Comments on: Declaring the audiobook vs print book debate officially stupid

By: Gentle Troubadour

Gentle Troubadour — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:43:53 +0000

I love both, actually, but reading a book whilst driving in the car is a little tricky. The sheer convenience of audiobooks adds greatly to their appeal. But sometimes the voice of the reader detracts from the enjoyment of the story, at least for me. I just can’t get into ‘Crescent Station’ because the reader has the most annoyingly nasal , irritating voice I have ever heard.

By: Podiobooker » Blog Archive » Delclaring the listen vs read audiobooks debate officially stupid

Fri, 24 Apr 2009 23:12:53 +0000

[...] guess my last rant on the topics of personal preferences in book reading didn’t go far enough. Because if I hear one more person try and correct someone talking about [...]

By: Diesel

Diesel — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 20:16:39 +0000

Evo, thank you for making me aware of this article, it really does raise some good points, especially concerning the visually impaired.

I was made aware of audiobooks through Ask A Ninja’s vlodcast via iTunes when a PDF was delivered in the feed advertising Infected by Scott Sigler.
I went along to the website and downloaded the first ‘episode’ and was immediately hooked.

My fiancé laughed when I told her I was ‘reading a book on my iPod’, and even today she giggles when I tell her about the latest novel I am ‘reading’.

And this is where I think the problem comes from: generally people do not see audiobooks as a book, and therefore the ‘idea’ of reading, or listening to a novel is, well, novel!
But is it really any more ridiculous than listening to the radio as a streamed audio file over the internet?

I don’t think so.

I like reading novel’s in the conventional sense, as a paper medium, but I just don’t the time. I need to sit and read regularly, and spend a good chunk of time with the book. My time these days allows me time to read only a magazine article or two at a time, so audiobooks are, for me, a blessing.

These days I do not read paper books, I listen to them, and Podiobooks has allowed me to read novels by authors I would have probably never heard of, genre’s I would not normally have bothered with, and to become so engrossed in a way I never have done before.

The author, telling the story just as he or she intended it to be read helps the listener to ‘live’ in the story.

There is so much more I could say, but I think this comment is long enough as it is.

So yes, give up the farcical debate now, its silly to say the least.

By: Podiobooker » Blog Archive » Declaring the audiobook vs print book … | AudioBookPoint.Com

Sun, 15 Mar 2009 08:48:32 +0000

[...] More: Podiobooker » Blog Archive » Declaring the audiobook vs print book … [...]

By: Morten Juhl-Johansen Zölde-Fejér

Morten Juhl-Johansen Zölde-Fejér — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 11:21:32 +0000

I personally find that there is an additional dimension in the podio- and audiobook: That you get to hear the author’s version. I am currently listening to Infected, and mr. Sigler’s approach contributes greatly to the feel of the novel. The same goes for Dr. Lowell’s storytelling in the tales of the Solar Clipper – and Phil Rossi’s characteristic voice first with Crescent Station and now with Eden.
There is a well-known (well, here, anyway) and most productive Danish author, Hans Scherfig, who had a very distinctive voice and narrative style. He did a voiceover in a movie made over one of his books, Den forsvundne fuldmægtig (’The clerk gone missing’ would probably be a usable translation) – and everyone I know who saw that movie remembers how that voice penetrated it all – and was evoked every time they read one of his books later on.

By: Glen

Glen — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 00:47:31 +0000

Everyone likes to be read to. (Well, nearly everyone.)

By: Sean Reiser

Sean Reiser — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 20:43:24 +0000

I couldn’t agree more. There are stories that I absorb through audio books and stories I read. For me there are certain stories that work better in Audio form, and some that work better off the page. I tend to read non-fiction and classics and listen to more modern books. I’m a kindle user and a podiobooks subscriber. And does it really matter? If people are getting exposed to more literature I don’t care if they are reading the books, listening to audio books or having their Mom read to them at bed time, it’s about getting good literature into more people’s hands.

By: Charlie B

Charlie B — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 20:29:46 +0000

I will say this: some of the books I’ve started and then abandoned on this site usually fall into the “can’t stand the performance” category rather than “can’t stand the writing.” Probably 2-1. Some of those poor performances I might actually read later.

By: D.C. Wood

D.C. Wood — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 19:59:25 +0000

A brilliant, brilliant point. I love BOTH reading and listening to books. It makes no difference. I’m still being exposed to such great storytelling. If I’m on a train journey, I can either listen to my iPod, or read a paperback and enjoy it either way.

By: Jennah - Recorded Books

Jennah - Recorded Books — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 19:22:31 +0000

I just shared this with you on twitter, but I do love your point about the visually impaired. Who would say to them, “Well, that’s not really reading”? I’ll have to remember that one!

By: Victoria

Victoria — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 18:57:55 +0000

It’s already happening !

http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6641258.html

And just to add… when it comes to choosing, I’m a both-at-the-same-time kinda girl if I can manage it !

By: Evo

Evo — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 18:14:15 +0000

You raise a valid point, SG. It’ll take a shift in business strategies to see it fully adopted, but I think it will happen. The Kindle is raising the point, much to the chagrin of some audiobook producers. I think that debate — purchasing the “content” and having unlimited options of the “container” is a much more worthwhile discussion. Oh, and if it wasn’t clear, I’m all for it!

By: ShakespeareGeek

ShakespeareGeek — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 17:27:57 +0000

You’ll get no argument from me, either. My issue has always been one more of the hybrid – why can’t I buy a book once, and then have it served up in whatever media happens to suit me at the moment? Maybe at home curled up in front of the fire under a blanket I prefer a literal page turner – but while I’m in the car driving 45 minutes to work, why not have it read to me? Likewise when I’m in a boring meeting at work, maybe I can get a few pages read on my iPhone? I shouldn’t have to pay for the book 3 times for that luxury.

By: Podiobooker » Blog Archive » I’m declaring the audiobook vs print …

Podiobooker » Blog Archive » I’m declaring the audiobook vs print … — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:58:00 +0000

[...] Go to the author’s original blog: Podiobooker » Blog Archive » I’m declaring the audiobook vs print … [...]

By: Basil Sands

Basil Sands — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:57:43 +0000

In reality it is as you guys say Apples and Oranges.

I have an audio / podcast on my smartphone for the gym. I have another audio book in the cd player of my truck. I have a paper novel on the toilet in each bathroom, and another by my chair. I also have a few e-books on my computer that I pop into from time to time.

A little something for all me.

By: Basil Sands

Basil Sands — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:53:09 +0000

But wait! Of course its a valid argument…because, well…because…

Because I want to feel smarter because I read books instead of listening because I can read…and I sit under a nice lamp in my comfy chair with a smoking jacket and read books with big words while I suck on my pipe..and…and

Anyway, I can’t follow those audio books…they talk to fast and I like to sound out all of the syllables anyway because they make my tongue feel good…

and … and…

Aw..slow day at work…I’ll shut up now and get back to my nice audio book.

By: Edward G. Talbot

Edward G. Talbot — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:51:48 +0000

I have a confession to make. When I do have a choice, I prefer to read paper books. But as Evo says, I don’t always have that choice. No paper book-reading in the car. Most times I can’t listen when I’m working, but occasionally I have to do the kind of repetitive task where I can. The way I look at it, audiobooks give me extra options. And certain performances provide a totally different experience, so much so that it can seem like a different book when I read the paper version.

I would still rather listen to a reasonably well-done audio book than read a pdf on my computer (or heaven forbid, anything smaller). Too hard on my eyes. But things like the Kindle or Sony sound intriguing.

There are a lot of options. I can understand people who simply don’t enjoy listening to audiobooks themselves. But there seems little point in turning it into a pissing content.

By: Ivy

Ivy — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:04:00 +0000

I agree completely. There is no reason to chose, no reason to limit ourselves, and no cause for debate.

For a small child, both at the same time is best. For an adult who can read without thinking about the mechanisms of it, it’s a pointless difference. Audio books, e-books, print books, paperback, hard cover…they’re BOOKS darn it. Wine is still wine when served in a paper cup.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 15:59:34 +0000

Thank. You.

Apples to oranges. Without audiobooks I would have no book consumption in my life.

It’s about making the best use of the time that you have.