Advice on making a band website

Chazz Michael Michaels

What I mean by this is registering a domain and making a site with band information, songs, gigs, etc. I have tried ReverbNation, Bandcamp, Facebook, MySpace, BreakingTunes and these do not meet my needs.

The problem I have it that I don't know how to code or anything like that, so what have people here in my position done? How did you solve this issue?

Thanks

It might help if you let us know what "your needs" are. I personally find facebook and soundcloud does the job nicely

ElectricTaurus

For what I can gather you need to hire a web designer and have a custom made site for your band.

If you sync your Reverbnation with Facebook/Myspace/Twitter you have a really powerful tool at your disposal that you can cobine with Soundcloud and Bandcamp.

Once you upadte something on the Reverbnation account it will display on all the other sites.

Chazz Michael Michaels

Something simple and uncomplicated. Doesn't need to be flashy. Contains all the info in one page. I am thinking maybe a Wordpress page with a registered domain, but they charge you more to embed video/audio, which is a shame.

I find Reverbnation to be overcomplicated. Band equity statistics abound, and yet finding the bands songs is an ordeal.

Denalihighway

check this crowd out bandzoogle.com (there are other providers to if you google around but these are specifically geared at musicians). it works out around a tenner a month with a load of functionality. u can also sign up for a free trial - just do it and see how it goes, its a no brainer.

i and a few others i know use them and find them brilliant. no coding expertise needed. if you're anyway half decent IT you'll fly it. basically if you can work your way around facebook, reverbnation etc etc u should be fine.

if you're serious about music, you need somewhere you can put your own stamp on. its amazing how many people aren't aware of services like these. you can get really professional results for not a lot of money and you have complete control.

don't waste money going to a web developer. unless you've got loads of it to waste that is.

rcaz

Check out Radiohead's website, one of the best band websites there is I think. Simple layout, easy to read, content straight up front, no loading screens, no fancy intro screens, no music that automatically starts playing when you load the page. (If you're interested, check out the source code (cmd+U on Firefox, cmd+option+U on Chrome). Really simple stuff, bar the little bit of java to animate the buttons at the top.)

A good website is simple, loads quickly, and gives you good content right away. The thing I don't get about so many other websites is, a good website is easier to make than a bad one. How many websites have you looked at that have had intro animations and fancy layouts and java applications running in them and animated menus and everything, that probably took ages to get working properly? If you have good stuff to show the user, you can make a top-quality website with a bit of thought, some HTML-for-dummies-type tutorials, and a plain text editor.

The most important thing is content though, a website's only good when there's good stuff on it.

I reckon go with Wordpress and use a simple theme.

Chazz Michael Michaels

rcaz wrote: »

Check out Radiohead's website, one of the best band websites there is I think. Simple layout, easy to read, content straight up front, no loading screens, no fancy intro screens, no music that automatically starts playing when you load the page.

A good website is simple, loads quickly, and gives you good content right away. The thing I don't get about so many other websites is, a good website is easier to make than a bad one. How many websites have you looked at that have had intro animations and fancy layouts and java applications running in them and animated menus and everything, that probably took ages to get working properly? If you have good stuff to show the user, you can make a top-quality website with a bit of thought, some HTML-for-dummies-type tutorials, and a plain text editor.

The most important thing is content though, a website's only good when there's good stuff on it.

I reckon go with Wordpress and use a simple theme.

I found a way of embedding music/video on Wordpress, so I'm going to with that.

I completely agree on overcomplicated websites. **** the animations and ****loads of information. Just give me songs, videos and gigs. End of.

rcaz

Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »

Just give me songs, videos and gigs. End of.

Well, not necessarily. The best bit about a band website is when the band themselves interact with it, and can share a little bit of something personal on there. Again with the Radiohead site, now and again the members will post a 10 track playlist of stuff they're listening to at that moment, which I think is some really cool fan interaction.

Contrast that with the websites that are obviously nothing to do with the band members themselves, where it's just a load of gig dates and "CLICK HERE TO BUY NOW" links.

tricky D

Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »

Something simple and uncomplicated. Doesn't need to be flashy. Contains all the info in one page. I am thinking maybe a Wordpress page with a registered domain, but they charge you more to embed video/audio, which is a shame.

Embedding video is trivial in WP.

All info on one page is not a good idea. The homepage should be the gateway with snappy snippets, linking to longer format content pages.

Dead right on the rest though: simple, no fancy crap like animations, excessive info (usually talking too much about yourself like a bad chat up technique) and definitely no auto-playing media.

WP should indeed do the trick.

gl

Chazz Michael Michaels

I split the information into a few pages, music, gigs, video, etc. The front page will be about interaction. Thanks for the advice.

rcaz

Throw up a link here when you've got it together!

Malice

rcaz wrote: »

Really simple stuff, bar the little bit of java to animate the buttons at the top.

Just to be pedantic and completely off-topic, that's JavaScript, not Java.

rcaz

Malice wrote: »

Just to be pedantic and completely off-topic, that's JavaScript, not Java.

D'oh! I'm only starting to learn this stuff now, excuse my ignorance :pac:

Malice

Don't mind me . By the sounds of it you already have the ability to recognise a good design unlike a lot of professional Web designers.