P5: Record an extract of the planned radio programme
Recording material:
I recorded my voice over in the sound booth, just so there won't be any extra noise the recording may pick up. I also read out loud the script for a couple of times so I know the feel of it and the pace I should be going at. When I was ready I clicked on the record button in audacity and started to say my lines for the voice over.
Editing:
Because I recorded my voice over straight onto audacity I started to edit and cut any mistakes I made during the recording. When I cut away all of the mistakes that were made I then imported the sound effects and background music I needed one by one.I moved those audio clips where they should be using the time shift tool. For certain sound effects and certain parts of the music I needed to either amplify the sound or lower it, I did this by clicking on effect, amplify and then adjusted the sound levels accordingly. I also wanted some parts of the music to fade in and out, so I used the envelope tool.
Uploading audio:
I first compounded all of the sound elements together so that it all became one track, I then clicked on file export audio where I then choose the WAV file option because WAV files compounds all of the audios together and makes a smaller file size. After naming the audio file I then waited for it to be exported onto my desktop where I then uploaded the file up onto Soundcloud.
Finished radio documentary:
5 minute extract:
D2: Evaluate the flow of programme content and audio levels
How successful was the running order (or flow) of your planned new radio programme? I think that the running order was successful, mainly because it gave me an idea on what to do and on when I should do a task.It helped me become more organised and have an idea on what I should do on the day of the recording. Some parts of the radio documentary flowed really well, an example would be near the end of the documentary, when one music track ended then having a sting before then transitioning into a different music track. That section flowed really well together because it wasn't very ‘choppy' it didn't seem as there was any sections. However, some parts of the radio documentary didn't really flow well together, an example would be in the middle of the documentary when a music track transitioned into one another, because both music tracks had different beats and were very different making it difficult to transition. To improve that I think I should've used music that were very similar to one another or just used a sting to transition songs together.If I compared the flow of my radio documentary to one in Radio 4, I don't think it sounds as professional as Radio 4's, this is because when I was listening to the Blondie documentary on Radio 4, the whole documentary had really good flow, there wasn't any point in the documentary where it didn't flow well. Comparing it to mine, the flow wasn't really consistent; in some parts in flowed well and in others it didn't.
Was all the content included relevant and did all of it work well? Discuss this point and give evidence from the finished recording. I think all of the content in the radio documentary was relevant, mainly because they all linked to the main topic of the radio documentary which was Michael Jackson. All the content was based around Michael Jackson,who was the main focus of this documentary. When looking at other radio documentary examples, the main focus of a music artist documentary is the music artist themselves, so all of the content in that documentary is linked to the music artists and have some significance. Looking at those examples, I tried to do the same in my own documentary where I made sure that all content is relevant. An example of this is that all facts and sound bites relate to Michael Jackson, like the interview Michael did with Oprah or how the voice over explained how he died. Making sure that all the content was relevant also meant I could keep my listeners engaged and entertained. This is because the people who could be listening would be fans of Michael or be interested in Michael, if I added in irrelevant information such as explaining one of Michael's' brothers, the audience wouldn't be interested and stop listening. Mainly because they were only listening because they wanted to know about Michael and not one of his brothers. I think even though all of the content were relevant not all of the content in the radio drama worked well. This is mainly because it resulted in my radio documentary in being a bit 'choppy' as in it didn't flow as well it could be. An example would be the beds transition into one another, because some beds don't have a similar beat meaning that when they transition into one another it's not as smooth. Another aspect would be that some sound bites were too long, for example one would be of the extracts from Quincy who was talking about Michael. Although it was relevant it was too long, meaning that the target audience could get bored listening to that sound bite and stop listening. Comparing sound bites from other radio documentaries I have noticed that all sound bites aren't very long, for example in the TuPac documentary the sound bites being used were very short. I think next time I should shorten the sound bites just a bit, just so the listeners wouldn't get too bored.
What do you feel were your key strengths during the making of this production from blank paper to finished piece, comment on every aspect and say what were your strengths. Pre-Production: In the pre-production phase, one of my strengths was that I thoroughly researched other radio documentaries. Because I thoroughly researched other radio documentaries it made it easier for me to come up with my own idea and create it because I noticed all of the codes and conventions and the way a radio documentary should be laid out. Another strength would be the proposal, because it helped me identify my target audience so I could tailor my idea around that. Because I made my proposal clear made it easier for me to fully create my documentary as it gave me a clear idea of my idea. Recording: One of my strengths during recording was that my voice was clear and there was no popping sound or any disturbance. This is because I learned some techniques before recording such as making sure I didn't have anything dairy before recording so that my voice was nice and clear. I also made sure to move my mouth away when I was making certain sounds such a 'p' sound to avoid that popping sound effect.
What do you feel were your key weaknesses during the making of this production from blank paper to finished piece, comment on every aspect and say what were your weaknesses. Pre-Production: One of my weaknesses in the pre-production phase was my running order. I think that the running order could've been more detailed, as the running order that I have use was pretty basic. I think that if I had a more detailed running order, it would've been more clear for me when it was time to record. Because I didn't have a running order for my documentary itself, as I was planning of having it pre recorded, I spent more time than necessary recording that. I think that if I had a separate running order I would've been more aware of the timing and I would've been aware of when everything should've been done. Another weakness during pre production was my script. When I was writing my script I didn't consider the types of songs I was going to used and the sound bites, because of that I found it hard to transition different songs into one another during post production. I also had difficulty finding the sound bites I needed in the script. I think in the future I should check if I could use the sound bites I wanted and to think carefully on the type of music I was going to use and the order of those songs; just so it would make post production more easier.
Recording: When I was recording, I have noticed in post production that in some parts of the script I was rushing to read it. Meaning that the listeners couldn't really hear my voice and understand what I was saying. I think next time I should read the script more clearly and carefully instead of just rushing to read it.
Post-Production: I think during post I could've checked all the sound levels before I exported the final product. This is because I have noticed that the sound throughout the documentary isn't consistent,as in some parts it is loud and in others it is quieter. I think next time I should check the sound level and make sure they are all consistent to make it more professional. Another weakness I have noticed is the transitions of the songs in the documentary, when different songs transition into one another they don't transition smoothly, making it seem that there is different sections instead of it just flowing together. I think next time I should either chose songs that are similar or add in a relevant sting/stab, to make the transitioning of music flow better.