The new font looks terrible in my opinion, but then, what do I know.

Cheers Richie. Y'all keep the feedbvack coming. Nothing is written in stone with these changes and if there appears to be a sensible consensus on X, Y, or Z I more than willing to roll back/revise some of the tweaks. eoghan

I like the font. Futura would be better though.

yea not reeeeeally feelin the font myself im afraid!

Likin the layout of the frontpage though. Changing the font is a good idea aswell.

Slightly different shade of blue?

Just how it's all moved around with the gig reviews under the album reviews, looks more concise.

It is a biut easier on the eye alright. But God, I hate the colour. There, I said it.

We fear change. I think the new layout is fine, but I thought the old layout was fine too. I must admit I dislike the new font but I'll probably grow accustomed to it over time.

The colour scheme is ick. Don't know anything about fonts, but it looks ok.

Like hte new layout, hate the font.

I'd have to say not liking the font at all, if you look at most webstites, (nme, rte, rollingstone, ireland.com, unison.ie) they all use sans-serif fonts like arial. It's just easier to read online, for printed works serif fonts like Times New Roman and Verdana work better, I'd definitely say go back to a sans-serif font for readability but then that's only my opinion. Had a look at www.nytimes.com and I don't think it looks good, the layout does but think the text is hard to read. As to the colour, I'd like a white background but the blue does make the site stand out from others. Anyway just my opinions, like the new layout and great that there are improvements being made all the time

HATE the new font, there was nothing wrong with the old one.

I have to agree on the new font.. Its just not working for me. Rest seems fine

I like the font, is easier on the eye, & more official looking ... although I'm more of a Verdana man myself ! Verdana was designed for small print, such as this site uses. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verdana

Me no like at all at all. Sorry there ol' chum.

Not feeling the font either, bit hard on the eye. Everything else is dandy

i like the font.

Excellent feedback so far m'luds'n'ladies. I hear the negative stuff some of you have been saying about the new Georgia font. But I don't want to ditch it just yet. I think the size of the font was too small, making it somethimes difficult to read / unattractive. So I have just increased the size of the fonts on the discussion board (while keeping it as Georgia). So... What are the thoughts on the larger sized fonts? What's preference: smaller fonts (as before) or the bigger ones now on the board? RSVP eoghan

have you never been told before that size isnt everything Eoghan?!?!

The new size for the new font is a big improvement over the old size for the new font but no better than the old font! So now I'm pretty indifferent on the font front.

Yep, the new size does seem to have improved things greatly. Twas probably my failing eyesight with old age that was causing the lower size font to trouble me.

font definately looks better now its been resized and the homepage seems much neater and easier to find your way with the new frames. course the bigger font also means its harder to disguise the fact youre on a message board while in work.

Is it just me, or is the font bigger on the last page than on this one?

No, wait a minute it looks ok now....tripin...

The re-sized font is much better, looks well

AFTER 4 years studying design i must say that font is terrible as too are the immediate heard some stuff on their myspace

Font? how about "Comic Sans"? *runs* (if you don't hear from me again, I've probably been stabbed with a pencil by a graphic designer or something)

i think you should get rid of the 'last updated on...' bit. fool people into thinking it's updated everyday. oh, and try wingdings. postmodern.

Now, THIS is how to design a music related site http://www.menomena.com/menu2.html I accept no responsibility for any temporary blindness that may occur.

White on blue never works terribly well from a design point of view, and if your monitor is subject to any form of glare text can become unreadable in those colours. Agreed with previous that the font used is meant for print, not computer screens. Site utilising fonts like this, http://www.neumu.com/, look more professional and are easier to read

eh the font is way too big....that is all

The text font is a bad chioce, makes everything harder on the eye. I dunno, i just get a really bad headache looking at cluas now, everything just seems all over the place and messy As for the home page, i think there is too much on it

I guess I've given it a few days - time for some conclusions. Firstly, the font which seems to be the most controversial change. I find it harder to read that the original, also a little on the large side. It reminds me of the new Guardian font (which, incidentally, I think works really well on the printed page). But, all in all, it doesn't really affect my enjoyment of the site. More controversial to me was the decision to move the email login to a new page. I use the email regularly and it was always nice to see what's changed on the site whilst logging in. Now I have bookmarked the login page, I suspect that over time, my usage of the site will show a slight dip. I think the new front page is an improvement. I appreciate the fact that the ads are still unobstrusive. I am assuming that the proliferation of the word "indie" is for search engine benefit? I like to think that CLUAS has broader range than that suggested by a word that is losing meaning to me. The Corrs, Van, Jack Johnson. Indie?