Comments on: High bandwidth/quality phone codecs and aural cues in radio programs http://www.notes.xythian.net/2006/02/24/high-bandwidthquality-phone-codecs-and-aural-cues-in-radio-programs/ Links, technical notes, whatnot. Fri, 05 Sep 2008 19:44:08 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: Lars http://www.notes.xythian.net/2006/02/24/high-bandwidthquality-phone-codecs-and-aural-cues-in-radio-programs/#comment-1844 Lars Fri, 24 Feb 2006 23:17:59 +0000 http://www.notes.xythian.net/2006/02/24/high-bandwidthquality-phone-codecs-and-aural-cues-in-radio-programs/#comment-1844 I'm sure they could apply a sound effect to designate the speaker as caller if that was deemed desireable. It would be pretty easy to add some low level white noise without cutting the quality too heavily. I don't see this issue as a problem. Hosts are easy to recognize by how they talk. I could characterize it as way moreauthoritive and confident than a guest or caller. Also the host usually talks the most unless they are moderating, which is a clue who is in charge in itself. Distinguishing between in-studio guests and and guests dialing isn't much of an issue. Listening to a scheduled guest call in at better quality is a all around win and I think by the pacing of the converstion I could infer if they are in studio or not. Converstions aren't usually as quick because the people talking don't get the benefit of body language and there is also the latency to deal with which will make the conversation not as crisp as an in person dialogue. A random public caller generally won't be given sufficient airtime to confuse me into thinking he/she is running the program or in studio. A random public caller rarely is engaged in conversation or debate these days. Just allowed to lay praise and a point, thats about it before the host hangs up. Overall, I can't wait. Good sound quality will make for better radio. It's probably not going to improve the actual content much though. I’m sure they could apply a sound effect to designate the speaker as caller if that was deemed desireable. It would be pretty easy to add some low level white noise without cutting the quality too heavily.

I don’t see this issue as a problem. Hosts are easy to recognize by how they talk. I could characterize it as way moreauthoritive and confident than a guest or caller. Also the host usually talks the most unless they are moderating, which is a clue who is in charge in itself.
Distinguishing between in-studio guests and and guests dialing isn’t much of an issue. Listening to a scheduled guest call in at better quality is a all around win and I think by the pacing of the converstion I could infer if they are in studio or not. Converstions aren’t usually as quick because the people talking don’t get the benefit of body language and there is also the latency to deal with which will make the conversation not as crisp as an in person dialogue.
A random public caller generally won’t be given sufficient airtime to confuse me into thinking he/she is running the program or in studio. A random public caller rarely is engaged in conversation or debate these days. Just allowed to lay praise and a point, thats about it before the host hangs up.

Overall, I can’t wait. Good sound quality will make for better radio. It’s probably not going to improve the actual content much though.

]]>