A Good, Though Routine, Interview Program (deleted)
Ok-This is a perfectly fine interview program. The questions are pretty good, the hosts are just fine. But frankly, does the system "need" this program? No. Not really. We got enough of these kind of shows--World Cafe, E-Town, etc. Plus every AAA station does their own long and short form artist interviews.
Before I loose the producer's respect and your attention, let me make a pitch for one change in the clock of this and every other hour long program. ---PLEASE____ provide a 60 second break at :20 and :40 into the hour. A single break at the bottom of the hour is no longer the desired structure by stations. There are lots of reasons, the need to ID the station is the most important. We just can't let that much time go by with giving our listeners our call letters.
Onto a couple of specific things:
The interview part of the program with Vance is great from an editorial point of view. Vance, who I am sure has adult ADD, is an interesting guest and provides good answers to good questions. During the interview Vance itemizes quite a few of his artistic influences and the producers chose to weave a song snippet from every one of them into the program. It was a bit overdone and must have been a lot of work to put together...I'd leave that out.
There are two other segments in this program I need to comment on.
The Creativity Corner features a guest commentator who is supposed inspire the listener to go find and/or reflect on their artistic side. Great idea! Bit New Age Spiritual, but public radio folks like this kind of thing.
This commentator chose to tell folks to turn off all stimuli, be quiet and find the inner voice. That's all well and good, but he pretty much says "Turn off the Radio"!!! Not a good thing!
The song analyst piece was a bit too over-educated condescending in tone. But then again I was working out at Gold's Gym when I listened to it so perhaps the atmosphere magnified my feelings. However, it would have been better to use a song by one of Vance's influences. The Cole Porter tune was out of context given the rest of the program. Mixing Jazz and pop and Americana is just fine, but there just wasn't any connecting tissue here.
OH--You might want to take out the thing about selling coffee on your website. Nothing ruins a radio manager's good night sleep like a UBIT scare!
So, what can I say, if the guest line up over time fits your station musical emphasis and you have room for this program, it's just fine. I think you would find it a good addition to your schedule. For WTMD, well we don't go too far the Americana side and we're full up on this type of programming. I think this is what the program's marketer will hear over time.
Comment for
"Primary Sources - Compulsory Shopping" (deleted)
This is short commentary piece that conjures up a somewhat interesting but illogical concept to balance three things: Discounting at Holiday time, the cost of internet access and Holiday shopping procrastination.
I don't want to give too much away and the piece is short enough for you listen to yourself.
After three listens, I just don't get the "oomph" that theater of the absurd is supposed to leave you with. As they say--Dying is easy, Comedy is hard--and the joke here is just not particularly compelling, for me---give a listen and you decide for yourself. If you find the joke more humorous than me, than you'll love the piece.
In the context of other program editorial this piece could round out a theme on consumerism or some other topic.
Technically, the reading is very good. Emotion is properly used and the reader's tone modulates very nicely.
Not bad. Not bad at all! In fact, this piece has provoked me to think about the different ways I hug different men.
Now I could tell you about what is running through my mind specifically, but I’ll just leave it at this—This piece made started me thinking about how I hug other gay men, straight men I know well, if I hug Metrosexuals differently. Hell it even got me thinking about how I hug male members of my family and would I hug Thom differently from Jai if I met the two cuties from Queer Eye. (Trust me, Thom would never forget that hug—after all, we’re both Italian.)
In other words, this piece did what is supposed to do. Make the listener think—fantasize even!
A few notes:
Try cutting this 5 min piece down to 3 mins. Forced editing, as is my rule, can usually make a strong piece stronger. This is a strong piece.
We know the producer is young by virtue of his picture on the piece and the station it was aired on. Watch your pacing and, as noted in other reviews, your honesty. Honesty is public radio core value and listeners can sense less-than-honest story telling very quickly. If you’re going to do a commentary on male hugging and allude to your own sexuality, you have own up to it honestly and appropriately for the piece you’re working on. That honesty doesn’t come through. It would have made a bigger impact to think about your hugging practices at 22, 32, 42 (yikes! My Age!).
Sure the writing and the pacing and the cadence needs some work. But this is the kind of stuff that learn with experience. This producer has talent and potential! I would consider this piece, as is or reworked, for an appropriate program for my station.
If my PD doesn’t put these on our air—He’s not getting a room upgrade at the next Non Comm!
This is the gold standard for non-hosted music and actuality pieces. The producer obviously has a grasp of what is important to the listener and how to make the subtl entertaining and engaging.
Let’s talk Dobro. The piece on Dobro Master Jerry Douglas is masterful. The Dobro is often overlooked and relegated to the background. Come on---how many bands are fronted Dobro Players? They are the big guys in the corner of the stage with a beard and Beer who get one solo and a shout out introduction.
Yet the producer coaxes out the most important details about the instrument and why Jerry and the Dobro are important to many genres. I was entranced and engaged learning how musicians work together, how they create, how they interact all be cause of this kissing cousin of a banjo. (My apologies to those who know the instrumental family tree better than I do).
These are not just pieces about the music or the artists. They are pieces that weave history, music and the human condition into a fully bloomed and well edited story. The producer’s story telling skills are well honed and he should be teaching others how to do these pieces. Not only that, but the producer has posted scripts for each piece!!! Providing these materials is another HUGE advantage in getting a piece aired on a station. Stations need these materials to provide prep and context for their staffs.
Hey, I don’t pay as well as WUNC, but call me if you want a job up north.
This is a ridiculous, absurd, college freshman attempt at piecing together their first Cool Edit or Pro Tools Project. Even if it isn’t, it doesn’t much matter.
This not a homage to an old technology worthy of its place in radio history. There is no context; there is nothing interesting save a couple of few and far between vocal samples.
Why would any programmer put this on their radio station? Well, when I was at NPR, Andy T. used to say that you could air Duck Farts every day noon and someone would complain when you took it off the air. Put this in that category! Hell, I’m still wondering why the producer put it on PRX to begin with.
OK, I’m finished ranting and I do try to point out interesting things in the piece or how the piece could be improved to make it useful to programmers and stations. This one just can’t be used for any other purpose than the esoteric purpose it was commissioned for.
Maybe the producer is a genius and I am just starting with the wrong piece. I promise I will delve deeper into the producer’s work! But if you need a SFX for piece your working on...Here it is.
So let’s be a bit real. This is hardly political music. This is pretty much the same kind of musical fare you can find on any commercial Alternative station. The jock is processed in a kind of telephone filter thing. It masks his young age quite well and his breaks are pretty nice. Sure some might say all these tunes are political, but I can’t really find too much depth to this stuff. It’s no 2005 equivalent of Blowing In The Wind. Call me old.
The music is nicely selected if you a fan of genre. Let’s face it, it’s not a public radio format. Our product must meet the needs of folks who are willing and able to give us money. I suspect folks in the under 30 demo who admire this kind of music are either able or possess the values to make financial contributions to public radio.
Be that as it may, this would be a great show for those college based stations that do this kind of thing. However, only on line stations can use this particular show because there are too many F bombs in one of the songs. Remember boi’s, the FCC doesn’t like that kind of thing.
Production is very nice and will mixed. My hope is these budding radio professionals enjoy the medium of radio as much as they seem to love the music. If they can separate the radio biz from the music biz, I suspect they will have long and successful careers.
Do we really need another Vietnam Vet working out his personal demons on the air?
Sure! It’s great to see ourselves through others experiences. It’s great to be enlightened by a survivor of a horrific tragedy whose had made a contribution to their own lives and others and find out how they did it.
Too bad this isn’t that kind of story.
This is a torturously boring piece and adds nothing to the thesis that war is hell and we should be scared of the personal and societal aftermath.
This piece bills itself about music and the healing power it can have. Yet, it’s a full 11 minutes before this guy even talks about his music and only in the last and closing moments does he tell us how he feels about music.
What we do get is an embarrassing musical track that sounds like a thirteen year-old’s diary—“I got up. I ate eggs. My friend took my place in line. He died. I didn’t. I went home.” It’s a pretty standard story. Horrific yes, but we’ve heard this many, many times before. There just isn’t anything special about this guy.
OK, this may sound a little unfair. These are terribly difficult pieces to do. A story told by the subject in his own words is an editing nightmare. You’re torn between the virtues of good storytelling that require the producer to shape a picture by grouping facts that the subject may not have described in the order in which they happened and being fully loyal to the chronology of the interview. You sort of have to tell the subjects story to themselves, almost being half a therapist.
How could this be made better? The producer needs to determine what the listener needs to hear in a way that resonates. It would have been better to tell the story of the subject’s life to day and use flash backs to show the impact on the war. There are several techniques that can be employed once a producer has a clear vision of the story.
You will find this piece to be well mixed and technically well done. Levels, mixes, transitions are seamless and the folks who put it all together did a great job.
I’m not quite sure how you can make the world’s most horrific natural disaster boring, but this piece accomplishes to sew together some chilling examples of the terror in a sleepy presentation.
First off, the narration is the kind of emotion-lacking-monotone that gives public radio a bad rap. The narrator is much more human and authentic during the interview segments. Emotion is ok to show in the transitions pieces too, after all, this is a humanity story, not a political event. But every time the piece goes back to narration I just want to take a nap.
Perhaps the time elapsed from the event to this review is too long. I am not sure if this piece for RN ran on the published creation date of January 27, 2005. As a month later piece, it tries to tie together too many emotions and elements of the story into one package. There are some powerful real time friends and family reunions but they are clouded by more sterile scenes and explanations of hospital scenes.
So at half an hour of time, this piece becomes muddy and dilutes the power of the tragedy by trying to cram too much into too long a time. It kind of turns into the public radio equivalent of those History Channel or Discovery Science documentaries that repeatedly relive the pain for those audiences who have become addicted to mass deaths caused by an event.
Perhaps the actualities could be reworked into a meaningful piece for the six month or one year anniversary. If the producer could find the people interviewed in this pieces then construct a then and now series of packages, I think it would make very very powerful radio.
The production of this piece is public radio perfect. The levels, ambient sound and mixing is top notch. But once again, producers wishing their pieces to gain wide acceptance should package their material into several lengths and purposes. This material would be more powerful, let alone heard by more people, if it was cut into five pieces for a week’s worth of stories.
This is a highly engaging piece of personal radio that is sure to serve as a wake up call for the highly stressed public radio listeners out there. That’s about 98% of our audience wouldn’t you say?
What’s Right about this piece:
It has a story to tell that listeners will find compelling and can identify with and act up on in their own lives. It’s personal without being immersive. The billing is right on too. When some one hears a promo about young guy with a sure to be fatal malady, listeners automatically think of AIDS or cancer. Heart afflictions among the young are mostly stories about a 30 year old who keels over unexpectedly and then we start looking for cocaine or ephedrine.
This piece shocks us about the unexpected turn everyone’s life has the potential to take. Yet does not overly ridicule traditional medicine in advocating a less than traditional treatment. What listeners find here is that the piece is ultimately about stress, something everyone can relate to, rather then a heart ailment that afflicts few people. It’s totally relatable. The listener is left feeling uplifted, optimistic and running to the phone to schedule a physical.
What can be improved:
It’s a little long. Not terribly, but a third or fourth round of editing might have tightened it up a bit. I always ask my students and staff for two versions of a project. I think it’s good practice to produce two versions; one to the agreed to length, and 20% shorter. Sometimes the shorter one is more powerful. The reading is very good, but a few longer pauses here and there would have added some punctuation to the salient points.
How to use this piece:
It’s totally wonderful for nearly any news programming from health focused to general interest. I think this is a wonderful piece to incorporate into your locally produced programs.
Before you read farther, you should know I think my job as a reviewer is to be a program director’s advocate—not a cheerleader for the producer. With that warning…Dive in….
The title of this piece is deceptive. It is not a tale of two cities. It is a piece of personal therapy. The producer simply turns on the mic, records (very badly by the way) some experiences and then proceeds to bore us with a depressing, torturous nearly 30 minuets full of personal information we don’t want to know.
First the techincal: Two Words—Wind Sock! The recording and mixing are below acceptable standards for a radio station. Sorry to be harsh, but I just can’t say it any softer. Much of the recording is down out doors and the wind in both San Francisco and New York is a starring cast member.
Now onto the content and story telling skills. I am not sure what the story is in this piece. Sure, the producer claims it be a discussion on the emotional state of chaning home towns. About half way through the piece I blurted out (quite unexpectedly) “Tell it to your Therapist Not My Listeners.” I got a strange look from the woman on the treadmill next to me. Radio is supposed to uplift, provide insight and entertain. Unfortunetly, this piece is a depressing and self indulgent and way too long. This is hard to say because it’s a diary piece, but I would find it hard to say I would want to spend time hearing this story over cocktails. Since most radio is done in the car, where cocktails are not available, the only outcome is a station switch.
Ok, how could this piece be made better? EDIT EDIT EDIT. That requires a producer to think about what the listener needs and wants to know and to objectively decide what to put in and what to leave out. The problem here is EVERYTHING is in here with no prioritization—Listeners don’t need to hear an elongated exchange about not being able to find a specific NYC subway brochure for example. The use of the word Piss in the opening is a turn off. If this were a comparision about the two cities, there should have been a corresponding section on BART. There are several transitional pieces that are adaquetly written that if strung together would have yeilded an acceptable three minute piece.
With deepest appologies to the producer, this piece is not ready for air.
Comment for
"#007 Cardigans - Album: Gran Turismo" (deleted)
Review of #007 Cardigans - Album: Gran Turismo (deleted)
This is a good, but standard, artist/record review. Standard mix music cuts and a couple of voice overs, none of which are paticularly enlightening or contain important content.
Any station with Cool Edit, a record, a press release and someone who knows and likes the group could do the same piece in about 20 mins of production time.
In order for me to want to put this on my air, I would need to hear something that I couldn't do or hadn't thought of incorporating into a similar piece.
Now to be nice to the producer: Keep working on these pieces, there is a need for good 2 min features.
Comment for
"Pop Vultures #13: Award Shows & Beyonce" (deleted)
I've been trying to like this show. I took the CD offered at the PRPD home and listened to both episodes (Award Shows and Religion). Frankly, I find so many technical and editorial problems with this series that I cannot envision it being on our air.
Fact Checking needs to be improved. For example the show asks the question why doesn't a rocker refuse an award like Marlon Brando did his Oscar. They cite none. A simple Google Search reminds us that Sinead O'Conner refused her grammy-providing example in support of the guests argument about the lack of rebellion in pop culture. My listeners know that and will stop taking the conversation seriously from that point on.
Taste: The CD version of this episode makes offensive prolonged description of sodomy with various award statues. I suppose it is
meant to be funny but it's just not appropriate or clever.
Credibility: There is no introduction as to who these people are and why I should be listening to them. I can't find on the Pop Vultures
Web Site how the host came to be a pop music critic--listeners will want to know how she came be expert enough to have a show on their
favorite radio station. In fact, in the CD version, the names of the people speaking are not mentioned until the closing credits. That's a
plain lack of using accepted radio practices. Why are these folks experts worthy of being taken seriously?
Ultimately and sadly, I conclude that Pop Vultures-in its current form, for my listeners, would sound more like a parent eavesdropping outside their college aged children's dorm room just before a surprise visit. You hope by senior year their arguments are become more reasoned and insightful.
Public Radio needs a show that can make my 40 year olds want to learn more about how and what 20 year olds think about culture. Pop Vultures could be that if the folks producing the show base their content and technical decisions more on that premise than just what appears now to be the need to talk for talks sake. We'll keep watching the development of this program in the hopes we can feel comfortable giving it a go on our air.
I am not a fan of these types of "no interviewer" pieces. They are hard to produce and are often too long..and well, frankly, the person speaking is just not that interesting. It's the producer's job to make an interesting person more compelling and turn a dull person into an interesting person.
WUNC knows how to do these pieces. The 3:30 is a perfect length..same a record so it makes this essay easy for music stations like ours to use.
There are just enough personal stories mixed with Tift's viewpoints about music to make the piece interesting because the segments are prioritized and skillfully edited.
One note to all news stations doing these kinds of peices: Check with the music station's play lists to see what single we are playing. This piece omits a cut from Good Hearted Man, now in rotation in many non-comm triple A stations. Not a big thing really as we would most likely follow this piece with the single, but something to keep in mind.
Comments by Steve Yasko
Comment for "Art of the Song #9 with Vance Gilbert" (deleted)
Steve Yasko
Posted on March 05, 2005 at 11:47 AM
A Good, Though Routine, Interview Program (deleted)
Before I loose the producer's respect and your attention, let me make a pitch for one change in the clock of this and every other hour long program. ---PLEASE____ provide a 60 second break at :20 and :40 into the hour. A single break at the bottom of the hour is no longer the desired structure by stations. There are lots of reasons, the need to ID the station is the most important. We just can't let that much time go by with giving our listeners our call letters.
Onto a couple of specific things:
The interview part of the program with Vance is great from an editorial point of view. Vance, who I am sure has adult ADD, is an interesting guest and provides good answers to good questions. During the interview Vance itemizes quite a few of his artistic influences and the producers chose to weave a song snippet from every one of them into the program. It was a bit overdone and must have been a lot of work to put together...I'd leave that out.
There are two other segments in this program I need to comment on.
The Creativity Corner features a guest commentator who is supposed inspire the listener to go find and/or reflect on their artistic side. Great idea! Bit New Age Spiritual, but public radio folks like this kind of thing.
This commentator chose to tell folks to turn off all stimuli, be quiet and find the inner voice. That's all well and good, but he pretty much says "Turn off the Radio"!!! Not a good thing!
The song analyst piece was a bit too over-educated condescending in tone. But then again I was working out at Gold's Gym when I listened to it so perhaps the atmosphere magnified my feelings. However, it would have been better to use a song by one of Vance's influences. The Cole Porter tune was out of context given the rest of the program. Mixing Jazz and pop and Americana is just fine, but there just wasn't any connecting tissue here.
OH--You might want to take out the thing about selling coffee on your website. Nothing ruins a radio manager's good night sleep like a UBIT scare!
So, what can I say, if the guest line up over time fits your station musical emphasis and you have room for this program, it's just fine. I think you would find it a good addition to your schedule. For WTMD, well we don't go too far the Americana side and we're full up on this type of programming. I think this is what the program's marketer will hear over time.
Comment for "Primary Sources - Compulsory Shopping" (deleted)
Steve Yasko
Posted on March 05, 2005 at 11:07 AM
A Bit Far Fetched (deleted)
I don't want to give too much away and the piece is short enough for you listen to yourself.
After three listens, I just don't get the "oomph" that theater of the absurd is supposed to leave you with. As they say--Dying is easy, Comedy is hard--and the joke here is just not particularly compelling, for me---give a listen and you decide for yourself. If you find the joke more humorous than me, than you'll love the piece.
In the context of other program editorial this piece could round out a theme on consumerism or some other topic.
Technically, the reading is very good. Emotion is properly used and the reader's tone modulates very nicely.
Comment for "To Hug or Not to Hug?"
Steve Yasko
Posted on February 20, 2005 at 12:34 PM | Permalink
Embrace, Pat The Back, Release, Air the Piece
Now I could tell you about what is running through my mind specifically, but I’ll just leave it at this—This piece made started me thinking about how I hug other gay men, straight men I know well, if I hug Metrosexuals differently. Hell it even got me thinking about how I hug male members of my family and would I hug Thom differently from Jai if I met the two cuties from Queer Eye. (Trust me, Thom would never forget that hug—after all, we’re both Italian.)
In other words, this piece did what is supposed to do. Make the listener think—fantasize even!
A few notes: Try cutting this 5 min piece down to 3 mins. Forced editing, as is my rule, can usually make a strong piece stronger. This is a strong piece.
We know the producer is young by virtue of his picture on the piece and the station it was aired on. Watch your pacing and, as noted in other reviews, your honesty. Honesty is public radio core value and listeners can sense less-than-honest story telling very quickly. If you’re going to do a commentary on male hugging and allude to your own sexuality, you have own up to it honestly and appropriately for the piece you’re working on. That honesty doesn’t come through. It would have made a bigger impact to think about your hugging practices at 22, 32, 42 (yikes! My Age!).
Sure the writing and the pacing and the cadence needs some work. But this is the kind of stuff that learn with experience. This producer has talent and potential! I would consider this piece, as is or reworked, for an appropriate program for my station.
Comment for "Musicians in their own words features on Grammy winners"
Steve Yasko
Posted on February 20, 2005 at 11:12 AM | Permalink
How Do You Like It?? MORE MORE MORE
This is the gold standard for non-hosted music and actuality pieces. The producer obviously has a grasp of what is important to the listener and how to make the subtl entertaining and engaging.
Let’s talk Dobro. The piece on Dobro Master Jerry Douglas is masterful. The Dobro is often overlooked and relegated to the background. Come on---how many bands are fronted Dobro Players? They are the big guys in the corner of the stage with a beard and Beer who get one solo and a shout out introduction.
Yet the producer coaxes out the most important details about the instrument and why Jerry and the Dobro are important to many genres. I was entranced and engaged learning how musicians work together, how they create, how they interact all be cause of this kissing cousin of a banjo. (My apologies to those who know the instrumental family tree better than I do).
These are not just pieces about the music or the artists. They are pieces that weave history, music and the human condition into a fully bloomed and well edited story. The producer’s story telling skills are well honed and he should be teaching others how to do these pieces. Not only that, but the producer has posted scripts for each piece!!! Providing these materials is another HUGE advantage in getting a piece aired on a station. Stations need these materials to provide prep and context for their staffs.
Hey, I don’t pay as well as WUNC, but call me if you want a job up north.
Comment for "Vinyl"
Steve Yasko
Posted on February 20, 2005 at 10:53 AM | Permalink
Do You Like Scratchn'?
This is a ridiculous, absurd, college freshman attempt at piecing together their first Cool Edit or Pro Tools Project. Even if it isn’t, it doesn’t much matter.
This not a homage to an old technology worthy of its place in radio history. There is no context; there is nothing interesting save a couple of few and far between vocal samples.
Why would any programmer put this on their radio station? Well, when I was at NPR, Andy T. used to say that you could air Duck Farts every day noon and someone would complain when you took it off the air. Put this in that category! Hell, I’m still wondering why the producer put it on PRX to begin with.
OK, I’m finished ranting and I do try to point out interesting things in the piece or how the piece could be improved to make it useful to programmers and stations. This one just can’t be used for any other purpose than the esoteric purpose it was commissioned for.
Maybe the producer is a genius and I am just starting with the wrong piece. I promise I will delve deeper into the producer’s work! But if you need a SFX for piece your working on...Here it is.
Comment for "Defunct-Second Opinion #1"
Steve Yasko
Posted on February 20, 2005 at 10:34 AM | Permalink
Alternative Just Ain't What It Used To Be
So let’s be a bit real. This is hardly political music. This is pretty much the same kind of musical fare you can find on any commercial Alternative station. The jock is processed in a kind of telephone filter thing. It masks his young age quite well and his breaks are pretty nice. Sure some might say all these tunes are political, but I can’t really find too much depth to this stuff. It’s no 2005 equivalent of Blowing In The Wind. Call me old.
The music is nicely selected if you a fan of genre. Let’s face it, it’s not a public radio format. Our product must meet the needs of folks who are willing and able to give us money. I suspect folks in the under 30 demo who admire this kind of music are either able or possess the values to make financial contributions to public radio.
Be that as it may, this would be a great show for those college based stations that do this kind of thing. However, only on line stations can use this particular show because there are too many F bombs in one of the songs. Remember boi’s, the FCC doesn’t like that kind of thing.
Production is very nice and will mixed. My hope is these budding radio professionals enjoy the medium of radio as much as they seem to love the music. If they can separate the radio biz from the music biz, I suspect they will have long and successful careers.
Comment for "Vietnam Blues"
Steve Yasko
Posted on February 19, 2005 at 09:12 AM | Permalink
Not every line of the interview needs to be in a story
Sure! It’s great to see ourselves through others experiences. It’s great to be enlightened by a survivor of a horrific tragedy whose had made a contribution to their own lives and others and find out how they did it.
Too bad this isn’t that kind of story.
This is a torturously boring piece and adds nothing to the thesis that war is hell and we should be scared of the personal and societal aftermath.
This piece bills itself about music and the healing power it can have. Yet, it’s a full 11 minutes before this guy even talks about his music and only in the last and closing moments does he tell us how he feels about music.
What we do get is an embarrassing musical track that sounds like a thirteen year-old’s diary—“I got up. I ate eggs. My friend took my place in line. He died. I didn’t. I went home.” It’s a pretty standard story. Horrific yes, but we’ve heard this many, many times before. There just isn’t anything special about this guy.
OK, this may sound a little unfair. These are terribly difficult pieces to do. A story told by the subject in his own words is an editing nightmare. You’re torn between the virtues of good storytelling that require the producer to shape a picture by grouping facts that the subject may not have described in the order in which they happened and being fully loyal to the chronology of the interview. You sort of have to tell the subjects story to themselves, almost being half a therapist.
How could this be made better? The producer needs to determine what the listener needs to hear in a way that resonates. It would have been better to tell the story of the subject’s life to day and use flash backs to show the impact on the war. There are several techniques that can be employed once a producer has a clear vision of the story.
You will find this piece to be well mixed and technically well done. Levels, mixes, transitions are seamless and the folks who put it all together did a great job.
Comment for "RN Documentary: Adrift in Sri Lanka"
Steve Yasko
Posted on February 13, 2005 at 11:24 AM | Permalink
Maybe We Need Pictures
First off, the narration is the kind of emotion-lacking-monotone that gives public radio a bad rap. The narrator is much more human and authentic during the interview segments. Emotion is ok to show in the transitions pieces too, after all, this is a humanity story, not a political event. But every time the piece goes back to narration I just want to take a nap.
Perhaps the time elapsed from the event to this review is too long. I am not sure if this piece for RN ran on the published creation date of January 27, 2005. As a month later piece, it tries to tie together too many emotions and elements of the story into one package. There are some powerful real time friends and family reunions but they are clouded by more sterile scenes and explanations of hospital scenes.
So at half an hour of time, this piece becomes muddy and dilutes the power of the tragedy by trying to cram too much into too long a time. It kind of turns into the public radio equivalent of those History Channel or Discovery Science documentaries that repeatedly relive the pain for those audiences who have become addicted to mass deaths caused by an event.
Perhaps the actualities could be reworked into a meaningful piece for the six month or one year anniversary. If the producer could find the people interviewed in this pieces then construct a then and now series of packages, I think it would make very very powerful radio.
The production of this piece is public radio perfect. The levels, ambient sound and mixing is top notch. But once again, producers wishing their pieces to gain wide acceptance should package their material into several lengths and purposes. This material would be more powerful, let alone heard by more people, if it was cut into five pieces for a week’s worth of stories.
Comment for "Illness and Cure - Rhythm"
Steve Yasko
Posted on February 10, 2005 at 04:41 AM | Permalink
It Will Make You Call Your HMO
What’s Right about this piece: It has a story to tell that listeners will find compelling and can identify with and act up on in their own lives. It’s personal without being immersive. The billing is right on too. When some one hears a promo about young guy with a sure to be fatal malady, listeners automatically think of AIDS or cancer. Heart afflictions among the young are mostly stories about a 30 year old who keels over unexpectedly and then we start looking for cocaine or ephedrine.
This piece shocks us about the unexpected turn everyone’s life has the potential to take. Yet does not overly ridicule traditional medicine in advocating a less than traditional treatment. What listeners find here is that the piece is ultimately about stress, something everyone can relate to, rather then a heart ailment that afflicts few people. It’s totally relatable. The listener is left feeling uplifted, optimistic and running to the phone to schedule a physical.
What can be improved: It’s a little long. Not terribly, but a third or fourth round of editing might have tightened it up a bit. I always ask my students and staff for two versions of a project. I think it’s good practice to produce two versions; one to the agreed to length, and 20% shorter. Sometimes the shorter one is more powerful. The reading is very good, but a few longer pauses here and there would have added some punctuation to the salient points.
How to use this piece: It’s totally wonderful for nearly any news programming from health focused to general interest. I think this is a wonderful piece to incorporate into your locally produced programs.
Comment for "Tale of Two Cities"
Steve Yasko
Posted on February 10, 2005 at 04:36 AM | Permalink
Sorry, It's not about Cities
Before you read farther, you should know I think my job as a reviewer is to be a program director’s advocate—not a cheerleader for the producer. With that warning…Dive in….
The title of this piece is deceptive. It is not a tale of two cities. It is a piece of personal therapy. The producer simply turns on the mic, records (very badly by the way) some experiences and then proceeds to bore us with a depressing, torturous nearly 30 minuets full of personal information we don’t want to know.
First the techincal: Two Words—Wind Sock! The recording and mixing are below acceptable standards for a radio station. Sorry to be harsh, but I just can’t say it any softer. Much of the recording is down out doors and the wind in both San Francisco and New York is a starring cast member.
Now onto the content and story telling skills. I am not sure what the story is in this piece. Sure, the producer claims it be a discussion on the emotional state of chaning home towns. About half way through the piece I blurted out (quite unexpectedly) “Tell it to your Therapist Not My Listeners.” I got a strange look from the woman on the treadmill next to me. Radio is supposed to uplift, provide insight and entertain. Unfortunetly, this piece is a depressing and self indulgent and way too long. This is hard to say because it’s a diary piece, but I would find it hard to say I would want to spend time hearing this story over cocktails. Since most radio is done in the car, where cocktails are not available, the only outcome is a station switch.
Ok, how could this piece be made better? EDIT EDIT EDIT. That requires a producer to think about what the listener needs and wants to know and to objectively decide what to put in and what to leave out. The problem here is EVERYTHING is in here with no prioritization—Listeners don’t need to hear an elongated exchange about not being able to find a specific NYC subway brochure for example. The use of the word Piss in the opening is a turn off. If this were a comparision about the two cities, there should have been a corresponding section on BART. There are several transitional pieces that are adaquetly written that if strung together would have yeilded an acceptable three minute piece.
With deepest appologies to the producer, this piece is not ready for air.
Comment for "#007 Cardigans - Album: Gran Turismo" (deleted)
Steve Yasko
Posted on November 07, 2004 at 01:50 PM
Review of #007 Cardigans - Album: Gran Turismo (deleted)
This is a good, but standard, artist/record review. Standard mix music cuts and a couple of voice overs, none of which are paticularly enlightening or contain important content.
Any station with Cool Edit, a record, a press release and someone who knows and likes the group could do the same piece in about 20 mins of production time.
In order for me to want to put this on my air, I would need to hear something that I couldn't do or hadn't thought of incorporating into a similar piece.
Now to be nice to the producer: Keep working on these pieces, there is a need for good 2 min features.
Comment for "Pop Vultures #13: Award Shows & Beyonce" (deleted)
Steve Yasko
Posted on October 04, 2004 at 09:59 AM
The Kids are in the Dorm Room (deleted)
Fact Checking needs to be improved. For example the show asks the question why doesn't a rocker refuse an award like Marlon Brando did his Oscar. They cite none. A simple Google Search reminds us that Sinead O'Conner refused her grammy-providing example in support of the guests argument about the lack of rebellion in pop culture. My listeners know that and will stop taking the conversation seriously from that point on.
Taste: The CD version of this episode makes offensive prolonged description of sodomy with various award statues. I suppose it is meant to be funny but it's just not appropriate or clever.
Credibility: There is no introduction as to who these people are and why I should be listening to them. I can't find on the Pop Vultures Web Site how the host came to be a pop music critic--listeners will want to know how she came be expert enough to have a show on their favorite radio station. In fact, in the CD version, the names of the people speaking are not mentioned until the closing credits. That's a plain lack of using accepted radio practices. Why are these folks experts worthy of being taken seriously?
Ultimately and sadly, I conclude that Pop Vultures-in its current form, for my listeners, would sound more like a parent eavesdropping outside their college aged children's dorm room just before a surprise visit. You hope by senior year their arguments are become more reasoned and insightful.
Public Radio needs a show that can make my 40 year olds want to learn more about how and what 20 year olds think about culture. Pop Vultures could be that if the folks producing the show base their content and technical decisions more on that premise than just what appears now to be the need to talk for talks sake. We'll keep watching the development of this program in the hopes we can feel comfortable giving it a go on our air.
Comment for "Tift Merritt: In her own words"
Steve Yasko
Posted on October 02, 2004 at 08:05 PM | Permalink
Get to Know Tift One Wonderful Moment at a Time!
WUNC knows how to do these pieces. The 3:30 is a perfect length..same a record so it makes this essay easy for music stations like ours to use.
There are just enough personal stories mixed with Tift's viewpoints about music to make the piece interesting because the segments are prioritized and skillfully edited.
One note to all news stations doing these kinds of peices: Check with the music station's play lists to see what single we are playing. This piece omits a cut from Good Hearted Man, now in rotation in many non-comm triple A stations. Not a big thing really as we would most likely follow this piece with the single, but something to keep in mind.