>>15801756I can tell you have a clue about what you are talking about in general, but you would have to actually do what the editor does with the raw audio he gets and edit it yourself and get the same result as Cornette's podcast to understand the few things you might not have ran into yourself.
Of course a comp and gate are applied, but there is no way that during the many hours they film the sensitivity of the mic / interface as well as their distance from the mic etc. is perfect. It needs to be adjusted and cleaned up through several means and maybe even spectral edits at times if a weird sound is present while they are talking. Think about when you listen. There are never really any weird sounds, touching the mic, or other shit to be heard, and you never hear any clipping, right? That's because they precisely edited the whole fking thing so every sound you hear is what they want to put in, like Cornette shuffling paper is only heard when they want you to hear it. You never hear anyone walking by or opening doors, any scratching sounds, etc. From experience editing, autismal spectral editing takes the most time. There is shit for noise cancellation like Acon Digital, but it isn't perfect and often fks up other sounds.
Also, the last cut of the podcast isn't close to what they actually recorded. There is way more shit they record that gets cut. Also think of levelling the sound. That needs to be reviewed, along with other things. And after you review and edit everything, you still need to do a final review and check everything again before sending it. So just listening to the RAW audio is probably over 5 hours, first draft is 4 hours or whatever, then final review is another 4 hours. That's not counting editting, correspondance with Jim and Brian, waiting for Youtube graphics, reviewing legal issues, rendering times, upload times, file transfer times, etc. It's a fuckload of work because they are very precise with what they are doing.
