Note: They still need to work on their audio, as the levels between presenters and guest are different and just about requires constant volume adjustment throughout. Despite that, I found the some parts of discussion quite interesting and worth the effort.
Notable comments, at minute 34, Dr. Seiler mentions a study he is running that looks to compare one longer low intensity session with 2 split sessions of similar total time and intensity (1 x 4 hour vs 2 x 2 hour).
This has been mentioned and discussed in a number of threads here, and I donāt remember if there was any science available with this duration range.
Itās interesting to hear that this current CV mess is one reason that we have people willing and able to perform this type of test, that largely was ignored in the past since it is quite challenging in light of the time on a trainer.
Iām excited to see what if any info comes from this testing.
IN todayās world of podcasts, consistent audio levels are the price of admission. With so much good content out there, why would any listener continually waste their time on this?
And it isnāt like this is a new problem for Fast Talkā¦it has been a persistent problem for them almost since the beginning.
I do agree. Itās frustrating that they seem unable to fix this persistent issue. As you said, itās long standing. The current shift of many in-person group podcasts to all remote (AACC) and their ability to do so with balanced levels shows that it is quite possible.
In a recent episode (not sure which one) FT even went so far as to list a new āemployeeā for them that was meant to handle the audio. Not sure if that fell through, or if that person is lacking in skills, but either way they are still putting out hard to listen to work.
I persist and keep giving them a shot, since there are nuggets that I appreciate, but I admit to bailing and instantly deleted some casts that were bad audio coupled with initial discussion that didnāt grab my attention.
Edit: I just emailed them a comment about the audio and will report back if they reply.
Agreed on all pointsā¦there is definitely some good content there, which keeps me coming back, but it is becoming increasingly difficult and their leash keeps getting shorter.
When they started Fast Labs late last year, I filled out their survey on their new website and I specifically pointed out their audio issues as something they needed to address.
Thanks for writing. Yes, ep. 106 was a tough one. We had some technical difficulties and Dr. Seiler wasnāt using a mic for the recording. It was great content, as you note, but poor audio quality. We decided to publish it despite those issues. What youāre hearing is much improved over what we captured, in fact.
We apologize for the inconvenience. Thanks again for listening.
I listened to this during Petit today with in ear earphones. I had no problem hearing everyone, My takeaways Zwift, maybe 2 2hr rides is as good as one 4 hr ride Zwift, 5 races in a week to āget the yayas outā. Zwift do the intervals first, then the Zwift ride. Zwift.
Iāll have to give this episode a listen. Like you all, I like some of the content in their podcasts, but their poor audio keeps me from listening to them more often than not. Iāve spent my fair share of time behind an audio console in live settings and have no stomach for podcasts that require me to change volume constantly.
A few years ago when I had way way way more windshield time, I listened to them religiously, but given that I had a promo-bluetooth speaker sitting in my cupholder-as-amplifier, I didnāt have a lot of complaints about sound quality. Iāve missed a year or two worth of regularity, but now that theyāve broken away from the rest of the Velo-news podcast, I might give them a try again, particularly in that I watch the TR while riding.
Dr. Seiler really should be an NPR reporter from Austin, not a physiologist from Austin residing in Scandinavia.
To me the Vegan Cyclist is the worst offender of this. His voice is usually pretty low and then the music is about 40 dB higher. Just one ish volume level please!
I will give this one a listen despite the audio quality pretty much like I continue to watch VCās content, haha
Seiler is doing a study comparing two rides/day vs one long
ride/day. Age group and some professional cyclists. Itās
supposed to run the month of April. I kept sticking Zwift in
because they kept talking about doing Zwift rides, races,
intervals on Zwift, etc. A mechanic at my local shop was deep
into zwift until he actually tore a muscle insertion away from the
bone in his leg from all the intensity. I stay away from Zwift,
because of the temptation to go too hard all the time.
Yup, thatās always funny and have me checking my mail, wondering why I got notifications and no mail
I suspect it was the Doc. since Chris mentioned he wasnāt using a mic.
Right! In VCās defense he is not the most technically gifted so Iām sure nailing consistent volume levels is lost on him, lol. I donāt get it though because video editing software does it so easily .
I agree and I think it makes him a more likable guy. I actually enjoy listening to him butcher names of various products he tests/gets sponsored by, I think itās great ha!
Hopefully he will get that mix down eventually. I will still watch his videos but that will make things just that much better.
I find most of the cycling science podcasts getting pretty lame now. Just recycling more of the same stuff that has been discussed hundreds of times on every other competing podcast. If they havenāt said anything interesting in the first ten minutes, I just delete and move on to the next poddy in the lineup.
