min.js) = 25243c770293cc3405fb4ce64ccacb58 MD5 (jquery.fileupload-ui.css) = 0da1e401aa97a021163e667e3c1f8401 MD5 (jquery.fileupload.css) = 7e4fce39a2e1c0563ece7c9287e3b438 MD5 (jquery.overlayScrollbars.min.js) = bc16ae2b903284c4ceac6125b97a42eb MD5 (jqueryfileupload.min.js) = dfd6a4cae657b8f65d1670035c1ca19e MD5 (jsrender.min.js) = f13034e7684ab3e60b25422dfa0cb7ee MD5 (load-image.all.min.js) = 7f6e03baf52d93272dc52fde0ed12f2f MD5 (luxon.min.js) = cb6b93d65a499347549aa32ba32fa6af MD5 (mobile-detect.min.js) = 97d53ffb4a3d53cc7dd154f5e8988043 MD5 (pace.js) = 401c263866972750082fee0535e33012 MD5 (pdfobject.min.js) = 5404a1b1e58b3438edb5442e5978c8e1 MD5 (popper.min.js) = a07236e5be6cb15ed2514656b65b112c MD5 (purify.min.js) = 06fc101cfda34ca338fc4cfa40f8b232 MD5 (select2-bootstrap5.min.css) = c8f0f997235d0f7bf2980a4df7cc5381 MD5 (select2.full.min.js) = 1212a89d7bdecd8b6356436273baa4dc MD5 (select2.min.css) = bb4f601b18b642bda193fb02d8845d94 MD5 (sweetalert2.min.css) = a442d3232ec50494e7d65884b5dab557 MD5 (sweetalert2.min.js) = e7e30e5d6a58180796e06466e5d6cb42 MD5 (tempus-dominus.css) = c83b93e8ef35f2d4a55b2f2db883a93b MD5 (tempus-dominus.min.js) = cf112b29332f404cf253abb3a3267637 MD5 (typeahead.jquery.min.js) = 7c4821f35def3c9aea85468b1745e00a MD5 (userevent.js) = e8864f995420305a6dd151344b86c385 MD5 (userfn.js) = 68b329da9893e34099c7d8ad5cb9c940
 

Rottmannash

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 11, 2020
Messages
2,223
Likes
1,870
Location
Nashville
It has nothing to do with the OS or (probably browser). If you make your window smaller than the width of the iframe, it will show a blank screen, See here Brave of MacOS:

View attachment 208784
Widening the window fixes it.
That's what it looks like on my phone. How does one widen the window?
 

datrumole

Active Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2020
Messages
148
Likes
61
more responsive for sure, but significantly more limited in functionality

  1. UX
    1. the 'contains' operand on the searches is red, makes it look like you can click and change the operand to other ones like 'starts with' 'not includes' etc...
    2. as others have commented, the layout of how to performance an advanced search is odd
  2. Functionality
    1. the ability to have multiple filters per criteria, if i want to search for AVRs and DACs, i can't
    2. speaking of AVRs, i have zero way to filter out AVR (PrePro) in the current search, when i search for AVR, i get both prepros and AVRs when all i wanted was just AVRs
    3. group by field would allow nested sorting. so group by brand, then by sinad score would allow at a glance their range of products per brand as an example of one where it would be useful to have this
    4. allow the change of operand, if i want to do 'between' on SINAD, let me, or do a 'not contains' or something of the sort

keep up the great work! love this site!
 

Endibol

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 18, 2021
Messages
47
Likes
70
As hopefully you all know, a ton of work was put into building the interface and database of our Reviews. Alas, for myriad of reasons, work stopped last October and index has become quite stale. I decided to take on keeping it current but for the life of me, I could not figure out how to navigate that complex system. On top of that, we (I) were playing monthly fees for Microsoft PowerBI for the interface you see.

As it happens, a smart member and web developer, @Nonick, contacted me with a quick prototype he had built from scratch. As soon as I saw it, I realized we need to go that way due to its extreme efficiency and simplicity. The work then started on refining the feature list and importantly, importing, fixing and updating the database. The latter was done with kind help from members @Rick Sykora, @BostonJack, and @chuckt62, we have now an updated and current database.

You can navigate to the new index with the menu bar or clicking on this: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?pages/Reviews/

Once there, you see a new dashboard that shows the latest reviews and statistics about them.
View attachment 207650

You can then click on the titles of different sections to see electronics/tweaks, speakers and headphones/IEM reviews. You can click on headings to sort in either direction. Or use Search to narrow down what you are looking for.

I want to emphasize that the main intent of this "1.0" release is to get the base platform solidified and database updated. So please do a quick scan and if you find mistakes in the database, post them here and I can edit/fix them.

You are also welcome to suggest features you like to see. We plan to do a 1.5 update which would be modifications/smaller features to the current system. Past that will be a 2.0 release with more sophisticated features/graphing, etc.

Let me extend my deep appreciation for hard work, knowledge and speed with which @Nonick has put in this system. He would work at his day job and then night after night spend hours on development of this system. His work ethics and willingness to work with me without any compensation of sorts (refusing to accept from me), amazed me night after night.

I also want to thank the previous team which built the system we used until now. Special thanks go to @pozz, for bringing the original idea to me and spending so much time and effort maintaining the old database.

I hope you find the new system useful and performant.

The new Review Index works fine! What I am missing though, is something that was present in the previous version: the possibility to search for "Review Type": Text or Video Review. Would it be possible to bring this criterium back as a filter column? Would be great..
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
39,380
Likes
178,765
Location
Seattle Area
I hope we are past compatibility issues (but fix today) as then we are going to freeze this as version 1.0 and start work on future version with more functionality.
 

voodooless

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
5,597
Likes
9,194
Location
Netherlands
I hope we are past compatibility issues (but fix today) as then we are going to freeze this as version 1.0 and start work on future version with more functionality.
Let us know when it’s supposed to be fixed, so multiple people can verify.
 

reasons

Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2020
Messages
75
Likes
12
I can confirm that I too am having an issue, safari and chrome on iPhone. Chrome and edge on PC also not working. Opera GX works on PC, very odd.
 

Elkerton

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2022
Messages
43
Likes
34
Maybe it wasn't in the old review index, but elsewhere: I miss the graphs which place each speaker tested by price and, individually, with and without sub, and with sub in the listening window. It was very helpful in my choosing a speaker since I am a pacer, and many seats are off axis.

May I also chime in: Great Work, Amir and everyone who helps on this website!
 

amm

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2021
Messages
15
Likes
40
Hello,

Thanks for all your hard work, Amir and others who have been helping with this. I am hoping to provide some useful feedback or receive some feedback as to what I am missing. I am using the latest version of Firefox. On the top half of the review index page, a list of latest reviewed devices along with the links to each review is provided. As I go further down the page, I see a tally of device categories that have been reviewed:

1653568577147.png


At this point, I expected to see a link in front of each category to take me to the reviews for that group, for example a link to review of all the DACs (Dedicated) which I was looking for. At least on Firefox I can't see any links. The only way that I can access the reviews for any category of devices is to use the links on the very top of the page (I missed it originally):
1653569353848.png

So after clicking on audio electronics, I needed to setup an exact search for DACs (dedicated) to get me to the list of reviews for them. Perhaps this could have been simplified by providing links to each category of devices on the first page within the drop-down tally. I don't consider myself to be internet savvy, so I may be missing something. Thanks
 
  • Like
Reactions: RHO

Keened

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 2, 2021
Messages
289
Likes
190
Maybe it wasn't in the old review index, but elsewhere: I miss the graphs which place each speaker tested by price and, individually, with and without sub, and with sub in the listening window. It was very helpful in my choosing a speaker since I am a pacer, and many seats are off axis.

May I also chime in: Great Work, Amir and everyone who helps on this website!

That would probably be better served by a vertical and horizontal dispersion metric of some kind. Perhaps it could be chunked into a point source/focused source/wide source grouping as well, but that's rather nebulous unfortunately.
 

TheWalkman

Active Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2020
Messages
239
Likes
521
I hope we are past compatibility issues (but fix today) as then we are going to freeze this as version 1.0 and start work on future version with more functionality.
I didn’t scan all the pages but this isn’t working on the latest version of Safari on my iPad. FWIW, page appears to load data but nothing is displaued.
 

hyfynut

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2020
Messages
69
Likes
48
I think the problem many, including me are facing is that the information on the dashboard is not much useful for anyone looking for a review. It’s just statistics. And, the menus are not immediately visible. They are hidden behind a hamburger menu even on a table view. Maybe the menus can be moved or copied to the dashboard and only the last reviews are left on the page. Then, the indexes moved to a new index page.
Yes, count me in that group, also, did I hear mention of a search function?
 

MrOtto

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2020
Messages
310
Likes
238
I'm missing premade filters, like "DAC", "AMP" etc. like the old database had.
 
Top Bottom