Presenting Evaluation

I presented on the second show with Nathan, taking on the mantle of Fearne and Reggie for Male-Female radio presenters. They used to both present the request show on Radio 1, and to a degree Nathan and I wanted to emulate them, as they share our target audience and have a good rapport with each other.

During the week we had both worked on the script (along with Marta) and I think this made our show sound a little more natural, as we scripted things the way that we would say them. In professional radio, either the presenter write the script, or the scriptwriter knows the presenter intimately, and so knows how they speak.

We didn't have a rehearsal before we went into record which was a mistake, because although I'd co-written the script, the first time I read it I stumbled a little with the phone and text numbers, although due to time-restraints not enough to re-record it. The reason this was so bad, is because presenters aren't meant to sound like they are reading a script, it is meant to sound natural and when you make mistakes like that it draws attention to the script.

I think also when it came to recording I felt a little nervous and embarrassed and you can definitely hear that in my voice the first view links, which doesn't happen in professional radio as the audience wants to trust the presenters to entertain them, and as soon as the audience start to hear nerves, there is doubt in their minds.

However there were a lot of good points to my presenting. My pace and tone; especially during the competition was very similar to the quicker pace and more serious tone radio presenters use in competitions. This is too imbue the listener with a sense of excitement and energy; to make them really want the caller to win. I was really impressed with my self during the competition, I thought (apart from when I stumbled over one of the lines) it was just right. I've heard really similar links on the Radio 1 request show. It was a big relief to get back on track, and I think my extra confidence from that successful link made the rest of my presenting more appropriate for my audience. I was enjoying it more, and you can always tell when you listen to the radio if a presenter is enjoying presenting.

In the rest of the programme my pace was quicker and my tone was more cheerful. Because my pitch is naturally low, I need to work a little bit harder to sound upbeat, but I definitely managed it. Feedback from the audience pronounced our presenting 'Bouncy', 'Upbeat' and 'Well-spoken', which was just what we were going for.

Technically, our vocal levels were good the whole way through, It was the levels of song that let us down. In the first jingle where I say 'We don't care about a play list.' my voice fades to basically nothing at the end but that's my own fault because I mumbled. I didn't know we where going to use it!

I think compared too our other shows, you could tell this was our second of three because the presenting was better than the week before but not as good as the live show. I think this had a lot to do with how we recorder our shows; In the first it was all out of sync, so it didn't flow, In this one we recorded our links in order, but could edit them to make them sound better, so there was less pressure. In the third show I think the presenting was the best because of the positive pressure- everyone was a little nervous, but I think the adrenaline helped the final show to become more exciting.

The music we chose was purposely a sample of what you tend to hear on the Radio 1 request show. Even though you can theoretically pick whatever you want, from our listening we've learnt that people still mainly choose off the playlist, or off previous playlists. There are usually a few oldies (We used Journey), and left-field choices (Frank Turner), but the rest of the songs we chose were pretty mainstream and suitable for Radio 1's 16-25 year old audience.

I have improved as a presenter because I know more now to take breaths, rehearse ( or at the very least read through) the script before recording, and too be more confident.

I used the techniques of changing my pace and tone for different parts of the show- making it more serious and quick for competitions and other times when I want the audience to feel tense, and then more relaxed for the lighter bits of the programme. I tried to imagine what my peers would say when we listened to the show back, and presented to them, as for this show they were my target audience.

Personally, I thought I could have done a lot better. I wish that we had managed our time better, so that we would have had a chance to rehearse and re-record the opening jingle and the first two links. Even though there was positive feedback about our presenting, and everyone thought it was upbeat enough for our target audience of 16-25, I think it could have been more so.

We aren't quite up to the standard of Fearne and Reggie on the request show yet, we'd need to rehearse a lot more and not sound like we were reading off a script. Also I think I'm a bit too well-spoken to sound like Fearne, I'd need to start dropping T's! However there are definitely positive signs. The competition was brilliant for both of us, but I wasn't consist ant enough throughout the show, and that was the main thing that let me down.

What I have learnt... Listening

Too make good radio, you have to listen to radio. This is to help you see what shows do well and why and which shows do badly and why. You can then emulate the good points, and avoid the bad ones.

Here is what I have learnt, and how we used that knowledge in our show.

Production is Key

However exciting your voice is, it needs some help. Shows use bed music to help the presenter to keep a good rhythm and to make the show more aurally interesting. They also use sound effects, drops and jingles to give the show branding, and to make the transitions between a link and a song more smooth.

Someone who uses production very much to his advantage is Zane Lowe. His show is so full of sound, and most of it comes from other places than his mouth. It means there is never, ever silence which is the biggest no-no on the radio. There is so much sound the listener barely gets a chance to breathe.

Production is more lacking on Student Radio shows. On Ramair, the only output that isn't speech or music are crudely made jingles. The lack of care of production makes you think; if they don;t care enough to have production values, why should I care enough to listen?

Presenting

The Presenters voice is the way the audience are drawn into the show. If you like a bit of music, it doesn't make you want to listen to the show you heard it on again and again. However if you like a presenter, you will want to hear their show again and again. It also makes a difference how they interact with the listener.

Most daytime mainstream presenters have a cheerful breezy tone, and their pace is very even. They talk to listeners who call in as if they are old friends. The tone changes slightly on stations with 40 + audiences; they still have a cheerful tone during the day, however their pace is slower, they don't rush anything, because the audience don't want to have to work hard to understand what the presenter is showing. They have less patience than younger audiences.

Fearne Cotton presents on Radio 1 in the morning. Her tone is very strong, almost abrasive. She often drops her T's and she has a very fast pace.
Steve Wright presents on Radio 2 in the afternoon. His tone is a lot gentler, his pace slower and his diction better. The way presenters talk often mirror their audience.

In the evening presenters have more freedom, because there is less chance the audience they have are listening just because the radio is on. When the schedule goes specialist in the evening, and the audience do too.

Some presenters, again like Zane Lowe use this to their advantage. Their pace gets faster, there tone gets louder and they get more passionate about the music.

Others, like Steve Lamacq on Radio 2 get more slow paced. This is again to do with the audience. Radio 1's audience generally stay up later, so in the evenings they want music to keep them up and energise them for their evenings. Radio 2 listeners use the radio in the evenings to help them wind down and relax, and their presenting mirrors that.

Think Of The Audience

Zane Lowe's audience are passionate about music and love lots of different genres - so does Zane. Chris Moyles's audience want to be entertained in the morning and don't need too many tracks, their most important need is humour. Chris Moyles Provides that. Frank McCarthy's audience are largely armed forces who want to catch up on what's happening with new music at home, and don't care too much about talking. So that's what he gives them.

Without the audience there would be no show, and so the Audience needs to be forefront in the presenters mind. That is the main thing I learnt from listening - Think of the Audience.

What I have learnt... Presenting Techniques

I only presented in the second show, which I was a little dissapointed about. However, because I achieved a distinction, It made more sense that I didn't present in the live show to let others get their grades up.
When I was in the actual process of presenting I felt very nervous, and because of this I think I didn't do as well as I could have done. My pitch, pace and tone were very erratic, and when we finished recording I thought I had done awfully.
However when we listened back, that wasn't the case. I was definately a little shaky at the beginning of the show, but after the first link I calmed down and my presenting sounded pretty good. It was also very enthusiastic, which made it suitable for our target audience of 16-24, and our Music Show. It could definately have been better, however I was clear, you could understand every word I said and It was lot better than I thought.
I thinkI felt extra pressure to try and shed the shell of Radio-4 presenting; I wanted to show the class I could do it. And I can, so I'm relatively happy with the result.

What I have learnt... Presenting Techniques

BE CONFIDENT!!!

I am a good presenter, and I could be brilliant. The one thing that holds me back is my lack of confidence. When I master that, I think everything else will fall into place. You don't hear presenters on the radio or even TV sound nervous, because they would loose their audiences trust. When you hear a confident presenter, you can trust them to entertain you, and make you glad you tuned in.
To improve my presenting, I just need to have confidence.

What I have learnt- Technically

Technical things are my weakness. I knew this, and so the very first thing I did in this whole project was to get James to give me a refresher course on the mixing desk. He and Ryan did a pretend show of The Beat, and gave me a chance to mix. Usually I present, so this session really helped me remember the basics.

In the First Show I recorded the speech, and then as we recorded in the wrong order, I put it together. This took me quite a while, but helped me get a fimer grasp on Auditions.

In our Second show, I edited the competition. This helped me learn about fading, volume levels and how to use the multi-track view to put two people voices overlapping slightly. I also learnt how to put sound effects into Auditions.
I also helped Marta and Nathan decide what sound effects we should use, and in what order.

In our Third Show, I edited my interview with Scroobius Pip. From what I had learned the previous weeks I found this relatively easy. I went through the transcript I had of the Interview bracketing the bits of audio I wanted to use and then I found the corresponding pieces on the screen and deleted what I didn't need.

When we were in the studio I learnt how to cue up a song ready to go on the laptop, while Keerah controlled the mixing desk. I'm dissapointed in myself that I didn't feel I could work the mixing desk well enough to be able to do it live, I feel I let the team down. However when I think about how far I've come during the six weeks we've been at this I feel more encouraged.

What I Have Learnt ... Technically

• How to use the mixing desk (although I need to become more ocnfident)
• How to use Auditions better
• Effects to make audio sound clearer
• Sound effects to make the radio show sound more entertaining and fun
  

What I have learnt...My Group

Before I start this post I just want to say that I've been so lucky to be in a good group. I was worried when I didn't get put with James,Amy and Ryan. This was contrary to popular belief, but this was becauseI have worked with them before and I know we work brilliantly together and produce amazing shows, not because they are my friends. I don't see why being friends and working well together should be mutually exclusive. Sorry I just had to get that off my chest!
However my group, Marta and Nathan in particular, have been incredible beyond words.

Nathan: I know he was a bit worried that he hadn't done enough, but really he's been brilliant. He has been at every single meeting, was eternally optimistic and was so encouraging he really kept me going when I was getting frustrated. He helped record things, do research, and was a brilliant presenter. He was a lot better than he thought actually, and I really thought he deserved a distinction.
He sort of took on the mantle of unofficial group leader, making sure we all knew what we were doing all the time, he helped whenever he could and was basically fantastic.

Marta: What can you say about the queen of Auditions? She did so much, added professionality to the show, always brought the songs in and helped me learn a lot about editing. I know whenever Beckie came into the edit suite she was the one editing, but that was because editing is her strength, and we'd be silly to make her not do it. We all had a go, but we realised it would be a detrment to the show if marta wasn't the one who did most of the editng. She taught me and Nathan how to work audtions, and we both had good go, and are more confident than we were before. However part of working in a group is playing to our strengths, and editing is Marta's.

Like nathan, she is also a lot better and presenting than she thinks, and could really benefit from an injection of confidence.
She also helped me a lot personally, because I do get very stressed, especially in Radio when I have high expectations of myself. She was always very calm and listened and I really appreciated it.


Keerah: Ok, so through my blog you have probably got that I was very frustrated that Keerah wasn't often there and our first show suffered from it. (We gave her a minimal role in the secon show so our recording would't suffer)
However in the live show she pulled it out of the bag big time. I, although I had protested, was lumbered with producing in the live show, and Itried on our rehearsal but just found it impossible. Somehow Keerah was able to control the mixing desk and present brilliantly. I really respect her for that.

What I Have Learnt... Group Work

I have learnt to rely on people when they show they can be relied on. I've learnt that someone isn't often here to not give them a role where it's essential they be there.
've learnt to try. When you are in a group with people who are better than you at things, it's good to watch what they do, and then try it yourself. I've learnt about auditions from Marta, and I know that next time I use it, as I have practiced during this project, I will be able to do it, and do it well.
Mainly I have learnt that in group work, it is really important to do as much as you can together. It is all very well delegating, and going off to do your own thing. In group work there has to be some of that. However when you work on the script together, edit together, choose the bed music together, there is a sense of unity that really makes the end result better.

Show 1 Evaluation

Our first show was a foreign music show, where we played songs from European artists and had interviews with European people who had come to England. Marta and Keerah presented, I did a little bit of Research before Nathan and I switched roles and I became the producer, and then at the end I wasn't feeling well so Marta finished off the producing. It was our first show, and we were all finding our feet, so the roles were all a bit cloudy.

The first problem, and the one we got the most feedback about, was that our levels were a bit off. This was because we were listening throug the speakers, and not the earphones as we should have.

One of our problems was that Keerah didn't come in outside of college hours, and after our experience where we tried to use the studio in college hours and found it impossible because it was too noisy and we were being pushed out, the rest of us agreed to get our recording done in our time off. It meant that when I was recording we had to do a lot of Keerah and Marta's bits seperately and so the presenting lost some of the flow it could have had if they were together in the same room. It also made me feel very stressed and ill, and so Marta very kindly agreed to take over, because I really wasn't up to it. And I think the show sounded better for it!

The main problem though was the suitability of our programme to the target audience; there wasn't any. Our show was meant to be 40 plus but there was nothing that made it so, the presenting - although very good and clear- was very contemporary. The music was also mainly modern and quite fast paced, and the interviews we had where with students, so we had nothing that the 40+ demographic could really relate too, it was more of a student show.

There was also a lack of existing shows like it. Although it is good we chose something totally unique and different, it was a bit of a mistake for our first show, while we were all still finding our feet. In retrospect, for our first show we should have done something similair to something that already existed; something that had a precedent, and then we could have gotten more adventurous in the second and third shows.

Another problem was the lack of script. We started to make one, however we decided because we didn't want our show to sound scripted, that we just wouldn't finish the script. This was a big mistake; in retrospect we should have made a script and then ad-libbed when it seemed appropriate.
The show was also relatively feature-less. We had two interviews with students but that was it. Really that could have been a prime time to relate to our 40 + audience, but I think because it was our first show , none of us were really confident enough to do anything more risky that Song>Talk>Song>Talk, and that made it sound boring.

Our Feedback was lukewarm, no-one really thought a whole lot of anything, or though people enjoyed the novelty of listening to songs by foreign artists. Everyone said how the show didn't really have anything that made it 40+ though, and I think that was definitely our biggest problem of all.

So to sum up; although our show technically was relatively good for the first show, and the presenting had a clear tone and pace, it was the wrong tone and pace for the audience. From my listening, 40 + radio usually has a 40 + presenter, so it was a bit of a hurdle for Marta and Keerah anyway, but their tone should have been slower and not quite so up-beat. We should have scripted the show, had more features, chosen more appropriate music, checked the levels through the cans.

Show 2 Evaluation

Our second show was a different take on the Radio 1 request show. Nathan and I presented, Marta edited the majority of the show (I edited most of the competition) and Keerah spoke in one of the jingles.

Presenting Evaluation

Nathan and I presented well together, he had a more laid back style which suited my slightly hyper all over the place one!

My best presenting I think came in the competitions. I changed my tone to sound more serious and tense, because from listening to a lot of Radio 1, which was the station we were aiming for, that is what the presenters do in competitions. I spoke clearly and succintly, and with an appropriate slightly fast pace; slow enough to be understandable but fast enough to add a sense of drama to the proceedings.

Some people have pigeonholed me as a solely serious, Radio 4 presenter, and I'm glad i proved them wrong. I got good feedback, the only bad bit was on the opening jingle where I just sound Odd, there is no other word for it.

Our presenting was suitable for the target audience of 16 - 24 (Radio 1's target audience) , because it was clear and fun, and it sounded youtful and contemporary.

Show Evaluation

As the previous week we had all been told to add features and competions, as well as the listeners voice, our show included all of them.
We had phone ins (as it was a request show), which we added authenticity too by using the effect Telephone Voice, on Audtions. Our songs had mainly had a lot airplay on Radio 1, so we knew we had made appropriate choices. In the Radio 1 Request show, although you can ask for anything you like, most of the songs end up being songs of the playlist, or that have been in the past. They are usually a few left of centre choices ( For this we had Frank Turner), and older songs (Journey), but because the target audience are quite young, most of the songs are contemporary, and the songs we chose reflected that.

For the competion we had 5 5 seconds clips from songs and our caller had to guess what they were, to win tickets to the secret Radio 1 show. These type of competitions are often heard on Radio 1, however you don't usually have to guess the song,you usually have to answer questions, so we added our own twist.
We also had a phone in were you had to ring up and answer the phone saying JAY Z! This happens all the time on Radio 1, and is appealinmg to listeners if they are a bit shy of speaking on air, all they have to do is say what they are asked to say as well as there name and where they come from.
The real sucess of the show I think came from our discovery of sound effects.Until you really listen out for them you don't notice just how many sound effects there are on the radio shows, so we added sound effects to our jingles, songs and features. It was especially effective in the Jay-Z competition, where we used Film Take sound effects, and Descent; putting them together made it sound more professional.


I think our show could easily be on Radio 1, it was jam-packed with features, we had appropriate music and lots of listener interaction. Nathan and I presented professionally, with the right tone and pace for our audience, and altogether it was a very good show.