What Should I Do?

As many of you know, I did a number of interviews while at the AVN show this January. Additionally, 2,142 of you know that the audio on my Chayse Evans interview was less than stellar.

I have a conundrum. I’ve been trying to edit the Jada Fire interview for a while now and the audio is suffering from the same problems as the first one. As far as I can tell, I have three options. The first is to just give up and transcribe the interview to a text format. There’ll be no questions about what was said and everyone can enjoy it. The second option is to publish the final cut with my super crazy compressed audio that is mostly able to be understood but sounds like Jada and I are underwater. From the feedback I’ve gotten from my coworkers, it’s pretty distracting. The third and final option would be to leave the original (loud) audio and insert subtitles so that you know what’s being said even if you can’t hear it. I don’t think that’s ideal either.

But these interviews are for you and I want to do what makes you guys happy. So, I’m putting it up for a vote.

What should I do with the Jada Fire interview?

View Results

Loading ... Loading …
Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • bodytext
  • Reddit
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • TwitThis

13 Responses to “What Should I Do?”

  1. ropeadope Says:

    Hi Alison. My vote went to the subtitle option, which I believe is an excellent solution. Let me explain. I live in an apartment complex. My hours are insane as I’m generally awake all night. When I watch television, I mute the audio to avoid bothering my neighbors, and use closed captioning. Closed captioning is the equivalent of subtitles. And if the audio is buried in the surrounding noise, subtitles will actually aid in the hearing of that audio. Something about the way in which the brain, eyes, and ears are wired.

  2. someguy Says:

    … or maybe a videobox fan out there does audio editing for a living and would offer to clean up the audio for free (or for a free month of vb or something)…

  3. alison Says:

    ropeadope – Good point. I think many folks probably consume their porn and porn-related videos on mute, so subtitles might be the way to go.

    someguy – Thanks for the idea. Sadly, I’ve already had some pros try their hands at it and I guess bad audio is bad audio. That said, if anyone wants to take a crack, they’re more than welcome!

  4. rygar13 Says:

    Porn on mute? maybe with headphones, but never on mute. That’s like a peanut butter sandwich with no jelly. Just sad.

  5. ocdave67 Says:

    Alison.. I was the only member to say something about the audio. What you posted last time obviously worked for most members and just not to well for me.. Thanks for asking however :)

  6. xposh Says:

    It’s only a blog post. Low-fi. Subtitles would take up too much time and I’d feel bad for whoever had to transcribe them. Voted “Publish with “underwater” audio”, 9 votes so far! Just rip another Jada interview off the web and post that but since it’s in 2nd so far it won’t happen? Not to be sexual, but if this interview happened and both women had their tops off, you could have posted a “mute” option. Sorry for that…

  7. alison Says:

    rygar13 – I gotta admit, I know a lot of people who watch porn that way…

    ocdave67 – No worries ;)

    xposh – You make a good point :) You all kind of know what Jada and I look like. That said, I’m happy to put the subtitles on if that’s what people want.

    what everyone is thinking – Your comment was off-topic and it was removed.

  8. DoomGoober Says:

    Sorry to hear your hard work ruined! Sound quality during interviews can be really tricky. Most recorders can output what they’re picking up through headphones and it’s always safest to do an on the spot check to make sure current conditions are recording well (background noise, microphone connections, echos, etc.) A lot of people also recommed a cardioid (semi-directional) microphone, though it will have a hard time picking up your voice as you ask questions.

  9. HotScooter2 Says:

    Alison i would like to offer another possible solution. would you consider translating to text,and adding photos from the interview to it.as it is good to see your reactions to the person you are interviewing,especially since it is so easy to get you to laugh and sometimes even giggle.and nothing wrong with laughing and it is contagious,and we all need it

  10. Dustmunkey84 Says:

    Hi,

    This is actually a relatively easy fix. I don’t edit audio for a living but I do edit film and recently ran into a similar problem after a shoot. It can be fixed in a matter of about 15 or 20 minutes. If you want some help I can walk you though these steps, or do it for you. I think you have my email.

  11. Dustmunkey84 Says:

    The final product should be reasonably high quality with substantially lower background noise.

  12. walken Says:

    Hey Alison, I think the ’subtitle option’ is the way to go. Porn is a visual medium and if a porn star is been interviewed I want to see her. I also want to know what she is saying so subtitles equals win – win in my book!

  13. Stewart Says:

    I can certainly take a look at cleaning up the audio – it depends on what kind of background noise there is. If anything can be done, then what you’ll get is something that sounds bad (due to the removal of things), but is at least more intelligible. My work is audio engineering/DSP, so I’d be happy to have a blast.