Start with what your studio actually does
Before comparing any way of managing sound, write down what a normal week in your studio looks like. A newsroom running several bulletins a day has very different needs from a live entertainment show with a band, a presenter and an audience. The first sets up the same desk and the same handful of microphones again and again; the second changes almost everything from one programme to the next.
I have sat in enough planning meetings to know that audio decisions go wrong when they are made from a brochure rather than from the floor. So begin with the facts: how many programmes use each studio, how many microphones a typical one needs, and how often the desk setup changes between them.
Ask the people who rig and operate the sound, not only the managers. They will tell you where time is lost, and that is where a workflow earns its place.
- How many programmes use each studio in a normal week
- Typical microphone count per programme
- How often the mixing desk setup changes
- Who rigs and who operates, and whether they are the same people
Microphone allocation: can you see it at a glance?
Microphone allocation sounds simple until two productions want the same radio mic on the same afternoon. The question to ask is whether everyone involved can see, in one place, which microphone is assigned to which person, in which studio, for which programme.
Check how you handle changes. A guest is added late, a presenter swaps a lapel microphone for a handheld, a battery pack fails. If the answer is a phone call to whoever remembers, you have a gap. A good workflow records the change once and shows it to the floor crew, the gallery and the audio operator.
Also ask how spares are tracked. A spare that nobody knows is available is not a spare. Make sure the allocation record distinguishes what is booked, what is free and what is out for repair.
- One shared view of every microphone assignment
- A clear way to record late changes
- Spares and repairs visible alongside bookings
Mixing desk setups and saved starting points
A mixing desk is only as dependable as the preparation behind it. Ask how a desk setup is documented: channel layout, routing, monitor feeds, any processing the programme relies on. If the setup lives in one engineer's memory, a day off becomes a risk.
The practical test is a handover. Could a colleague who has never worked on this programme build the same setup from your notes alone, in the time you would normally allow? If not, the documentation needs work before any tool is chosen to hold it.
Look too at how setups are matched to programmes. A template for the morning bulletin, another for the studio panel show, and a clear note of what differs on the day, saves the repeated rebuilding that eats into rehearsal time.
- Setups written down well enough for a colleague to repeat
- Templates per programme, with day-specific changes noted
- A named person responsible for keeping them current
Audio checks before and during broadcast
Ask when checks happen and who signs them off. Before broadcast, a sensible routine covers every microphone in use, talkback, IFB feeds to presenters and the return to the gallery. The checklist should be short enough that people actually complete it under time pressure.
During broadcast, the question changes to who can raise a problem and how fast the right person hears about it. On a live show the audio operator, the director and the vision mixer need one running order and one way of flagging a fault.
Finally, ask what happens afterwards. A fault noted on air and forgotten by the next day will come back. Your workflow should leave a record that the next shift can read before they start.
- A pre-broadcast check short enough to finish on time
- A clear route for flagging faults on air
- A record of faults that the next crew can read
Fit with crews, gallery and the rest of the plan
Sound does not run alone. Rig times, lighting changes and camera moves all compete for the same studio hours, so audio planning has to sit beside them. Ask whether your sound arrangements can be seen by the people building the schedule, and whether they, in turn, can see when a studio is free for a line check.
Consider also how new staff and freelancers join in. Someone arriving for a single day should be able to find their microphone, their channel and their cue without a long briefing. Simplicity here is a sign of a workable system, not a lack of ambition.
Last, think about the people who will maintain the records. A workflow that needs an hour of upkeep after every programme will be abandoned within weeks.
- Audio plans visible to whoever builds the schedule
- Easy onboarding for freelancers and one-day crew
- Upkeep that takes minutes, not hours
Questions to put to any provider, ours included
When you speak to anyone offering help with sound workflow, ask them to describe a failed check and how their approach would have caught it. Ask what you would need to supply from your side, and what stays in your hands afterwards.
Ask how existing records are brought in, how long a typical studio takes to get started, and who you would speak to when something on the day goes wrong. Straight answers matter more than a long feature list.
If you would like to talk any of this through for your own studios, our contact page is the place to begin, and we are glad to go through your setup with you before any commitment is made.
A sound workflow is worth choosing when it makes the ordinary day calmer: microphones accounted for, desk setups repeatable, checks short and honest, and faults remembered. Work through these points with your own crews before you decide, and note where the answers are thin. Those gaps tell you what you actually need, which is a better starting point than any list of features.
