Trial Presentation Blog : Courtroom Presentation, Litigation Software : Charles Perez : Trial Presentation Blog

While we're in the "digital mythbusting mode" allow us a moment to tackle digital AUDIO recorders.

Ah, yes, the march of progress. Remember the video rant? Yep, same thing here.

If you're relying on the new state of the art digital audio recorders to record important statements to be possibly used in a trial presentation here are a few tips that will make your life a little easier and your presentation a little smoother:

Unless you’re going at full CD quality, your digital recorder is tossing stuff out to save space. Supposedly your ears will not miss the missing stuff, but our forensic audio equipment sure will. You want your machine to toss out as little as possible, and that means running at the highest "bit rate" you possibly can.

To put it another way, if you are maximizing your recording time, then you are also minimizing your recording quality, and also the amount of help we can be to you. If you need to record for a very long time and have to go to a low bit rate to do it, then it’s time to invest in new equipment with more storage space. As with video, it’s better to get a small amount of useable material than a large amount of junk.

A lot of these portable digital recorders have

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

So we've explained the pitfalls and challenges of dealing with video images and what works and why.

Now we're going to tackle audio problems and challenges - a subject particularly near and dear to our audio engineer savant Eric Graf:

Yes, we are called Video Resources, but we "do audio" too. If you have an audio recording that needs to be clarified, we’re just the guys that you ought to bring it to. I’d like to tell you what to expect from us, and what you can do to make sure we can give you the results you want.

When dealing with an audio recording that’s hard to understand, the objective is to understand it. It’s not to make the thing a high- fidelity, professional-sounding recording, and usually that’s not possible anyway. Once we get it to where you can understand the conversation, we stop messing with it.

Often we will not be able to snag every word. 60% comprehensible is considered a big improvement over 10%.

If you read my lengthy tome about video, you no doubt remember my rant about the shenanigans on TV shows like CSI. It goes for audio too. To summarize: Much of the “technology” on those shows is more James Bond than LAPD. Do not judge a “real” clarification job by what you hear on those shows. Because frankly, they’re full of it.

What we CAN usually do is reduce background noise, background talking, foreground talking (sometimes), distortion, muffledness, and general unintelligibility. It really depends on a lot of factors.

Sometimes we can work wonders. Occasionally we can't work anything.

But we do have the tools and the expertise to do as much as can be done. Our microcassette player alone retails for $8000, and we often find that it delivers a huge improvement just because it plays so much better than everybody else's microcassette player.

Sometimes we’ll listen to a recording you’ve submitted and say “sorry, we can’t help you.” We like a good challenge, and we like making money while tackling a good challenge, but we aren’t going to waste your time or resources on a lost cause. Here’s how you can help reduce your chances of your cause being lost:

GET US THE ORIGINAL. PLEASE. WE BEG YOU.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

OK - in the previous blogisode my sidekick and ally in presentations Eric Graf exploded many of the make-believe antics that pass for science on those pop cop "CSI" - type soap operas that have the masses convinced that such visual alchemy truly exists.

One of the culprits that I feel has encouraged the feebs who write the CSI tripe is the DVR, or Digital Video Recorder. I've personally witnessed the growth of these machines over the past 5 or 6 years in the surveillance arena and have marveled at the promises made by the manufacturers that hawk them to their unsuspecting customers with the overt promise of the unit being capable of isolating an incident (and any suspect within the incident) and then enlarge said subjects facial features for police identification.

I've had the sad chore of bursting many a security manager's bubble when I point out the REAL limitations of their 32 camera, state of the art, real-time, internet accessable system. I no longer feel the need to let them rest their head on my shoulder anymore while gently rocking them and saying "There, there, it wasn't your fault".

Because, it is their fault. They should know better.

Here's why - Here's Eric's take on what we'll call "The Digital Myth":

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks