7. evaluation(4)

7. evaluation(4)

• 1.
  Audio Evaluation Your name
• 2.
  Production Process Evaluation
• 3.
  Research • In theresearch my strengths is analysing the podcast that I found but the only problem is that I found it very hard to try and find one because a lot of them were not talking about the game that I was going to be talking about. Also some were very long and some had bad language in it. Towards the end I had to find some that were not that similar to what I wanted, because I had used to many and also there were not many than what I wanted. On audience I chose it to be low teens and young adults. Because that’s the age gap where people are really into gaming. I put male because stereotypical males are more into gaming than women. I put the belgoner class because you would want I not need it.
• 4.
  Planning • At thebeginning the mind maps helped me because I got a rough idea of what I wanted to do, and I knew the game on what I wanted to talk about. The last mind map was to expanded on my final idea, and that helped me because I got to expand on what I wanted to do. I could of improved the last mind map, I did not put in a much detail than I liked. On the pre production, I planed on what sound effects I needed to get. The only thing I needed to get is the intro and outro music. I had to find multiple, to find the right one. I also had to make sure the people that I was interviewing as well. The script I planed by introducing the podcast and the people that I was interviewing.
• 5.
  Time Management The bitthat took the most time is trying to record because I did it the first time, and it was not right for the first time. So I had to do it until it was right. But then I did the interview witch took longer than expected so I did not do all of the questions. All of the power points I was on time for but the problem was before I was behind on the other project so I had to finish that quickly before I started to do the audio project. Overall I thought I mange my time very efficiency. On the audio project the interview bit we kept having to restart then the begging and then end I had to redo but the dating did not take that long the only problem was it was over 5 minutes so I had to get feedback and work on it.
• 6.
  Technical Qualities • https://www.youtube.com /watch?v=KV0jro- Xnk4&list=PLKTI9gxtYg3FL 7Tt_IoOh_XF8oSecIcKM&i ndex=41 Thetechnical qualities that are similar is the intro music, but the intro music on mine goes over the intro so you can hear some music when the intro is happening. But on the other one it stops when they talk. Also they were more discussing rather than interviewing. On mine there was an echo because I did not have a professional sound booth or anywhere that is sound proof, and the other one sound more professional because there was no echo and they did it without a stutter. On my project the volume was inconsistent, but the other one was more consistent, because they had a proper set up. Mine might have been more professional if I had more time to put it all in.
• 7.
  Aural Qualities • Iwould like to improve the enthusiasm in my project because it was very dull and boarding to listen to. The script was very good and interesting, but when we were saying it we did not sound interesting. I would improve it by using a sound proof room, and a proper microphone. I would also rehearse it so that there is no stuttering. The strengths was the writing the script, but the problem was that I did not do it right the first time, so I had to rerecorded it. Also I had to make sure the people that I was interviewing were her on the day so there was a lot of planning.
• 8.
  Audience Appeal I managedto appeal to my target because it contained some tricks and tips. Also the name of the podcast will make my audience appeal to this product. Also to the older people they would get drawn into to podcast by using some flashback to the older days that get them interested such as the jager acog. That will get them intested because they will remember and what to remember more on what happened.
• 9.
  Peer Feedback
• 10.
  Feedback 1 • Whatdid you like about the product? – In the podcast there where some very good sound effects in that made it sound better and keep the audience interested in it – There was a lot of detailed question about the podcast this make it a lot more interesting for the audience when they are watching the podcast • What improvements could have been made to the product? Add music to make it sound a lot better by adding a song all the way through the podcast so it will sound more proffesional
• 11.
  Feedback 2 • Whatdid you like about the product? – The aspect which I like the most about the interview is how Ben is really clearly spoken and the fact that he adds gaming themed music at the beginning to make it more interesting. • What improvements could have been made to the product? • Nathan could have been more enthusiastic and used less of the word/phrase ‘Err’.
• 12.
  Feedback 3 • Whatdid you like about the product? – I liked the introduction music and the voice overlay over the top. – I liked the questions as they gave the audience lots of information. • What improvements could have been made to the product? – Maybe add some outro music at the end to fully finish off the podcast.
• 13.
  Peer Feedback Summary •What do you agree with from your peer feedback? – I agree that Nathan needs to be more enthusiastic because he makes it really boring and dull, also I agree with is the detailed questions. • What do you disagree with from your peer feedback? – I disagree that music need to be all the ay though I think it would be distracting for the listener.
• 14.
  Peer Feedback Summary Iwould change based of my peer feedback, the person that I am interviewing because they did not sound like they enjoyed to be there and make it very dull, I would also change my voice because it sounds quite and I need to sound interested on what I am saying. Also I would try and make it more of a discussion rather than an interview so people will be more drawn in to other people opinions rather than just answering the questions.