By I.J. Hudson
I started an exchange with a great young marketeer/social media guru that I’ve known for several years, Jeremy Epstein. He’s the guy in front of NSM, Never Stop Marketing. He’s one of the few people I follow every day, because he has interesting stuff to say and he says it very well.
I started an exchange with a great young marketeer/social media guru that I’ve known for several years, Jeremy Epstein. He’s the guy in front of NSM, Never Stop Marketing. He’s one of the few people I follow every day, because he has interesting stuff to say and he says it very well.
I was critical of some of his videos. Not because they lacked content, but because of the audio quality of that content. I suggested his use of a flipcam was okay, but it would be oh-so-much-better if he captured quality audio from the people who were singing his praises. After all, WOM (word of mouth) means words coming out of peoples’ mouths. Shouldn’t the audio be as important as the video of their lips moving? After all, you can understand audio all by itself; having video only involves lip reading, which is not a skill many people possess.
I approached the audio issue from the perspective of a grandfather who felt it was important to capture the words of the little ones as they progressed from total gibberish - to “yeah, that sounds like something” - to real words.
I also addressed it from the perspective of a TV guy who used natural sound and peoples’ own words to tell stories. Pictures were great, but natural sound was always the icing on the cake. Sometimes the video of an event is so compelling, the sound is secondary. But when the video is of people talking about you – the sound is primary.
Jeremy had legitimate concerns. The flipcam is simple. Just take it out and shoot. It’s not intimidating, no waiting to mike someone up. Plugging in audio stuff could be a turnoff. Besides, there’s no input for an external mike. I agreed that the audio quality is (gulp) “almost tolerable,” but suggested good audio would enhance the testimonials of important clients and be well worth the effort.
Jeremy’s quandry is being addressed slowly, not adequately, by the camcorder/flipcam industry. You don’t have to accept lousy or even average audio – unless you want to. A call to an A/V guy I trust pointed to up a growing aftermarket of external audio devices for camcorders, including the flipcam. They’re mostly Bluetooth devices. Some are more expensive than the flipcams. At the moment, they appear to involve a small modular receiver that plugs into the base of the flipcam and a small lapel mike.
IMHO, that’s a good start. But why not have Bluetooth audio built-in to the flipcam or camcorder itself. Then stick the lapel mike onto the subject and go. Good audio; less intimidation. We did it with laptops for wireless networking, why not with camcorders?
I don’t for a moment suggest this is a solution for professionals. There’s always the high end for those folks. But for basic video and audio – this is a problem waiting for a sensible solution. Maybe it’s out there and I haven’t found it. I do know that so-so audio can be a negative. Why not choose a solution that makes you look good and the people who trust you sound good? No brainer?
Wait! There’s another argument against me. Audio and video standards in the digital age have slipped a little. Okay, a lot. I get it that something that appears too professional loses some credibility. You certainly don’t want someone accusing you of being too professional. Real is super important. However, I think what I’m proposing is a reasonable compromise. Audiophiles won’t be bothering you for details about the equipment you’re using. But the people you’re holding up as “happy clients” won’t think you’re making them sound bad either. Everyone looks – and sounds good.