6 ms·

Lou Reed made it pretty big though. I agree with the article. Especially this part: > Forget the lousy microphones and the dinky interstitial stock music — t

Lou Reed made it pretty big though. I agree with the article. Especially this part: > Forget the lousy microphones and the dinky interstitial stock music — the thing that derails most podcasts is the blab. There are two kinds, more or less. The first is that soft, inquisitive staccato popularized by Ira Glass on “This American Life,” the source from which so much pod-voice appears to have sprung. The second mode is performative in a different way, and you hear it on most round-table podcasts — a tone that people use at parties when they want to be heard by people that they aren’t necessarily talking to. And it’s pretty much one or the other. Be podcasted to in a cozy, overly considered way, or be podcasted at in a hastier, less-considered way. There's something phoney about podcasts. I see most podcasts as similiar to TED talks or books by Malcolm Gladwell. These things are the opposite of Punk, which feels real, even when it's shitty. That doesn't mean there can't be good podcasts or that there aren't any, but the dominant format seems pretty lifeless to me.

nickelcitymario 7y ago
> Lou Reed made it pretty big though. Not compared to the influence he had on other musicians. The general music loving public is not THAT familiar with him. He was a musician's musician. (Also an asshole and abuser of women, which has nothing to do with this discussion, but I can't praise him without mentioning this.) > There's something phoney about podcasts. I see most podcasts as similar to TED talks or books by Malcolm Gladwell. Ironically, Malcolm's podcast "Broken Records" has an episode where Rick Rubin discusses this, in a way. He said something to the effect that all musicians start out copying their favorite musicians, until they find their own sound. I think this is the same for podcasts. Most podcasters are new to the form, so they haven't had the time to find their voice yet. They're still figuring it out. Ira Glass himself speaks to this point: “Nobody tells this to people who are beginners, I wish someone told me. All of us who do creative work, we get into it because we have good taste. But there is this gap. For the first couple years you make stuff, it’s just not that good. It’s trying to be good, it has potential, but it’s not. But your taste, the thing that got you into the game, is still killer. And your taste is why your work disappoints you. A lot of people never get past this phase, they quit. Most people I know who do interesting, creative work went through years of this. We know our work doesn’t have this special thing that we want it to have. We all go through this. And if you are just starting out or you are still in this phase, you gotta know its normal and the most important thing you can do is do a lot of work. Put yourself on a deadline so that every week you will finish one story. It is only by going through a volume of work that you will close that gap, and your work will be as good as your ambitions. And I took longer to figure out how to do this than anyone I’ve ever met. It’s gonna take awhile. It’s normal to take awhile. You’ve just gotta fight your way through.”
- leftyted 7y ago
  Sure, The Velvet Underground's influence on pop music exceeded their popularity, but they were relatively successful, just not compared to The Beatles or to Dylan (who influenced Lou Reed and The Beatles). But who is The Velvet Underground of podcasts? Who is the punk of podcasts? It's not Ira Glass. I'm not saying you're wrong to celebrate the "democratization of long form audio" but the popular stuff seems milquetoast to me. And that's what's being criticized here, though maybe a bit too broadly.
  - nickelcitymario 7y ago
    > the popular stuff seems milquetoast Isn't that true of any medium? I don't know who the Velvet Underground of podcasts would be. I wouldn't have recognized VU when they were getting started either. I suspect this is the sort of thing that's easier to recognize when looking back. I certainly didn't understand punk the way I do now back when I was a punk rocker. All I knew was I could play a little bass (badly) with some friends who played guitar and drums (badly) and sing (badly) and we had a blast doing it. Yet today, looking back, I see so many top-notch musicians who credit punk for the work they've been able to produce. Of course, this may be my way of passing the buck. "Wait and see" is an easy way for me to dismiss your argument, and I apologize for that. It could be that in 10-20 years we'll look back at podcasting and say, "Meh, that didn't really amount to anything." But I suspect that won't be the case. (As for my 2 cents on who's killing it at podcasting... I'm personally a fan of the Cracked podcast. It's always entertaining and educational to boot.)
    - leftyted 7y ago
      You've convinced me that "I'm Against Podcasts" is a stupid statement. I think you're absolutely on-point for saying that, 10-20 years from now, we'll look back on podcasts that are widely acknowledged as classic. At the same time, I think criticisms by this author are mostly valid and probably helpful (inasmuch as they push people to innovate and take risks with the medium). The criticisms are just overly broad and they ought to be aimed more clearly at specific trends within in the medium rather than the medium itself.
jordanpg 7y ago
Really? I hear that some people do not like the "NPR voice". OK, that's a criticism of the format, I suppose. But to then compare Ira Glass/TAL with TED or Malcolm Gladwell stretches credulity. TAL is the pinnacle, the granddaddy of storytelling, of many types, shapes, and colors. It can't be painted with a single brush. Ira Glass usually speaks for a couple of minutes of each episode. I would challenge you to listen to some of the classic episodes and then tell me it still reminds you of TED: https://www.thisamericanlife.org/513/129-cars https://www.thisamericanlife.org/513/129-cars https://www.thisamericanlife.org/570/the-night-in-question https://www.thisamericanlife.org/570/the-night-in-question https://www.thisamericanlife.org/414/right-to-remain-silent/act-two-0 https://www.thisamericanlife.org/414/right-to-remain-silent/... https://www.thisamericanlife.org/355/the-giant-pool-of-money https://www.thisamericanlife.org/355/the-giant-pool-of-money https://www.thisamericanlife.org/206/somewhere-in-the-arabian-sea https://www.thisamericanlife.org/206/somewhere-in-the-arabia...
save_ferris 7y ago
I agree that a lot of the major podcasts don't focus enough on clarity. That said, I've found more high quality content than I'll be able to listen to by digging a little deeper. I've gotten into music composition recently, and I've been completely blown away by the number and high quality of music writing podcasts like SongExploder. I'm constantly and pleasantly surprised by what I find.
mbrock 7y ago
Weird. The podcasts I listen to are mostly improvised long form conversations between interesting people: EconTalk, Partially Examined Life, Primo Nutmeg, The Henry George Program, Software Engineering Daily, A16Z, Track Changes, Joe Rogan, Tyler Cowan, and so on. Mainstream anything is kind of bad, but the supply of truly interesting podcasts is quite tremendous.
- matwood 7y ago
  Agreed. Podcasts let me listen to longer form conversations about topics I'm interested in.

nickelcitymario 7y ago

> Lou Reed made it pretty big though. Not compared to the influence he had on other musicians. The general music loving public is not THAT familiar with him. He was a musician's musician. (Also an asshole and abuser of women, which has nothing to do with this discussion, but I can't praise him without mentioning this.) > There's something phoney about podcasts. I see most podcasts as similar to TED talks or books by Malcolm Gladwell. Ironically, Malcolm's podcast "Broken Records" has an episode where Rick Rubin discusses this, in a way. He said something to the effect that all musicians start out copying their favorite musicians, until they find their own sound. I think this is the same for podcasts. Most podcasters are new to the form, so they haven't had the time to find their voice yet. They're still figuring it out. Ira Glass himself speaks to this point: “Nobody tells this to people who are beginners, I wish someone told me. All of us who do creative work, we get into it because we have good taste. But there is this gap. For the first couple years you make stuff, it’s just not that good. It’s trying to be good, it has potential, but it’s not. But your taste, the thing that got you into the game, is still killer. And your taste is why your work disappoints you. A lot of people never get past this phase, they quit. Most people I know who do interesting, creative work went through years of this. We know our work doesn’t have this special thing that we want it to have. We all go through this. And if you are just starting out or you are still in this phase, you gotta know its normal and the most important thing you can do is do a lot of work. Put yourself on a deadline so that every week you will finish one story. It is only by going through a volume of work that you will close that gap, and your work will be as good as your ambitions. And I took longer to figure out how to do this than anyone I’ve ever met. It’s gonna take awhile. It’s normal to take awhile. You’ve just gotta fight your way through.”

leftyted 7y ago
Sure, The Velvet Underground's influence on pop music exceeded their popularity, but they were relatively successful, just not compared to The Beatles or to Dylan (who influenced Lou Reed and The Beatles). But who is The Velvet Underground of podcasts? Who is the punk of podcasts? It's not Ira Glass. I'm not saying you're wrong to celebrate the "democratization of long form audio" but the popular stuff seems milquetoast to me. And that's what's being criticized here, though maybe a bit too broadly.
- nickelcitymario 7y ago
  > the popular stuff seems milquetoast Isn't that true of any medium? I don't know who the Velvet Underground of podcasts would be. I wouldn't have recognized VU when they were getting started either. I suspect this is the sort of thing that's easier to recognize when looking back. I certainly didn't understand punk the way I do now back when I was a punk rocker. All I knew was I could play a little bass (badly) with some friends who played guitar and drums (badly) and sing (badly) and we had a blast doing it. Yet today, looking back, I see so many top-notch musicians who credit punk for the work they've been able to produce. Of course, this may be my way of passing the buck. "Wait and see" is an easy way for me to dismiss your argument, and I apologize for that. It could be that in 10-20 years we'll look back at podcasting and say, "Meh, that didn't really amount to anything." But I suspect that won't be the case. (As for my 2 cents on who's killing it at podcasting... I'm personally a fan of the Cracked podcast. It's always entertaining and educational to boot.)
  - leftyted 7y ago
    You've convinced me that "I'm Against Podcasts" is a stupid statement. I think you're absolutely on-point for saying that, 10-20 years from now, we'll look back on podcasts that are widely acknowledged as classic. At the same time, I think criticisms by this author are mostly valid and probably helpful (inasmuch as they push people to innovate and take risks with the medium). The criticisms are just overly broad and they ought to be aimed more clearly at specific trends within in the medium rather than the medium itself.

jordanpg 7y ago

Really? I hear that some people do not like the "NPR voice". OK, that's a criticism of the format, I suppose. But to then compare Ira Glass/TAL with TED or Malcolm Gladwell stretches credulity. TAL is the pinnacle, the granddaddy of storytelling, of many types, shapes, and colors. It can't be painted with a single brush. Ira Glass usually speaks for a couple of minutes of each episode. I would challenge you to listen to some of the classic episodes and then tell me it still reminds you of TED: https://www.thisamericanlife.org/513/129-cars https://www.thisamericanlife.org/513/129-cars https://www.thisamericanlife.org/570/the-night-in-question https://www.thisamericanlife.org/570/the-night-in-question https://www.thisamericanlife.org/414/right-to-remain-silent/act-two-0 https://www.thisamericanlife.org/414/right-to-remain-silent/... https://www.thisamericanlife.org/355/the-giant-pool-of-money https://www.thisamericanlife.org/355/the-giant-pool-of-money https://www.thisamericanlife.org/206/somewhere-in-the-arabian-sea https://www.thisamericanlife.org/206/somewhere-in-the-arabia...

save_ferris 7y ago

I agree that a lot of the major podcasts don't focus enough on clarity. That said, I've found more high quality content than I'll be able to listen to by digging a little deeper. I've gotten into music composition recently, and I've been completely blown away by the number and high quality of music writing podcasts like SongExploder. I'm constantly and pleasantly surprised by what I find.

mbrock 7y ago

Weird. The podcasts I listen to are mostly improvised long form conversations between interesting people: EconTalk, Partially Examined Life, Primo Nutmeg, The Henry George Program, Software Engineering Daily, A16Z, Track Changes, Joe Rogan, Tyler Cowan, and so on. Mainstream anything is kind of bad, but the supply of truly interesting podcasts is quite tremendous.

matwood 7y ago
Agreed. Podcasts let me listen to longer form conversations about topics I'm interested in.