This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Anyone want to put anything in it about the website being down? Christinaross ( talk) 16:14, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

So who came up with the notice about the service being shut down this morning? (11/8/10). Certainly the service was offline, but the edits made sounded like the service was closed for good, but as I type this I am listening to Slacker. Some of the edits are still there, referring to Slacker in the past tense. 16:32, 8 November 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Angiest ( talk • contribs)

The webplayer has been updated and the Screenshot is old. here is what it looks like now. http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/3307/slackerscreenshotzx0.png —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.65.215.195 ( talk) 04:37, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I heard that it is very difficult to create a meaningful classical station or stations. Something about multiple performances of the same music by multiple artists or symphonies. I like classical too. I will be happy when they get around to programming some. I know from a feedback email that they are working on it. But did not disclose when. Xenotica 22:15, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Did anyone ever explain WHY there's no classical music available on slacker? I was loving the site until I made a station of just classical artists- and it wouldn't play. Why would they have those artists available? It's just odd.

I agree that the classical music support on Slacker sucks, but in a sense it's similar to that of Last.fm. The problem with classical is that it's very different from non-classical music in that with non-classical the performer is who matters, whereas classical the performers do not matter as much as what/who they are performing. In a general sense, you don't care whether the London Philharmonic or the Montreal Symphonic Orchestra are performing some Mozart, just that it's Mozart. For non-classical, if Eric Clapton is performing a cover of Cocaine by J. J. Cale, you don't care that it was written by J. J. Cale, you want to listen to Eric Clapton. It is these fundamental differences in the way these types of music are handled that cause so many headaches for music services such as Slacker and Last.fm. Ahugenerd ( talk) 17:00, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Does this article meet he guidelines? I read everything more carefully this time so hopefully I got it right. I am open to any suggestions of course since I am new using WikiPedia. Yup a n00b! Xenotica 01:01, 9 August 2007 (UTC) Bold text

Any idea what the actual sound quality is on either the browser player or the portable? I've been using the browser player for a week or so and am wondering if I should just stick with radio over iTunes (i.e. live365) or with the slacker player. The device is very tempting, but the stats on the slacker.com Website pretty much suck. 24.127.49.104 ( talk) —Preceding comment was added at 17:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

This article still needs a lot of work. There is a lot of prose that sounds like advertising. AliveFreeHappy ( talk) 20:09, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Can you be more specific please. So someone can attempt to fix the "prose" I personally don't see that but with a little guidance maybe I or some else can. Xenotica ( talk) 18:56, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

The part that made me cringe was in the History section

Slacker’s library of CD-quality music across all genres and eras ensures that music lovers can enjoy radio stations on their BRAVIA HDTV ranging from music of the golden-era classics to today’s hottest hits. By simply linking their BRAVIA Internet Video Link to your online Slacker account, users can easily enjoy...

It simply reads like promotional copy that you would find in a sales flyer, not an encyclopaedia. The boldface is mine, to indicate precisely some of the problematic prose.

Vitriolum ( talk) 20:59, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

about it only available in the US, im not near there and can listen to it; that could be wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.90.75.18 ( talk) 07:46, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Any particular reason the recent reviews were removed? Nala Galatea ( talk) 09:42, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Is it just me, or does this sound like a press release? 11:29, 11 September 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.108.164.229 ( talk)

Indeed, this is far too promotional (I mean, specific packages and prices are even specified.) Eccomi ( talk) 21:18, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

This reads very much like an ad/PR. Someone removed my Spam warning for some reason. Rabend ( talk) 12:43, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I put it back on, since this site is just a blatant ad. Rabend ( talk) 15:23, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Slacker has recently released a new portable player called "Slacker G2" a more streamlined device than the earlier version shown. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.184.164.167 ( talk) 02:48, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Should we add something in the article saying that the artist profiles and album reviews come from allmusic.com?

We could also mention something about the dj's that program the stations. forums.slacker.com mentions most if not all of them. And that site seems to be official, so maybe that could be a reference, but only taking content written by the staff?

But overall, the page needs to be expanded immensely, I mean if you look at Pandora and last.fm's page, they're a whole lot more filled out. Flap Jackson ( talk) 03:25, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure the Slacker Community section is needed. Just about every website or service has a Facebook, Twitter, and MySpace account. Is it really necessary to draw special attention to this in an encyclopedia article? Keithandmissy ( talk) 19:41, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

The "Audioscrobbler hack" is not notable for a supposedly encyclopedic article. This is doubly true when there is no citation for the information. It seems to me that the main purposes of that section is to (1) provide an opportunity for an external link (essentially linkspamming for the hack authors) and (2) make the article fulfill a user guide or some other function for Slacker/authors-of-the-hack that is more correctly done elsewhere (i.e., on a Slacker forum or some other site that is not Wikipedia). Removing that section would reduce the fanboy tone of the article. If you really think the information is somehow critical to someone who wants to read an article explaining what Slacker is, at least provide a citation that isn't self-published and/or reduce it to a single sentence. It does not warrant its own section. SlubGlub ( talk) 17:20, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

This section seems to be outdated. LastSlacker doesn't seem to work with newest version of Slacker and developer does not update it anymore. See this post: http://www.last.fm/group/LastSlacker/forum/52246/_/2017974 Also I believe the reference link for the Firefox Extension is http://code.yerblog.com/lastfm/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bexica ( talk • contribs) 20:38, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

As an editor at Crawdaddy!, and to comply with COI guidelines, I am not posting the link to this column about the Slacker music service. However, I would like to recommend it on its merits, and hope that an editor will find the time to examine the piece and—if he or she sees fit—post it to the "Recent Articles" section. I appreciate your time. Crawdaddy! [1]
Mike harkin ( talk) 23:11, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

The "Recent Articles" section seems to be contrary to WP:NOT and the WP Manual of Style. While a reasonable "Further reading" section may be appropriate, this is not it (IMHO). SlubGlub ( talk) 03:12, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

It would be better if those articles could be converted into references that further support the "History" section or other parts of the article. Then there would be less concern about keeping them. -- Bovineone ( talk) 22:15, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:

1. There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
2. It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
3. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 ( talk) 21:09, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Slacker was just overhauled. AmericanLeMans ( talk) 04:52, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

The article says one central function of Slacker Radio is to suggest "similar songs and artists." How do they operationalize "similar"? I think it's more than just the same genre, sex or age. The Pandora Radio article has a reference which says Pandora uses attributes from the Music Genome Project to define "similar", but I've never seen how Slacker does so. Kim9988 ( talk) 23:36, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

The article lacks in discussing the copiright issue: 1) do slacker radios pay copyrights to the authors of the songs? 2) if yes do they pay the same amount to all artists (signed, unsigned, national or international artists) and with which modalities? 3) absolute and comparative quantification of the (eventually) payed copyrights; how do slacker pay to the author for each streamed songs? How much do Slacker pay in comparison to a traditional radio or TV broadcast? How do they pay in comparison to other streaming web services like deezer, pandora, spotify etc? 4) what do musicians, authors and labels think about slacker? 5) which is the method by which a band or musician can have their songs on slacker they contact slacker directly or there is some intermediation? 6) what kind of control there is about the number of times a song is streamed? Do Slacker send a report to the American Society Of Authors and Editors? Mmrecords ( talk) 03:44, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

It appears that their premium service is indefinitely unavailable. Every time I try to see if I can upgrade it says that it is "currently unavailable". The Mo-Ja'al ( talk) 18:36, 26 January 2019 (UTC)