Re: Lowry Mays speaks

[Aaron Read <aread@speakeasy.net>]

At 10:38 PM 2/26/2003 -0500, Rick Kelly wrote:
>On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 21:48:25 -0500 SteveOrdinetz <steveord@bit-net.com>
>writes:
>
> > I am.  What goes on behind the scenes has changed over the years,
> > but to  the end user the difference is barely, if at all noticeable.
>
>As the keeper of a web site that specializes in pre-voice-tracked radio,
>I must (probably surprisingly) say that I'm with Mr. Ordinetz on this
>one.  As a matter of fact in some ways voice tracking ends up sounding
>better than what was going out on the air 25 years ago, especially on
>smaller stations.

Agreed.  All you gotta do is listen to college radio these days to hear 
just how awful local radio *can* be.   Don't get me wrong, college radio 
can be ab-fab, and (if you're into more unusual music) often the music 
selection is pretty good.   But all too frequently the stopsets and voice 
breaks are hideously bad sounding.  Slow, meandering, full of ahhhs and 
ummmmss, frequently lacking important info (like they'll say everything 
about the song that just played EXCEPT who the band was...or there'll be a 
four minute voice break and the call letters are never said).

As I frequently advise my college clients...automation is not 
evil.  Technology is ALWAYS neutral; it can be used for "good", or it can 
be used for "evil".   Most radio outlets have used it for "evil" (as us 
radio geeks interpret it) but voicetracking & automation can be used to 
make a station sound better AND still sound local.   Sound even 
better...since with voicetracking you've got a chance to re-do a crappy 
break if need be.  More human than human, if you will.  :-)



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aaron "Bishop" Read             aread@speakeasy.net
FriedBagels Consulting          AOL-IM: readaaron
http://www.friedbagels.com      Boston, MA