What rhetorical conventions did you draw on?
The rhetorical conventions upon which I drew most heavily were vocal delivery (both my own as well as that of my interviewees) and the inclusion of music. I decided I wanted to ask people what music they associate with spring, and I figured that the most effective and sensible supplemental sounds to add would be clip of each song someone described, played directly after they describe it.
How did you pace your project?
I rented an audio recorder from Jones Media Center last week, and then over the several days following, I gathered many recordings of a variety of things. At first, I was not sure how I wanted to approach this project, so I thought it would be a good idea to keep a wide-open range of audio sources. I recorded things like the sound of my longboard rolling down the sidewalk (and then getting the wheels stuck in an iron grate and sending me off the board), bits of conversation between my teammates, and footsteps. On the final couple of days remaining, when I had my approach decided, I focused more on interview-style recordings about music. On the last day, I made the podcast compilation itself, cutting and moving pieces around and adding the corresponding songs.
How did silence or other audio effects function as transitions and organizational
devices? What kind of voice did you use? How did you use your voice as a rhetorical tool?
I used my voice as a rhetorical tool in more ways than one. First, I vocally introduced the audience to the piece by asking my interviewees something to the effect of “what kind of music reminds you of spring? ” Then, albeit more subtly, I used my voice to keep up a casual dialog with my interviewees. I did so in order to keep the flow of conversation most natural, to receive a useful answer from each of them, and to establish for the audience a mode by which to listen to the piece. I did not, however, utilize silence as a rhetorical tool in my piece at all.
How did your use sound indicate the genre of your piece?
I think the conversational style I used in my podcast indicated the genre and mood of my piece to be relatively lighthearted and casual. The music itself tended to be uplifting, emotionally positive and/or upbeat, which contributed to the mood of the piece.
How did composing a piece to be heard differ from composing a piece to be read?
The most significant difference between composing a piece to be read and a piece to be heard are the obvious variances in limitations and advantages. For example, when working with audio instead of text, the “author” (composer) is able to relay and imply things that might be difficult to do with words. However, unexplained sounds often lend themselves to ambiguity, a problem which is more easily resolved in the form of written text.
In my case, a strength of composing a piece out of sound is that it gave me the ability to let my audience hear for themselves the songs that were mentioned and described.