<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>RyanMacklin.com &#187; podcast production</title>
	<atom:link href="http://RyanMacklin.com/tag/podcast-production/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://RyanMacklin.com</link>
	<description>One man&#039;s blog about games and social media</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 21:49:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Two Podcast Production Sins</title>
		<link>http://RyanMacklin.com/2011/06/two-podcast-prod-sins/</link>
		<comments>http://RyanMacklin.com/2011/06/two-podcast-prod-sins/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2011 17:38:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ryan Macklin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Social Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[podcast production]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reader request]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://RyanMacklin.com/?p=1255</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last week, I was on #zinechat talking about podcasting &#38; new media. As these discussions tend to go, we talked about production. I was asked to go into further detail into two of those production topics by a reader. Sin #1: Cutting All The &#8220;Ums&#8221; I understand the impulse to do this. When you&#8217;re editing [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Last week, I was on <a title="I’m on #zinechat this Wednesday, May 25th" href="http://RyanMacklin.com/2011/05/zinechat-wed-may-25th/">#zinechat</a> talking about podcasting &amp; new media. As these discussions tend to go, we talked about production. I was asked to go into further detail into two of those production topics by a reader.</p>
<h3>Sin #1: Cutting <em>All</em> The &#8220;Ums&#8221;</h3>
<p>I understand the impulse to do this. When you&#8217;re editing audio, every &#8220;uh&#8221;, &#8220;um&#8221;, stutter, restarted sentence, vowel elongation and the like are discordant notes. Many of us as podcast editors hate those. They grate on us. So we remove them.</p>
<p>I did this in the early days of Master Plan. I thought it was &#8220;good audio.&#8221; Today, I can&#8217;t stand to listen to that. I did what I call today <em>over-editing</em>. The end result was (a) many hours of work on my end to produce the show, (b) a lot of cut waveform artifacts you can hear, and (c) the remove of the human quality in a voice.</p>
<p>It turns out that only I really noticed them. Listenrs, it turns out, are <em>used to human speech</em>. Ums and Uhs and the like are a part of that. However, jarring cuts in the waveform are not a part of that &#8212; and those do get noticed by listeners, particularly headphone &amp; earbud ones.</p>
<p>Today, on the rare occasion I still edit audio, I don&#8217;t slave over every Um. I only work on the ones that happen in succession &#8212; &#8220;Back when we were uh uh uh developing Podcast the RPG&#8230;&#8221; And even then, I&#8217;m as like to leave one in for the human element as I am to cut them all. It largely depends on how easy it is to cut all of the Uhs in a moment without leaving a cut artifact behind.</p>
<p>I saw it as part of my duty as an interview podcaster to leave my guests sounding human. A few Uhs and restarts helps convey that humanity in a way we unconsciously recognize. Now, I was incredulous to this idea, until I started watching and listening to professional interview pieces. Stutters are at times left in. They&#8217;re character.</p>
<p>And it makes editing easier if you aren&#8217;t trying to remove them all. As to which ones I remove? Generally ones in succession (&#8220;uh uh uh&#8221;), sentence &amp; thought restarts that last ten or more seconds, and anything that makes it hard to understand what&#8217;s being spoken.</p>
<h3>Sin #2: Separating Speakers in Left &amp; Right Track</h3>
<p>I&#8217;m going to use a bit of hyperbole here. If you have some people speaking in just the left track, and others in the right track, you either intentionally or accidentally <strong>despise your audience</strong>.</p>
<p>Often, your listeners are going to be listening on headphones or earbuds. When you do that, you&#8217;re saying &#8220;fuck you, you don&#8217;t get to listen to my show&#8221; to:</p>
<ul>
<li>Folks partly deaf or completely deaf in one ear &#8212; can&#8217;t hear half the conversation</li>
<li>Folks with a sore ear or ear infection &#8212; can&#8217;t hear half the conversation</li>
<li>Folks who have inner ear disorders &#8212; the conversation is literally disorienting, dizzying (this applies to grossly non-normalized audio as well)</li>
<li>Folks with suddenly-busted headphones (since they do wear down) &#8212; can&#8217;t hear half the conversation (this also applies to commuters with stereo system problems, which is much more expensive)<br />
I had this happen on a plane trip once. That&#8230;sucked. Luckily, the shows I listened to were in mono.</li>
<li>Folks with a reason for only wearing one ear bud, like going jogging in a traffic-busy urban area and still wanting to be aware of your surroundings. Cuz, hey, cars.</li>
</ul>
<p>Some of these situations are temporary, some permanent. But even cater to the temporary &#8212; if I can&#8217;t listen to your show when people are talking about it, what are the chances that by the time I can, ten other things have grabbed my attention instead?</p>
<p>And that doesn&#8217;t even address when the two tracks are not normalized, so that one side is quite and the other loud. There&#8217;s one indie podcast years ago that used to do this. I stopped listening the day that the grossly un-normalized spiking laughter happening in just my left ear nearly caused me to clutch my head in pain and disorientation. Remember, we use our ears for balance. Don&#8217;t fuck with that, and you&#8217;ll keep more listeners.</p>
<p>If you&#8217;re just doing a talk show, make it mono (or barring that, identical stereo&#8230;which is just like mono except you&#8217;ve doubled the file size). Unless, of course, you like telling a portion of your audience that you are comfortable discriminating against them&#8211;because that&#8217;s what we feel when podcasters thoughtlessly make such audio.</p>
<p>- Ryan</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://RyanMacklin.com/2011/06/two-podcast-prod-sins/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Podcasts and Seasons</title>
		<link>http://RyanMacklin.com/2010/08/podcasts-and-seasons/</link>
		<comments>http://RyanMacklin.com/2010/08/podcasts-and-seasons/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Aug 2010 19:19:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ryan Macklin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Social Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[media monday]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[podcast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[podcast production]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ryanmacklin.com/?p=397</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve mentioned before that I think more podcasters take the idea of &#8220;seasons&#8221; as a silly, &#8220;let&#8217;s pretend we&#8217;re real media&#8221; way. Like, &#8220;ohh, look at us, we&#8217;re season 2! Aren&#8217;t we keen!&#8221; Not that I mind people having fun, playing around at something, whatever, but I feel like if that&#8217;s what someone thinks of [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve mentioned before that I think more podcasters take the idea of &#8220;seasons&#8221; as a silly, &#8220;let&#8217;s pretend we&#8217;re real media&#8221; way. Like, &#8220;ohh, look at us, we&#8217;re season 2! Aren&#8217;t we keen!&#8221;</p>
<p>Not that I mind people having fun, playing around at something, whatever, but I feel like if that&#8217;s what someone thinks of as a season, they&#8217;re missing the point. And it&#8217;s a point I&#8217;ve been talking about here and there for the last year or so. That seasons can be a good idea, if you understand them.</p>
<p>These days, I don&#8217;t enter into new projects without some plan of an exit strategy. Things that sounds like they&#8217;ll go over forever tend to end at a point of low energy, which is a violation of one of my podcast rules: &#8220;Leave people wanting more, not having wanted less.&#8221; Which means that with anything on-going (including this blog), I break my time spend doing that into seasons, and choose whether to renew that project after each season.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve been talking with a friend about starting a new show, something we&#8217;re both interested in talking about but want to make separate from our current shows. He was worried about adding another ongoing commitment to his life, and I agreed.</p>
<p>&#8220;That&#8217;s why podcasts aren&#8217;t ongoing commitments to me anymore. I think in seasons. Tell you what, let&#8217;s try five-episode seasons. If we like our first season, we&#8217;ll renew.&#8221;</p>
<p>As I described my thought and the advice I&#8217;ve given over the years, he came at me with a new thing I hadn&#8217;t considered before. &#8220;No. I don&#8217;t want to do something episode-based. That doesn&#8217;t feel like it has a hard stop.&#8221;</p>
<p>This blew me away, because I hadn&#8217;t considered something based on time-elapsed before. Or, rather, I had and discarded it. &#8220;Yeah, but if we say &#8216;Let&#8217;s try this for two months&#8217; and we only do an episode&#8230;I dunno.&#8221;</p>
<p>We compromised. Five episodes in fourteen weeks. That&#8217;s one episode every two weeks, with an extra four weeks to cover life happening. Not that we&#8217;ve started that yet, but then GenCon recovery really only started with me last week, and I have a backlog of life. We should be recording our pilot in September.</p>
<p>Another podcast I might be a part of (holy crap, it&#8217;s almost like I&#8217;m a media producer again) is taking a similar approach, and it&#8217;s smart[1].  Small, agile seasons. It gives us a target to shoot for that&#8217;s reachable in the short term, a period when we not only can but must seriously evaluate what&#8217;s happened, a time where we can plan to take a break rather than it just happening&#8230;<a href="http://masterplanpodcast.net/">and lasting several months</a>. Most importantly, it gives us permission to walk away.</p>
<p>Permission to walk away while you&#8217;re at a high point is important to being successful at anything. You&#8217;ll be remembered for your last acts on something. If you ride something all the way down to it crashing, that&#8217;s what people will remember. People give me shit still for Master Plan podfading rather than properly ending (though I am, slowly, getting back on that horse because I feel like I should finish it right, even if that violates my rule above). And <em>that&#8217;s</em> the point of seasons &#8212; to give yourself permission to quit something while it&#8217;s still good when you think you don&#8217;t have another full season in you.</p>
<p>Also, funding. But that&#8217;s another topic for another time.</p>
<p>- Ryan</p>
<p>(Not sure if I&#8217;m going to stick to &#8220;Media Monday&#8221; as a blog topic, but I&#8217;m playing with the idea. We&#8217;ll see if it survives a season!)</p>
<p>[1] Yes, I just said my own idea is smart. <a href="http://io9.com/5612287/gencon-in-photos-gamers-cosplayers-miniatures-dice-and-more-dice/gallery/30">I&#8217;m a humble guy.</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://RyanMacklin.com/2010/08/podcasts-and-seasons/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Round One on Podcast Production</title>
		<link>http://RyanMacklin.com/2010/04/on-podcast-production/</link>
		<comments>http://RyanMacklin.com/2010/04/on-podcast-production/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Apr 2010 20:40:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ryan Macklin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Social Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[podcast production]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ryanmacklin.com/?p=242</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(No, this is not an April Fool&#8217;s Day joke. Or it&#8217;s the world&#8217;s most boring one.) The other day, I was showing my business manager, Justin Smith, how I go about producing an episode of The Voice of the Revolution. We started talking at around 7pm as I did my pre-post-production (what I call it [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(No, this is not an April Fool&#8217;s Day joke. Or it&#8217;s the world&#8217;s most boring one.)</p>
<p>The other day, I was showing my business manager, Justin Smith, how I go about producing an episode of <a href="http://thevoiceoftherevolution.com/">The Voice of the Revolution</a>. We started talking at around 7pm as I did my pre-post-production (what I call it when I&#8217;m working with the files before I start editing). It wasn&#8217;t until 9pm that I actually starting <em>editing </em>the source files.</p>
<p>It was around 9:30 that I really wished I had just recorded the screen and our conversation, because I&#8217;m sure others would benefit. (As would I &#8212; I don&#8217;t lay claim to doing this as well as I could, but because amateur/self-production is so cloistered, learning better techniques is a slow process.)</p>
<p>So I&#8217;m going to start a series that I&#8217;ll update from time to time. I have a lot to say about making an episode of any of the podcasts I do, and packing that into one blog post is madness. This post will serve as an introduction, for you to get a sense of what it is that I do.</p>
<p>The Voice of the Revolution is, on average, a 40 minute show. I do my damnedest to keep it from going over 40. There are four segments of varying length, three of which are done by the two co-hosts via Skype, and the remaining one being an interview done by one of the co-hosts and a guest.</p>
<p>Recording the three co-hosted segments takes a 35-45-minute session. The interview on average around 15 minutes.</p>
<p>And it takes me around <em>seven hours</em> to make all that into the end product.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s three hours less than it took when I started doing The Voice on episode #19.</p>
<p>&#8220;Holy fuck, Ryan, that&#8217;s a long time!&#8221; you might say. I know some of my podcasting cohorts tell me that. However, in the real world, a ratio of around 10x-time is a decent rate of production. I&#8217;m pretty comfortable with that, given that I&#8217;ve put a lot of pride in my abilities as an audio producer. But what I&#8217;m doing isn&#8217;t complicated, it&#8217;s just time-consuming. Anyone can do what I do. And I want to show you how.</p>
<p>This initial post will talk about the software I use and my overall philosophy on content.</p>
<h3>Software</h3>
<p>Even though I have a Mac, I haven&#8217;t found software that I&#8217;m happy with yet. So I keep an XP boot and run <a href="http://www.adobe.com/products/audition/">Adobe Audition</a> 1.5. Audition isn&#8217;t available for the Mac<strong>[1]</strong>, but if it was I would make sweet, sweet love to it. (And would actually bother to upgrade.)</p>
<p>Audition is a great waveform editor and multi-track mixer. For those who aren&#8217;t sure what I mean by that, a waveform editor is a program that manipulates the sound file &#8212; cutting, muting, adjusting, etc. A multi-track mixer is a program that lets you manipulate the way multiple sound files playing on top of and along side of each other.</p>
<p>(That&#8217;s a pretty simple description. I&#8217;m sure those who don&#8217;t know what I&#8217;m talking about are cringing at it. But then that description isn&#8217;t for you.)</p>
<p>That&#8217;s my main bit of software, my workhorse. But I use a couple other tools as well:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.bias-inc.com/products/soundsoap2/">SoundSoap 2</a> is what I use to do some sound cleanup. But noise reduction and sound cleanup will need to be a post all of its own.</p>
<p>For doing all my remote calling work, I use <a href="http://www.skype.com/">Skype</a> and with it <a href="http://www.powergramo.com/">PowerGramo Pro</a>. I&#8217;ve been using PowerGramo Pro for years and it&#8217;s always been reliable. (Though, twice I fucked up by misconfiguring it, so user error is possible.)</p>
<p>And because I&#8217;m using Audition 1.5, which doesn&#8217;t handle .ogg files, I use <a href="http://audacity.sourceforge.net/">Audacity</a> to turn the .ogg files that Brennan sends me from his copy of PowerGramo Pro into .wav files. Otherwise, I stay the hell away from Audacity. It&#8217;s a fine program if you&#8217;re starting out, and I do recommend it for the newbie podcaster, but once you&#8217;ve been around the block a bit you&#8217;ll see where it&#8217;s frustratingly deficient.</p>
<h3>Philosophy on Content</h3>
<p>Justin was telling me that there&#8217;s a clear signature to anything I produce, that he can tell something is &#8220;a Ryan Macklin production.&#8221; Josh Roby once spotted that I started producing the Voice of the Revolution before we told anyone (which I think was episode 22 or 23, giving Brennan a few episodes to see if it worked out for him). That&#8217;s largely because of my take on content. (Which I&#8217;m pretty sure I talked about on this blog a year ago, when I was less consistent with updating it.)</p>
<p>Mechanically, I&#8217;m a subtractive editor &#8212; I cut what I don&#8217;t want from a source file to make my target file. But I don&#8217;t think of myself like that. I look at what I&#8217;m leaving in as additive, as having passed a litmus test for content. And that test is that it fits in one of the three categories:</p>
<ul>
<li>What&#8217;s said relevant information for the topic at hand (which is the point of anything I do<strong>[2]</strong>), or</li>
<li>What&#8217;s said adds to the speaker sounding human (and thus reduces listener distraction), or</li>
<li>What&#8217;s said adds to the noticeable rapport between the hosts &amp; guests (which serves as a proxy rapport between the speaker and listener).</li>
</ul>
<p>This means I don&#8217;t cut every &#8220;um&#8221; and stutter. This means that awkwardly-timed laughter might actually stay in the file. This means I cut when one of us rambles off topic, unless that ramble helps build rapport and I&#8217;m not seeing that built well beforehand.</p>
<p>I came up with these rules a couple years back, and I talk about them whenever I do a podcast 101 type of panel. The latter two are actually things that forced me to stop editing every stutter, um, and pause in the source file &#8212; a bad habit I had for about six months.</p>
<p>Next bit of content: the end result is king. If the recording has to be shifted around and be &#8220;out of order&#8221; in order to make more sense for the end result, I do that. Nothing in the recording is sacred. The end product is everything. So I will occasionally re-organize the file by cutting and moving around (though that&#8217;s usually difficult, for a number of reasons that&#8217;s also its own post).</p>
<p>That&#8217;s it for now. I&#8217;m over my 1K wordcount limit, and I&#8217;m late on finishing up March&#8217;s Voice episode. Back to work!</p>
<p>(If you have a specific topic you&#8217;d like me to talk about, feel free to ask in the comments. I have several in mind already, but think of it as voting for which you want to see first.)</p>
<p>- Ryan</p>
<p><strong>[1]</strong> If you have a suggestion on Mac software that is comparable to Audition, I would love to hear it.</p>
<p><strong>[2]</strong> This totally betrays the sort of podcaster I am. While I&#8217;m happy to participate on rambly panel shows, I will never produce one.</p>
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden" />
<input id="jsProxy" onclick="jsCall();" type="hidden" />
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden" />
<input id="jsProxy" onclick="jsCall();" type="hidden" />
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden" />
<input id="jsProxy" onclick="jsCall();" type="hidden" />
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden" />
<input id="jsProxy" onclick="jsCall();" type="hidden" />
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden" />
<input id="jsProxy" onclick="jsCall();" type="hidden" />
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden" />
<input id="jsProxy" onclick="jsCall();" type="hidden" />
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://RyanMacklin.com/2010/04/on-podcast-production/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

