[bct] Re: Podcast quality

  • From: "Vince Thacker" <vince@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 16:05:56 +0100

I agree with the general drift of the conversation here. I've though,m well, maybe I could even use that little pocket memo I've been carrying around with me, but no it's just too awful. It has a terrible noise-to-noise ratio.

And although I'm fairly tolerant of varying quality sound, when I hear the start of a phone blog, or womething where there are several people talking but I can only hear the one who's doing the recording, it does turn me off.

I shan't be doing any podcasting until I've got equipment I'm happy with. I won't expect professional radio quality but I will expect not to put my listeners through any audio grief.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Amy" <amy@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 3:21 PM
Subject: [bct] Re: Podcast quality

Good words, and you put it more tactfully than I probably would have. Not that I wouldn't hae wanted to be nice about it, I just didn't ahve the words.
And I agree. I spent my whole life using little $30 tape recorders. While they work, and some of them did an okay job, I guess I'm a bit tired of the low quality most of them give me. And I was in the market for a new tape recorder anyway, a decent one, but not too expensive because I simply can't afford it. If the MicroTrack were more accessible, I'd try for it, because idealy that's the quality I would much prefer. but I can't right now, so I need to find another option for now,a nd work possibly toward something higher end, if I choose to do so. But if not, then I will do the best I can. And even if it's all you can affort, you can still make decent podcasts, and that is the important thing.
Thank you, dan.

----- Original Message ----- From: "The Scarlet Wombat" <coconut@xxxxxxx>
To: <blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 5:46 AM
Subject: [bct] Podcast quality

Mary, I will gently take exception to what you say. I do not think an emphasis on quality can ever be overblown. We owe it to ourselves and our listeners to produce the best podcasts our budgets and skills allow. It is like writing, you are a careful writer who cares about what you write, same for podcasts, if we can make them better, it is good to do so. Obviously, budget constrains many, and this is not a problem.

My wife has very limited hearing out of one ear only, and she cannot hear the hiss present in recordings made with the Olympus units, however, if I play one such for her, then one made on the kind of machines Neal and I have, she can tell the difference, instantly, even if she cannot quantify that difference. While few should or even can afford that much for a recorder, as you note, there are ways to get a better recording out of your Olympus, like using external microphones.

I encourage people to make the best podcasts they can. This does not mean that those with inexpensive equipment and software should not try, they should and we see some very good results on the web site made with lower cost equipment. But, let's not diminish the emphasis on quality because having a goal to reach is always good.


-- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.7.0/345 - Release Date: 5/22/2006

-- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.7.1/347 - Release Date: 24/05/2006

Other related posts: