Where I come from, QUALITY is job 1
June 5th, 2006Anyone who can scan their music memory banks and send me from whence this song quote came from gets real props. I think one day they should invent a device that scans your brain and if there’s a song in there it should match it with a database and play that song on your computer. I’ll give that one to the entrepreneurs.
Anyhow, the issue of quality is constantly argued in audio circles. I went to an AES meeting once with keynote speaker George Massenburg; arguably one of the greatest minds of our technological time (this guy invented the parametric eq for God’s sake people). George spoke of how important audio quality was to the music industry and felt that the music industry would not die based on mp3 downloads because people wanted quality. They wouldn’t necessarily care the first time they heard a song but a true fan would listen repeatedly and start to find the minor glitches that might eventually lead to them actually disliking the song. Maybe not something to be concerned with for podcasting. Or is it!? DUN DUN DAHHHHH!
After a great episode (34) of Across the Sound with Joseph Jaffe where Jaffe, in a very impromtu manner, interviewed Saatchi and Saatchi’s CEO Kevin Roberts the question arose for me again… is sound quality important in podcasting if the real import of that podcast is content?
The quality of the recording of that interview was poor at best (no offense Joseph), I know it was done in an elevator, likely with a handheld recorder, but the important thing there was the content; don’t get me wrong (there’s another audio clip going in my head) I agree that content is king but here’s my point…
Audio that is recorded with full knowledge that that audio will be used for podcasting should be as good as possible. Why?
Efficient production gets the message out sooner.
I am an editor for IT Conversations; an excellent organization bringing you excellent content, constantly. How does this happen? Volunteers record discussions, panels, conferences, etc. then those programs are overseen by series producers to pick the best content from those panels, coferences,etc. which are then edited by the editors, uploaded to a server and posted on an IT Conversations site page. No slight to the engineers recording but it takes A LOT longer to edit content that isn’t recorded well. It’s no different than recording a band in studio; a bad drum sound never becomes good, just less bad.
The result? I, as an editor, spend more time trying to fix problems with volume & noise rather than editing minor speech problems (ums and ahhs). The second result is that it takes longer to get the program up.
Why does this matter?
If the name of the podcasting game is excellent content delivered to the masses, and the masses want their content as soon as possible, the content’s quality must be kept up throughout the whole process to save time in post production.
Think of any advertising that gets screwed up in printing; either a problematic ad is run or the product doesn’t get advertised when the company needs it to.
Audio is no different than text, it’s content value is just as high.
And easier to emotionally interpret 
Let’s think of who’s listening to this podcast. An attendee of the conference stands to benefit just as much as anyone from hearing that conference’s content. A repeated listen might fill in gaps in that person’s notes or perhaps they are siting the content of a panelist’s speech for research; maybe one of the most salient points here. In the same way that we preserve books and magazine’s for their relevant content, we should ensure the quality of audio remain excellent for future generations.
I could go on with reasons why, that’s not the intent, here’s the thing…
How do we solve this issue?
I have some of my own ideas that I will be posting in the future, but for now I invite your thoughts on the topic. Important? Not?
