What do you think about the new search results design?

music

#1

I’m not sure it’s better then what it was,
you have to really stress your eyes to see al the data that was easily visible before


Audiojungle new player
#2

“What do you think about the new search results design?”


#3

Good stuff: The design looks more modern. The boxes are big and it´s room for additional info like lets say… an original track name.

Bad stuff: Icons are way to small, no point of extra tags and sales advertising in the thumbnails. Music Packs shows up as 1 track which is misleading.


#4

totally agree


#5

From the latest Envato Author “Audio Top Trends & Insights” article;

More and more, customers are looking for the visual element in everything. Authors with poor quality or unprofessional thumbnail, or a thumbnail that doesn’t relate the style/mood or item itself, may affect a customer’s decision to stop and listen to the item.

Someone else at Envato;

“Let’s make the author thumbnails as small as possible, so customers can barely see them!”

:roll_eyes:


#6

@BenLeong @Sarah_G

Sarah: First of all, thank you for an excellent article about Audio Top Trends and Insights! Really useful, and I think everybody would want more of this kind of articles.

Cut and paste from the article: Generally, customers have found track titles hard to understand. Some are too long, some are too short. There are also some track titles that have been ‘over tagged’ and read closer to a series of tags, instead of a track title. Doing this, may help get the item to show up more in search but it also creates a really bad experience for customers. Aesthetically, it affects an author’s presentation and quality, which ultimately influences a customer’s decision to click on your item, or scroll on by.

It is no secret anymore that AJ´s tag only presentation is a very bad customer experience (as well as bad author experience). So what if we actually look for a solution to this? Telling authors to be more careful with tags is not going to fix this. That would only be wishful thinking. Authors are only copying what “works”, and it´s getting messier every year.

What if AJ simply instead adds an “optional name field” for music tracks? With the new search design, it is certainly room for this (in addition to the Name/Primary Tags), the old search layout had no room for it. This could be a field were authors (if they want) can add a proper name to their tracks. This would raise the professionalism of the presentation a lot. So the current NAME field would still be used for tags if authors like (Name/Primary tags if you like). The best would of course be to have a searchable “optional name field” but at the very least just having a dead text field would raise the presentation a lot. This operation should not be rocket science for the code and design teams.

The name discussion is nothing new, but now there is an actual opportunity to implement it in the new search design because of all the space in the boxes. For music this tag madness have been especially bad. For sound effects it is a different story," a screaming eagle" is and will always be "a screaming eagle.

Ben: Regarding way to tiny thumbnails in the new search engine, and a possible discussion about implementing an additional optional name field. Do you think this is something that can be done at the same time as you gather people to look at the “Broadcasting License” presentation? But of course please prioritise the Broadcast Licenses first of all, this is were the most money is leaking out of Envato and authors pockets.

Thank you guys for any feedback on this!


#7

Love your “optional name field” idea!
This could be a great and simple solution to the famous messy-titles problem.

This is the best idea.

We need 2 separate titles:

One is for the most important tags (what we called titles these days on AJ). Should be limited to max 5-6 words. And it should not be visible for the customers. Used solely for the search purpose (just like it is now).

The second one is a real name of the track. A nice artistic name that is easy to read and meaningful. Visible to everybody. “Sunny Morning”, “The Beauty of Love”, “Our World”, etc. Not used for search at all, therefore, there is no benefit to put an ugly sequence of search tags there.

I believe this topic really needs a new thread cause you made some really good points, @MojoSoundtrackMusic.


#8

I don´t think it´s my idea, was discussed some time ago in another thread. Anyways, it´s a simplistic and effective idea which should be very doable and would certainly lift the presentation of AJ tracks.

I agree we need 2 separate titles, not sure if the tags should be hidden in the search engine though. Probably helpful for customers, and remember we have a gazillion tracks that are just using tags :slight_smile:

Maybe that´s an idea yes, but lets see if we get some feedback here first. Thanks for your input to this!


#9

Hey @MojoSoundtrackMusic,

Thanks so much for reaching out and sharing your feedback.

In terms of adding an optional name field for music tracks, this is something we’ve heard before and agree that this could be a way to improve the presentation of items in the marketplace.

At the same time, it’s equally important for authors to be aware of the techniques being used that can contribute to a negative customer experience and how it affects the overall look of their items. This is why we continue to communicate the importance of mindful tagging and highlight the value of being proactive when setting up item tags/titles.

Ultimately, they both work towards the same result, and I will definitely be passing on your feedback to our relevant teams. :slightly_smiling_face:

Also, thanks for reading the trends report, I’m so glad you liked this and found a lot of value in it - we will definitely be continuing this in the future!

All the best,
Sarah.


#10

agree


#11

Hi @Sarah_G

Thanks for taking this seriously and chiming in. :slight_smile:

There are countless of great ideas on how to improve the search engine, but I think the Alternative track name (optional) idea differs with it´s simplicity, and it would leave the current search engine untouched, just adding a professional identity to it all. So it seems very doable and without any downsides, at least none I can think of at the moment.

For example check out @WaveToys who gives his tracks “artistic names” in the description of the tracks : https://audiojungle.net/item/fun-upbeat-pop/22135884?s_rank=1 (you can also search the name of the song “Make Me Jump”, simply because it is written in the very description) A good title conveys important information about feel, energy and mood of a track to a customer, similar to what a tagged thumbnail can do.

Thanks again for passing this feedback on!


#12

In theory I agree with you. In reality, giving an actual title to a track instead of the infamous tag stack, makes you invisible in search. You are thus asking authors to willingly become invisible so that buyers have a better customer experience. This is both unfair and unrealistic. This issue is due to your faulty system, therefore it’s up to Envato to fix it. It all boils down to a simple thing: as long as titles are weighed in, things won’t change! We’ve been warning you about this issue for over five years… five years during which you’ve done nothing to fix this.


#13

I like the new design! Its modern and clean. Great that now all the thumbnails are Retina (Hi-DPI) ready. I don’t care if its small, most of them are horrible anyway.


#14

Customers respond very well to this, in 90% of the cases I get emails like this:
Hi, I have a question about the song Inner Fire
instead of
Hi, I have a question about the song Powerful and Energetic Indie Rock
So they are not ignoring this.

But just having this in the description isn’t enough, we should really have this as the main visible title, and continue to have search engine that responds to generic 3-4 words SEO titles (which will be hidden and entered in the optional or “seo” title field). I know this seems complicated, but at this point there is such a mess created on AudioJungle that I don’t see a better way to solve this.


#15

Here is a quick mockup with my “fantastic” graphic design skills:

43

Obviously it has to be better designed, but it just gives a so much better feeling browsing tracks (and selling them) if you can add a proper name somewhere.

We also have to consider the benefits of having “primary tags” visible to customers (at this point in AJ history). Some authors have huge portfolios and might not want to give “proper names” to all their tracks…


#16

What about the reverse sizing? Big “Energy Drink” and smaller “Typography Action Drums & Claps”?


#17

That could definitely work I think. Also 50-100% bigger thumbnail would make sense. Maybe someone with skills could make a better mockup :slight_smile:


#18

I like it, everything appear more clear now, at least for my eyes :sweat_smile:


#19

I just typed the word “epic” in a search, then randomly looked at titles of the 105,961 songs spanning 60 pages of results. Every song I saw was called something like “Epic”, “The Epic”, “Epicness”, Epically", “For the Epic”, blah, blah, blah.

So… @Sarah_G - You MUST take the title out of search engine consideration entirely. If you don’t, authors will continue to do this for eternity. Yes, artistic names might not be entirely invisible if they don’t fit extremely common keywords. But if the song fits “epic”, “inspirational”, “motivational”, or any of the many other common search terms, the authors really don’t have that much of a choice because too many of them refuse to use creative names due to the fact that the title appears to be weighted in the search results. And when “everybody is doing it”, you’re lost if you don’t. Take the titles out of the search engine weighting and authors can use creative titles without a concern.


#20

@Sarah_G Thanks for reaching us and describing the opinion of staff :slight_smile: It doesn’t happen too often :slight_smile:

There is one more VERY important thing which we all do not understand and we all report this bug on forum regularly. Why in the search results there is only one SUMMED duration of all variations of the track instead of (like it was in the past) separated time of all variations? This is so unpractical for buyers. If someone is looking for a 30 seconds track, he has to go “inside the item” to see what is the duration.

Even more confusing is a fact that duration filter works ok = it gives the results of at least one variation with selected duration (e.g. 30 sec). But interface displays summed duration (e.g. 3 minutes).

Screen displays old interface, but it’s the same in the new one.


AJ's search algorithm is not sustainable. The Popular Files list is going stale.