The document summarizes Muhammad Syaffa's evaluation of an audio podcast production project. Some key points: - Research could have included more existing podcasts to improve content and audience appeal. - Planning helped lay out ideas and script but was not organized enough, rushing the finished product. - Time management allowed finishing on schedule but more time could have added interesting content. - Peer feedback suggested adding intro/outro music and slowing pace; the author agrees music should be added.

1. Audio
Evaluation
Muhammad Syaffa

2. Production Process Evaluation

3. Research
• Strengths
By doing my research before executing my project was essential as it shows me what is
the trend now that appeals to audience. With that I can find useful insights and use it
for my own podcast.
• Weakness
I should’ve included more existing products on the market into my research. With this,
it may improve my podcast better in the forms of delivering and the tone of my voices
on the podcast. It could also inspire me to include more content that appeals more to
my targeted audience.

4. Planning
• Strengths
With planning it really helps me to lay out all my ideas and my script that I need to
use my podcast. Planning also helped me to explore more ideas on what to use for my
podcast ranges from content to the tone of my voice that I should be using on my
podcast.
• Weakness
The main weakness of my planning would be that its not organized enough
which resulted in me to rush finishing my product to meet the deadline I set.

5. Time Management
I think my time management went well. This is because I was able to finish my
project according to my schedule and was able to produced it just in time for
the deadline. If I would have more time given to add more interesting
contents into my podcast. Hence, my podcast would’ve been more interesting
and could’ve been more appealing. If I would’ve have more time I will add
more content such as adding quizzes or asking more questions towards my
co-hosts about their opinions on their favourite genre.

6. Technical Qualities
SIMILARATIES
• The structure of our podcasts are the same.
• Both our podcasts contain informative content to entertain our targeted audience
and the appeal to our audience.
• We both uses relax and informal tone in our podcast so that our audience could
enjoy our podcast casually.
• Both our podcasts have co-hosts in it so that it will be more entertaining.
DIFFERENCES
• Some podcasts usually focused on a specific genre but mine was done
spontaneously which I think appeals more as the conversation will be casual.
• My podcast focuses more on my co-hosts opinions about their favourite genre and
specific artists compare to other podcast that focuses more a fixed genre.

7. Aural Qualities
I believe that my product was good with my self only using
premier pro for a while. It was definitely creative and different
compared to podcasts that are available on the market right
now. The difference is not just subtle it is not noticeable as I said
earlier that my podcast focuses more on peoples’ opinions about
their taste in music and their favourite artists, compared to other
podcasts out there who only focuses more on a specific genre. I
like the whole part of my podcast although my sound effects got
corrupted on my podcast I am still satisfied with the whole
outcome of my podcast. I would definitely try to recover back my
music effects in order to make my product more appealing to my
targeted audience. I would also add more content to it and more
informative insights for my audience to enjoy my podcast more.

8. Audience Appeal
I used informal tone in my dialogue so that the
whole atmosphere of the podcast would be
casual and relaxed. With this I believe that my
audience would enjoy the conversation more.
My co-hosts also talked about recent songs in
order to appeal more to people with
psychographic of belongers. With this belongers
would listen to my podcast and be interested in
it. I also made my podcast accessible and free so
that many people can enjoy my content.

9. Peer
Feedback

10. Feedback 1
• What did you like about the product?
The questions were very good with some good
responses, and it was funny and it felt like I was
involved in a nice funny conversation
• What improvements could have been made to
the product?
It felt quite rushed at the beginning and end which
could be because of time so give yourself more time
next time.

11. Feedback 2
• What did you like about the product?
I liked the extensive conversations about
peoples preferences towards music and why
they listen to it.
• What improvements could have been made to
the product?
The podcast should’ve had music in it even just
for the intro and outro.

12. Feedback 3
• What did you like about the product?
– I like how the podcast talks about the boys favourite
music. And when they first listened to that music and
what got them to like that music.
• What improvements could have been made to
the product?
The only thing that Mo could improve on Is adding
music in the beginning and ending or in the
background, it just needs a little something to spice
it up a little.

13. Peer Feedback Summary
• What do you agree with from your peer
feedback?
– I agree that I should’ve added music for the intro
and the outro for my podcast.
• What do you disagree with from your peer
feedback?
– I disagree that one of my classmate claimed that I
was rushing, I think that my flow was calm and
stable.

14. Peer Feedback Summary
I would’ve add music effects at the intro and the outro of my
podcast. The music that I possibly would use is RnB because those
type of music fits the whole atmosphere of the podcast. It gives a
relaxed vibe and my targeted audience would enjoy my podcast
even more. Furthermore, I will slow down in the future when I’m
doing my podcast if it will make my audience to enjoy my podcast
better. In order to maximise my audiences’ pleasure I will
definitely add more content such as adding quizzes and invite
more co-hosts to share their stories and opinions about their
favourite genre of music and even their favourite artist.