[Farrel]

My wish is for high quality podcast audio

Much higher than currently available on offerings from big players

Bottom Line Up Front

Record microphone input at source for each participant during Skype or
Google Talk conversation. Merge the two files and publish.

Problem

The audio quality of the interviewee is poor unless the interviewee is
at the same computer with the interviewer.

Details

I have never ever written audio software in my life so I have no idea
how to do this but I can imagine a module design as follows

Interviewer module

Software that records while one is on Skype or Google Talk. It records
input from the microphone on one channel and input from the
interviewee on a separate channel. It would also need to generate
audio signals that would later be used for aligning audio files/
tracks. The audio signal would be audible. I imagine that it would be
4 half second tones every 1 second in escalating pitch. The software
could automatically generate one at the beginning of the interview,
one at the end and then at any other time that the two parties suspect
that something unexpected happen and that they need to resynchronize.
During the interview the software could produce a suprasonic and a
subsonic tone every minute or two to ensure ongoing syncrhonization.

Interviewee module

Same as interviewer module but it does not generate tones. Instead it
recrords interviewee's voice directly from his or her own microphone.
Even the most awful microphone and microphone setting will be better
than recording the returning stream on the interviewer's computer. At
the end of the interview the recorded file would be uploaded to a
server or a peer-to-peer computer. On one track it could have the
interviewee's voice and on another track it could have the
interviewers voice (just for backup redundancy) and the emitted tones
from the interviewer module.

Some interviewee's may be brain-dead (in a computer sense) and
therefore incapable of downloading the software and installing it. In
that case it could easily be administered by the interviewer and
interviewee using Teamviewer or GoToAssist or Crossloop.

Synchronization module

The software that would then merge the two direct voice recordings and
synchronize based on the tones. The tones would automatically be
deleted.

Resources required

One audio software programmer who knows his or her ass from his or her
elbow and at least a modicum of automated file transfer.

Wild guess is that 100 hours of programming would generate an alpha
version for testing.

Marketing

I do not know. Perhaps open source development with request for $10
donation.

Does something such as this already exist

[Farrel]

Sorry about the typo. “Is their...” should be “Is there...”

[Richard Crowley]

"Farrel" wrote ...
My wish is for high quality podcast audio
Much higher than currently available on offerings from big players

How "high quality" does it have to be for speech?
How much "high quality" will be discarded by most people listening
on their computer speakers or their MP3 players?
Bottom Line: Your starting premise is questionable. Unless you left out
some other compelling argument.

Bottom Line Up Front

Record microphone input at source for each participant during Skype or
Google Talk conversation. Merge the two files and publish.

Look at the products from www.highcriteria.com/ and similar companies
before assuming that no solution exists. Your proposed solution, while
technically possible, seems like vast overkill for the proposed application
and the miniscule market.

[Farrel]

For speech, it does not have to be high "high quality" but it should
be better than one hears over the telephone. I am definitely not
referring to audiophile quality so sorry about my loose use of "high
quality". Maybe I should have typed "higher quality".
What do you think would be a low barrier way of starting a podcast? I
was thinking of interviewing (having a conversation with) various
experts in a a very narrow niche disease from around the world. Should
I just set up skype to skype calling and record the call with Pamela
or similarly Google Talk to Google Talk and use audacity or
highcriteria's Total Recorder standard edition that has "Recording
VoIP Calls and Internet-telephony Conversations". I have never done
this but was going to start. Intuitively I just thought that it would
make most sense to record at source rather than after the one stream
has had to take a streaming internet journey.

[Farrel]

On May 4, 12:33*pm, "Richard Crowley" wrote:

Look at the products fromwww.highcriteria.com/and similar companies
before assuming that no solution exists. *Your proposed solution, while
technically possible, seems like vast overkill for the proposed application
and the miniscule market.

I know nothing about this field. Can you please list a couple of
companies that are similar to highcriteria?

[Richard Crowley]

"Farrel" wrote ...
For speech, it does not have to be high "high quality" but it should
be better than one hears over the telephone. I am definitely not
referring to audiophile quality so sorry about my loose use of "high
quality". Maybe I should have typed "higher quality".
What do you think would be a low barrier way of starting a podcast? I
was thinking of interviewing (having a conversation with) various
experts in a a very narrow niche disease from around the world. Should
I just set up skype to skype calling and record the call with Pamela
or similarly Google Talk to Google Talk and use audacity or
highcriteria's Total Recorder standard edition that has "Recording
VoIP Calls and Internet-telephony Conversations". I have never done
this but was going to start. Intuitively I just thought that it would
make most sense to record at source rather than after the one stream
has had to take a streaming internet journey.

It has long been the standard practice to send an experienced sound
recordist with high quality microphone and recorder out to the location
of the interviewee while the interviewer is back at home base on the
phone. This practice dates back before the days of the internet, Skype,
and podcasting, etc.

Telephone-quality audio has not been a problem for most listeners
*IF* the content is compelling: If the person is some sort of expert
on the subject (or a celebrity, etc.) or if it is on-location and/or live
reporting of something happening far away (or even across town,
for that matter.) Furthermore low-quality audio is used as an effect
(the audible equivalent of MTV "shaky-cam") to convey the feeling
of "reality" and immediacy.

It is certainly technically feasible to do a higher-quality recording
at the distant end, but it would assume that that person has a
microphone (and acoustical environment) worthy of higher-quality
reproduction. It would also presume that they are technically savvy
enough to install and operate whatever software. IMHO, the
assumption is not valid in most cases, and the potential increase
in quality is nowhere near worth the effort it would take to get there.
The cost/benefit ratio seems very much in the negative field here.
I strongly suspect that is why nobody is doing something like this.