I'm now doing my podcasts in real-time. This is a big change for the better, but it also means that I have to learn how to fix a whole new category of bugs and mistakes. I consider my set-up a "Reverse-Adam-Curry." At Bloggercon, Adam explained that he was using his Powerbook as the source material for his music, sound clips, microphone and mixer and then using a line-out to an mp3 recorder to make the real-time recording. I'm going the other way. I have my music on one station (a Powerbook, an iPod, or a MP3 player). From the headphone cord of that station I connect to the line-in port on my PC. I also connect a microphone to the PC and use the Wave-Out Mix setting in Windows to combine the two. Sony Sound Forge 7.0 on the PC is where I make the sound recording. I now have a set-up capable of providing excellent sound quality, but I still have to solve two more problems. The first one is to find the optimal encoding that matches high quality sound with small file sizes. That's as much as matter of taste and download tolerance as it is a technical problem. The last podcast was 22,100/16 bit, but checked in at 35 megabytes. Above average sound quality but I'd like to cut the file size by about 10 megabytes. What's the right compromise? I don't know yet. The other problem will only be solved by practice. I don't yet have the timing down for starting and ending songs or fading them in and out. At Bloggercon, Adam described this as the Nintendo-skill part of podcasting -- in other words, I have to get faster with my hands juggling the sound levels and the play and pause buttons. It's just a matter of time. In the meantime, I could edit out all the mistakes or just continue to post the new podcasts warts and all. I'm going with the latter approach. Chirp, Chirp.
|
||||||||||||||||
Chirp, Chirp
The sounds of bugs. Plenty of them. But I'm getting better, even if it's not quite so obvious to the handful of listeners out there. Podcasting in 2004 is a lot like blogging in 2000: few tools, lots of technical mistakes by the podcasters, and voices still under development. In 2000, professional publishers could easily smile down at the bloggers, confident that their place as the source of news and commentary was secure. I'm sure audio broadcasters feel the same about podcasting. Howard Stern and Mel Karmazin are pronouncing satellite radio as the future of audio, but I see the future of radio as the user-enabled network. Unless the users can send their own broadcasts over the satellite, Sirius will remain at the margins of mainstream radio. I've never aspired to be a DJ, but I do get excited when I see the future. And the podcasting wave is too exciting not to hop on and see where it takes me.
Comments
Re: Chirp, Chirp
by
cambler
on Sat 20 Nov 2004 11:34 AM PST | Profile | Permanent Link
Um, with respect, no. As someone who's done a lot of professional sound engineering, 22k/16 doesn't cut it. Indeed, 44.1/8 might have been better for your purposes. But listening to the music was difficult, though I admit I'm more critical than most.
I'd much rather see a higher-quality and larger file. Or, alternatively, offer both. High quality but large size, an then a smaller file for those who want it. If bandiwidth isn't an issue for you, blow the doors open. Re: Re: Chirp, Chirp
by
Bret Fausett
on Mon 22 Nov 2004 08:23 AM PST | Profile | Permanent Link
44.1/8 was perfectly awful. Much worse than 22/16. I wish I had realized just how bad before I did an entire podcast last night. I'll redo today and see if I can blow the doors open.
Re: Re: Re: Chirp, Chirp
by
cambler
on Mon 22 Nov 2004 09:15 AM PST | Profile | Permanent Link
It was worth a try - you probably have tons more dynamic range needed.
So why not do a 44.1/16 feed as well as a lower-resolution feed for those who don't have the bandwidth? I presume that *you* have the bandwidth? Re: Re: Re: Re: Chirp, Chirp
by
Bret Fausett
on Mon 22 Nov 2004 09:43 AM PST | Profile | Permanent Link
I am using borrowed bandwidth right now. :-) Thanks, folks!
Re: Chirp, Chirp
by
Bret Fausett
on Sat 20 Nov 2004 11:43 AM PST | Profile | Permanent Link
The first real-time podcast from a couple of days ago was awful as far as sound quality, but I thought last nights was much better. I'm going to try again over the weekend though, so I'll try your suggestion. I agree that quality is the goal. I want to offer better sound quality than FM or streaming media. *That's* the value proposition for podcasting. For the user, bandwidth shouldn't be as big a deal since podcasting downloads can be set to occur during the wee hours of the night. If I err, I'm going to err on the side of high quality sound. I'll try 44/8 next. Thanks for the suggestion.
Re: Chirp, Chirp
by
kpettersen
on Sun 21 Nov 2004 11:40 PM PST | Profile | Permanent Link
Bret, Heard you on the 'Random Bytes' podcast earlier and found it very interesting. I agree with your sense of the future of podcasting. Have you given any more thought to hosting podcasters under your license(s)? I am sure there are some out there who would jump at the chance if the price was pretty reasonable for hosting. But I had another thought at the same time. And since you are a lawyer, you may know! What if you just host the RSS feed? Or is the license tied directly to the mp3 file?
Re: Re: Chirp, Chirp
by
Bret Fausett
on Mon 22 Nov 2004 08:28 AM PST | Profile | Permanent Link
I think you could just host the RSS feed if that were the only way of getting the mp3 (in other words, don't provide a direct link off the third-party site). I do want to host other podcasters under a single license, but first I'm going to start a corporation and move transfer the licenses to the corp. I don't want to expand the scale of this thing as Bret Fausett. It's certainly the way to do it though. I can see an openpodcast.org sort of thing in which people post their podcasts and playlists and the corporation handles all the license payments. With a thousand podcasters all under one roof, I have no doubt that advertising and tip jars could pay for the licensing fees -- now paying for all that bandwidth though, that's another problem! :-)
Bret Re: Re: Re: Chirp, Chirp
by
kpettersen
on Mon 22 Nov 2004 12:00 PM PST | Profile | Permanent Link
Bret, Bandwidth is not always the problem that people think. There was so much dark fiber laid during the .com boom, and it is all still out there. I know you can get $50 a meg in the NY area, but I am sure even better prices can be found. I don't think bandwidth will be an issue at all.
One of the reasons a lot of podcasters are having bandwidth issues is that all of their monthly deals have a 'transfer' cap. In podcasting, 'transfer' caps are a bad thing. But when you start getting your bandwidth in 10 meg increments, most companies don't cap how much total information was passed during the month. You get 10 Mbs, whether you use it all or not. Trackbacks
TrackBack URL: Weblogs that reference this article:
|
||||||||||||||||

