[BC] Doing remotes in 2007

[Barry Mishkind]

At 02:27 AM 4/5/2007, Goran Tomas wrote
>>It turns out that Skype to Skype calls have a frequency response of about 30
>>Hz - 8 kHx, low latence, and sound GREAT on air. The USB microphone 
>>allows you
>>to be digital from the mike capsule all the way to the station.
>
>Yeah, people have been doing that, but my concern is the sound 
>quality... It just isn't at the level you get from a RF link or ISDN 
>codec. Btw, in my experience Google Talk has slightly better sound 
>quality than Skype.

         Goran,
         It is interesting to me to see this sort of comment.

         Of course, there are many different types of "remote"
         broadcasts, from drop-ins from the local car dealer to
         a symphony hall concert.

         However, in many cases, there is a level of obsession that
         goes beyond the level of balance.

         As has often been noted here, CONTENT is usually more
         important to the listener than the absolute purity of sound.

         In fact, I've had more than one PD agree that if the
         "marti shot" is too good, then how does the listener
         know there really is a remote going on?

         Now, I do *not* advocate the bare cell phone remote.
         They almost always sound horrid. In fact, I know
         of some cancellations caused by lazy staff who would
         rather not set up the remote gear, but use the cell
         phone since "it was only two breaks"

         Just like a sports broadcast usually seeks to ADD
         crowd noise instead of having the relative silence
         of the booth back the play by play, many remotes
         actually "benefit" from the audio being something
         less than perfect.