Harrison Lincoln completed an audio evaluation project involving voice impressions. His research provided ideas and comedy but finding relevant examples was difficult. Planning drew from existing sketches but he worried about copyright. He managed his time well according to a schedule. Technically, his work was similar to other audio sketches. Audio quality improved after re-recording but switching voices strained his throat. He appealed to his target audience with familiar scenarios and voices. Peer feedback praised the comedic timing but noted gaps between voices and inconsistent volume. Harrison agreed volume could be improved and disagreed that it was too loud.
3. Research
• My research gave me an idea of what I was doing and how to do it along
with some hints of comedy and political views that everyone thinks but
doesn’t say out loud. Another strength was that some of the video
tutorials for some of the voice impressions helped and added on to my
content. Whereas some weaknesses were quite common as it was hard to
find a podcast that used voice impressions or learn the voices from videos
that I tried to learn from. Another weakness was having to switch between
voices for different lines, I tried to record each characters audio but the
audio wasn’t loud enough or wasn’t up to the standards I set my self.
4. Planning
• One strength of my planning was watching some previous skits and
sketches that used voice impressions and taking some elements of the
voice acting and writing techniques. One of the weaknesses of my
planning was not thinking about how it would sound to others and
worrying if I had stolen any content from previous products and might get
some copy right claims.
5. Time Management
• I had a timetable given to me and I followed it to a tee by doing each bit of
work and course work as it makes working towards production a lot easier
along with the timetable we had to write up our selves.
• If I had any additional time I would have spent more time on my product,
script and research. I feel like having more research and a better script
that was either shorter or have a different scenario and
6. Technical Qualities
• My work is similar to other audio skits as
they’re set with similar scenarios and are
written with similar styles. The existing
product, I used the same elements of comedy
in my product, along with the same light-
hearted humour the existing product uses
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-
eJ0QKVu6Y
7. Aural Qualities
• At first my audio was too quiet so I had to
record it again but after re-recording it the
audio was at the desirable volume and was up
to the standards I had set my self. One of the
strengths was my ability to change my voice to
the next voice in an instant after practicing I,
how ever the weakness was the strain it put
on my throat whilst switching between voices
8. Audience Appeal
I have appealed to my targeted audience by using different voices and having
a same set scenario as similar products have similar scenarios as well. I think
the conversation between Kermit the frog and Donald trump would appeal to
my target audience as I feel it had the most elements of comedy in along with
it being the longest and the best out of the two. I think the music at the end
really appealed to my target audience as it adds a little more humour to the
audio skit and adds the cherry on top as you would say.
10. Feedback 1
• What did you like about the product?
– The perfect comedic timing at the end
• What improvements could have been made to
the product?
– The gaps between the voices
11. Feedback 2
• What did you like about the product?
– I liked the voices and how the it was written
• What improvements could have been made to
the product?
– The volume could have been a bit louder in some
places and quitter
12. Feedback 3
• What did you like about the product?
– The closing music as it had timing and added to
the comedic effect
• What improvements could have been made to
the product?
– The volume was too loud in some places making it
too loud in some places
13. Peer Feedback Summary
• What do you agree with from your peer
feedback?
– I agree with the music at the end and how its
timing was on point
• What do you disagree with from your peer
feedback?
– I disagree with the volume because I think it was
at a decent level
14. Peer Feedback Summary
I would change the volume level to be a quieter along with reducing the number of
gaps in between the voice changes to make it sound better and more professional,
along with less voices to shorten the time so it doesn’t escape or only just make it in
to the time slot.
Editor's Notes
What were the strengths of your research? How did your research help your product?
What were the weaknesses of your research? What could you have done better/improve? What effect would this have had on your product?
What were the strengths of your planning? How did your planning help your product?
What were the weaknesses of your planning? What could you have done better/improve? What effect would this have had on your product?
Did you manage your time well? Did you complete your project on time or would your products have improved with additional time?
What would you have done if you had more time to produce your work?
Compare your work to similar existing products and discuss the similarities and differences
Does your work sound good? Was it creative? What aspects of your product’s audio do you like? What would you improve? How would you improve it?
Discuss the strengths and weaknesses
How have you appealed to your target audience? What specific bits of content would appeal to your target audience.
Make reference to specific recordings, dialogue, music and sound effects
What changes would you make to your product based upon your peer feedback and why?
