SH
Also on Instagram, for younger people, former Disney Channel alumni and singer Miley Cyrus has a Instagram Live show called "Bright Minded" where she chats with special guests and this show aims to spread positivity in these dark times.
I'm betting some of you don't really care about Miley but props to her for doing this.
I'm betting some of you don't really care about Miley but props to her for doing this.
GE
thegeek
Founding member
Why stop at just having the presenters at home when you can have the gallery crew at their own homes too: https://www.svgeurope.org/blog/headlines/bt-sport-radicalises-entire-channel-production-with-decentralised-remote-production-operation/
JO
The set ups for HIGNFY and The Mash Report worked well, I think the latter is more suited to it but both did well given the circumstances.
Given both The View and The Talk in the US have adopted the filming at home setup, I can see ITV possibly doing the same with Loose Women within the next few weeks.
Given both The View and The Talk in the US have adopted the filming at home setup, I can see ITV possibly doing the same with Loose Women within the next few weeks.
JA
I wonder if it will become more common after all this is over once they see it can be a money saver 
Why pay for studios, equipment and crew?
Why pay for studios, equipment and crew?
NT
Was very impressed by Krishnan Guru Murthy's set-up on Wednesday night - I tuned in late and thought the "LIVE - West London" was an error.
I was struck by how clear Paul Merton's connection was on HIGNFY - wondering if he does voiceovers or radio stuff from home and uses a high-quality connection for that (is ISDN still a thing?).
I was also wondering if Kirsty Wark hosting Newsnight from Pacific Quay with a very nice Glasgow skyline behind her has made some in the BBC think about the hassle of dragging talent to and from London.
I was struck by how clear Paul Merton's connection was on HIGNFY - wondering if he does voiceovers or radio stuff from home and uses a high-quality connection for that (is ISDN still a thing?).
I wonder if it will become more common after all this is over once they see it can be a money saver Why pay for studios, equipment and crew?
Why pay for studios, equipment and crew?
I was also wondering if Kirsty Wark hosting Newsnight from Pacific Quay with a very nice Glasgow skyline behind her has made some in the BBC think about the hassle of dragging talent to and from London.
DA
It is still a thing, and I've seen a few mentions of it recently in descriptions of home studios. It seems to be a contractual obligation to follow any mention of ISDN with "(essentially a high quality phone line)"...
It's a much lower bitrate than internet connections these days, but more than makes up for it by being extremely low latency and exceptionally reliable - no chance of your data packets being routed via Iceland or relying on a server in Volvograd when you're trying to dial in to the studio two miles down the road.
I've listened in on a few ISDN recording sessions and they might as well have been in the booth next door, Zero noticeable delay and not a single dropout.
(is ISDN still a thing?).
It is still a thing, and I've seen a few mentions of it recently in descriptions of home studios. It seems to be a contractual obligation to follow any mention of ISDN with "(essentially a high quality phone line)"...
It's a much lower bitrate than internet connections these days, but more than makes up for it by being extremely low latency and exceptionally reliable - no chance of your data packets being routed via Iceland or relying on a server in Volvograd when you're trying to dial in to the studio two miles down the road.
I've listened in on a few ISDN recording sessions and they might as well have been in the booth next door, Zero noticeable delay and not a single dropout.
SP
The problem with Skype and Zoom and whatever else is also that because of the way the technology works the bulk of the problem isn't always the hardware, but the compression used along the way.
You can have the greatest hardware on the planet, and once Skype gets its hands on it and compresses the crap out of it it'll soon look like a YouTube video from 2006. Then of course the broadcasters are feeding this through their own systems and upscaling, and it soon looks like an explosion in an artefact factory.
It's interesting that things like Instagram Live or Facebook Live can sometime produce better imagery compared to something like Skype or Zoom.
This is a bit of an apples and oranges situation. Facebook Live is a one way broadcast, Skype and Zoom are communication tools and prioritise low latency so conversations work.
I know some podcasters back in the day would use Skype or even just a phone line to have a conversation between contributors but both would record their end of the conversation locally. Then they combine the two recordings in the edit.
I wouldn't be entirely surprised if that's how HIGNFY was done, at least for Paul and Ian. They were both wearing clip on mics which isn't usual in these situations.
It raises an interesting point. Obviously webcam manufacturers couldn't have forseen what has happened but with the explosion in Skype and various videoconferencing programs it might have made sense to increase the oomph of webcams.
In mitigation though it was a late-ish night interview so natural light wasn't available.
In mitigation though it was a late-ish night interview so natural light wasn't available.
The problem with Skype and Zoom and whatever else is also that because of the way the technology works the bulk of the problem isn't always the hardware, but the compression used along the way.
You can have the greatest hardware on the planet, and once Skype gets its hands on it and compresses the crap out of it it'll soon look like a YouTube video from 2006. Then of course the broadcasters are feeding this through their own systems and upscaling, and it soon looks like an explosion in an artefact factory.
It's interesting that things like Instagram Live or Facebook Live can sometime produce better imagery compared to something like Skype or Zoom.
This is a bit of an apples and oranges situation. Facebook Live is a one way broadcast, Skype and Zoom are communication tools and prioritise low latency so conversations work.
I know some podcasters back in the day would use Skype or even just a phone line to have a conversation between contributors but both would record their end of the conversation locally. Then they combine the two recordings in the edit.
I wouldn't be entirely surprised if that's how HIGNFY was done, at least for Paul and Ian. They were both wearing clip on mics which isn't usual in these situations.
IS
ISDN is still a thing, but only just. BT is turning it off by 2025 and haven't installed it for a while. AIUI a lot of ISDN connections now are actually via IP.
It still gets used a lot in radio, a lot of studio-studio and back up studio-transmitter links are ISDN.
It still gets used a lot in radio, a lot of studio-studio and back up studio-transmitter links are ISDN.
IS
I was struck by how clear Paul Merton's connection was on HIGNFY - wondering if he does voiceovers or radio stuff from home and uses a high-quality connection for that
I wouldn't have thought so, I think he's not known for not being that technically savvy, he doesn't have a mobile phone. I can't think of anything he or his wife does that would require it.
I think Steve's suggestion of recording it locally is the most likely way, although that would need someone to go to his house to set it up - the shot was too good for it to be done without some crew
Night Thoughts posted:
I was struck by how clear Paul Merton's connection was on HIGNFY - wondering if he does voiceovers or radio stuff from home and uses a high-quality connection for that
I wouldn't have thought so, I think he's not known for not being that technically savvy, he doesn't have a mobile phone. I can't think of anything he or his wife does that would require it.
I think Steve's suggestion of recording it locally is the most likely way, although that would need someone to go to his house to set it up - the shot was too good for it to be done without some crew
GE
I was struck by how clear Paul Merton's connection was on HIGNFY - wondering if he does voiceovers or radio stuff from home and uses a high-quality connection for that (is ISDN still a thing?).
I wasn't especially impressed by Ian or Paul's audio! One was too quiet and the other was distorted - just about excusable under the circumstances but I hope they can improve upon it for next week.
I think the format mostly worked. It was clearly edited to be faster-paced, which was good, but they maybe ought to think about the bits that need audience reaction, like the caption competition at the end.
thegeek
Founding member
I was struck by how clear Paul Merton's connection was on HIGNFY - wondering if he does voiceovers or radio stuff from home and uses a high-quality connection for that (is ISDN still a thing?).
I think the format mostly worked. It was clearly edited to be faster-paced, which was good, but they maybe ought to think about the bits that need audience reaction, like the caption competition at the end.
UK
I know some podcasters back in the day would use Skype or even just a phone line to have a conversation between contributors but both would record their end of the conversation locally. Then they combine the two recordings in the edit.
It was pretty common to do something similar 15-20 years ago at the BBC (before Skype was a thing) when a guest couldn’t get to a studio and the programme wanted them in quality. We knew it as a ‘simulrec’ - there’d be a producer / fixer with the guest recording in quality. (With the World Service that could be in all sorts of places.) We’d record a version with just the presenter questions as well as a backup that included the answers via the phone. The audio would then be emailed or FTPed and mixed together. That bit wasn't too difficult, unless the person at the remote end had cut up all the answers in to individual clips or - even worse - edited out the gaps. Then it took a lot longer to put back together! Fine if there was plenty of time, but I can remember some tight edits where you’d be waiting for the quality part to arrive - especially as a producer would usually then need to edit it (for time / content) as well.
I know some podcasters back in the day would use Skype or even just a phone line to have a conversation between contributors but both would record their end of the conversation locally. Then they combine the two recordings in the edit.
It was pretty common to do something similar 15-20 years ago at the BBC (before Skype was a thing) when a guest couldn’t get to a studio and the programme wanted them in quality. We knew it as a ‘simulrec’ - there’d be a producer / fixer with the guest recording in quality. (With the World Service that could be in all sorts of places.) We’d record a version with just the presenter questions as well as a backup that included the answers via the phone. The audio would then be emailed or FTPed and mixed together. That bit wasn't too difficult, unless the person at the remote end had cut up all the answers in to individual clips or - even worse - edited out the gaps. Then it took a lot longer to put back together! Fine if there was plenty of time, but I can remember some tight edits where you’d be waiting for the quality part to arrive - especially as a producer would usually then need to edit it (for time / content) as well.