Voice-tracking: wrong for radio?
15 October 2017 · News · Radio Tomorrow with James Cridland
Radio Tomorrow with James Cridland
“What do you think of voice-tracking?” came a voice in Q&A after one of my presentations in New Zealand.
The question came from a man wearing a t-shirt...
You've reached our premium or archival content
To access this page, and more great content just like it, you need to become a paid subscriber.
If you already have an account, please login.
Otherwise, registration is quick and you'll have access instantly after payment.
Once upon a time (when I started in radio 54 years ago) what is now called 'voice tracking' was simply 'recorded'. And there's nothing wrong with pre-recording programmes, or parts thereof. James describes the 'problem' very well (as he always does - a man who the BBC 'lost' to their discredit) but I'd like to make a couple of observations. Radio relies heavily on engagement. The voice coming out of the speakers needs to engage with the brain at the other end. That doesn't have to be in real time. I pre-record a handful of syndicated shows each week and they are popular and successful, because I record them with the same attitude (for younger readers, this means mindset!) that I'd use for a live programme. But although recorded, they are produced in realtime. So I listen to the music I'm playing, respond appropriately and move on. Now for my full time paid job I'm a BBC television announcer-director. (Which means I speak and put the programmes to air at the same time) My voiceover end credits works best when I have watched the programme with my viewer (our audiences are always singular) and reacted in an empathetic way. At the end of a very exciting programme, I'm excited. For a sad and emotional programme, I'm sad and emotional. Or 'real' as the current generation would have it. And thereby hangs the key -radio has to be 'real' to be successful. Voice tracking without the remotest bit of engagement with what has gone before is clinical, and deadly. (I know - I've done it) and listening to it you get the sense that the presenter is a robot. It turns listeners off (often they won't pinpoint what's wrong, but they will sure as hell recognise that it ain't real) and pushes ratings down. Voicetrack or not? That's simply down to the talent and professionalism of the presenjter, a group of folk who corporate radio treat like shit. Hey, coporate radio man (and yes, I DO mean you, Richard Park, my once friend and colleague) wise up!! The balance sheet is important of course, but so are the ears attached to3 your radios!
A thoughtful piece from a man ther BBC ought not to have lost. I have - in my 54 year radio career - voice tracked, and I have not. In my day it was simple 'recorded', which nobody batted an eye at. Now although I record syndicated radio programmes for many parts of the world, my paid gig is at the BBC as a television announcer-director (i.e. we speak and push buttons). What makes that work is watching the shows WITH the viewer. I do an end credit squeeze/voiceover and empathise. If I'm pumped with excitement, so is my listener (always, always singular, people!) - if I'm an emotional wreck, so is my viewer. I always reflect that. Likewise radio - coming off the back of a piece of music requires you to have HEARD the track. Otherwise you are a dull, cold, unfeeling robot. VT works best when the presenter knows the music intimately - otherwise, it's a load of utter crap.