I hear Lite FM, Fresh FM, K-rock, WQCD and others in NYC are considering computer generated "voices"! (just joking! I don't want to start a panic in NYC-- especially at AFTRA HQ! )
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Voicetracking
- Thread starter Clayton Douglas
- Start date
Clayton Douglas said:I hear Lite FM, Fresh FM, K-rock, WQCD and others in NYC are considering computer generated "voices"! (just joking! I don't want to start a panic in NYC-- especially at AFTRA HQ! ) (Some may say smooth jazz and some other music are already computer generated so why shouldn't the jocks be too?)
PS---- For those of you who seem to feel jocks have become meaningless--- think CBS-fm and some other stations would have their good ratings if they were jockless ?
flytrap said:Funny you should mention comuputerized voices on the radio. I remember when NOAA weather had a real voice on it. Now its a robot voice in my area. The thing I can't figure out is wouldn't it be easier to just record the forcast with a real person that to type it out on a computer? Its a lot easier to talk than to type. and its faster.
Actually you'd have to type it out and then hand the copy over to someone who has to go to a studio and open a mic so he can read it on the air. Not to mention most of those reports were on tape, not live.
With the computer voice on Weather Radio, you just type the copy into the machine and it reads it directly on the air. It's that much quicker.
M
mediamayhem
Guest
oaktree said:Gentlemen - as one who hears it, sees it, reads it, comments on it just like you ... as well as being "in it," ...
It is what it is ...
The listeners who listen just don't CARE about radio anymore.
As great as this board is, it's not a landscape of "average listeners." It's an opinion board for radio fans and a few who are in the business...or who wannabe.
The fact is, that listeners don't CARE anymore ... and with their available choices and both the "corporate" mentality and the fact that so much radio sounds like crap, is not relevant, isn't "local" and the music leaves a lot to be desired in the wake of what arm-chair PDs can do now with their own iPods ... can you really blame the listeners?
They don't care whether it's "live," "voice tracked," "syndicated on CD," or fed from Dallas, California or Resume Speed, Nebraska by "satellite."
The great majority don't care. And they are listening less and less.
That's putting the cart before the horse. Listeners don't care anymore because they haven't been given a good reason to care. They do have many other alternatives (iPods, etc) that can satisfy their music needs. So tell me...if someone owns an iPod, why EVER turn on the radio? To hear what's happening between the songs, that's why. To hear local traffic or a jocks personality or a fun contest - anything that they find entertaining that cannot be duplicated in their iPod. And those elements are much better executed LIVE vs. voicetrack, even if it's the greatest voicetracker in the world. Yes, a listener may not know it's voicetracked - but they may also not be as satisfied with what they're hearing, unable to pinpoint just what the reason is.
Corporations are cutting costs wherever possible -- consolidating positions (one persona doing 2-3 jobs) or saving money by firing live talent and paying a fraction of the cost to voicetrack. But with cost-cutting comes sacrifices. The one person doing 3 jobs can't possibly do those three jobs as thoroughly as three people could. The person voicetracking can't possibly do the job as well as a live jock could. And the listener is on the receiving end of a product that just isn't quite good enough and feels no loyalty to it - hence, lower ratings. Management can place the blame on iPods and other things, but in reality it is their poor decisions that cause listeners to bolt.
My point is I still feel stations generally do better with live/local jocks and news people.( but I must admit--- I have a neighbor who thinks everything on tv and radio is live! even at 3 am! I can't explain it to him and have given up! He does not think the music is live. he thinks that is on "records". the guy is about 80! )
So tell me...if someone owns an iPod, why EVER turn on the radio? To hear what's happening between the songs, that's why.
Or perhaps to hear music that isn't yet on their iPod.
Or perhaps to hear music that isn't yet on their iPod.
In some markets even voice tracking is "personality radio" because stations go completely jockless or just have an AM personality.
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.