Isoprenoid@programming.devtomemes@lemmy.world•Know the risks when you say watch whatever you want...English
9·
9 days agoThe IT Crowd didn’t use canned laugh tracks, They recorded audio of audience responses.
The IT Crowd didn’t use canned laugh tracks, They recorded audio of audience responses.
They pay out of initial capital investment and leveraging.
How does pirating make a corporation broke? Making a copy doesn’t steal money.
Edit: We can’t pirate a company into bankruptcy.
Up and down votes are not a “agree / disagree” button. They are for dis/encouraging posts. You can upvote a post you disagree with but can see that it is useful for the discussion.
Developers: White whale, holy grail!
I understand where you’re coming from: If natural dialogue is preferred for a creative work, then having laughter audio is inappropriate.
I disagree that canned laughter and live audience laughter are equivalent.
With live audience reactions it’s like watching a theatre presentation, you get to be part of the crowd. We get a chance to laugh at the jokes at a natural pace (allowing for pauses so we don’t miss the next joke) that the audience would set, and their reactions are modulated organically.
Canned laughter doesn’t do this, it doesn’t set a natural pace. It is calculated by an audio engineer, and the laughter will be an unnatural reaction to the joke presented.
It’s the difference between a genuine and forced smile. We can naturally sense something is off. A live audience reaction is superior to canned laughter in most cases.
That being said, some shows don’t need laughter audio to be enjoyable.