3 ms·
I love Brian Kernighan interviews so I was eager to listen. I have mixed feelings. You would often make a point and then play snippets from him supporting it.
by bronson 6y ago
I love Brian Kernighan interviews so I was eager to listen. I have mixed feelings.
You would often make a point and then play snippets from him supporting it. You often gave yourself center stage and used him as evidence. I found it overedited and synthetic, more a performance than an interview.
I came for BWK and left unsatisfied. If that's the style you were going for, that's fine. Maybe it's just my expectations.
It was entertaining lisen. Thank you for making it!
- agbell 6y agoOh, I'm sorry you didn't like the format. Thanks for giving it a listen anyhow.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- peterburkimsher 6y agoI think the format is good for your podcast, where your listeners would be used to hearing your voice. On Hacker News though, people are a bit more familiar with BWK. Thank you very much for transcribing the text; it's better to listen, but it's easier to translate to other languages, and also read while looking busy in an office. The audio is better for the Canadian accents though!
- ptx 6y agoI suppose this is just matter of personal preference, but I'm not a big fan of this style of podcast either - although I did greatly enjoy the episode! I just felt it would have been even better if it were simply a conversation, without jumping back and forth in time, inserting explanations (although they were helpful), etc. As you said in the podcast - "start at the beginning". If it had then proceeded from the beginning to the middle and from there to the end, I would have found it more relaxing to listen to. On the other hand, there are some of these heavily edited, radio-style podcasts that lots of people think are amazing but leave me confused and annoyed. So maybe you shouldn't listen to me. :)
- agbell 6y agoThat makes sense. Part of my process is having people listen through to the interview and let me know where they get confused. Then I add in explanations there. The explanations mean people don't get lost if they don't know what punch cards are or fortan for instance. I also think there are many straight interview podcasts and I'm trying to do something different.
- mutagen 6y agoI think your podcast and format is great, keep doing it and refining it. I look forward to listening to each new episode because of the interesting and wide ranging guests and the broader viewpoint you look for in the discussions.
- ptx 6y agoMakes sense! Maybe my confusion (which was more about the format than the topic), could be solved just by some subtle sound effect to mark the switch between you talking to the guest and you talking to the listener? Since there's no video in a podcast to give this context, the listener has to exert some effort trying to deduce it from other clues. For example, Accidental Tech Podcast inserts a small jingle at the start of a sponsor break whereas Talk Python inserts a sudden awkward silence in the conversation. It took me many episodes of the latter to stop wondering if the player had crashed, or if the interviewer lost his train of thought, or the guest was offended, etc. The jingle lets the listener know what's happening, which gives a more relaxing listing experience. So some easy way to distinguish the interview from the narration would be useful, I think. But maybe I'll be less confused once I've listened to a few more episodes. A new podcast always takes some getting used to. Thanks for making it!
- duderoso 6y agoi bet you give great code reviews
- swyx 6y agothere are people who feel strongly the opposite way - this format offers more context, cuts out small talk, allows the narrator to construct a story. to each their own... perhaps the OP could release the raw audio if they wished to cater to both