In the podcast “Making Radiolab”, hosts Jad Abumrad and Robert Krulwich discuss the importance of sound in radio shows as a means of storytelling. They reference a clip in which developmental psychologist Anne Fernald says, “Sound is kind of touch at a distance,” and then delineate how this is so. The air that pulses into a listener’s ears causes vibrations and bending of receptive hair within the ears, then charged particles send electricity to neurons to create the sounds we hear. Jad and Robert distort Fernald’s sentence through filters by extending the effects, vibrations, and breaths of the sound clip- subsequently demonstrating the capabilities of sound effects and illustrating the story of sound as a travelling journey to the ear.

To further exemplify the use of sound in story, Abumrad and Krulwich refer to an interview done with pilots facing G-forces in a flight simulator.  One “raw” interview with a pilot (“raw” meaning not edited) is then compared to an interview reinvented with editing. Through music, juxtaposed vocal tracks, and various sound effects, the edited interview clearly creates a more colorful story of which the listener associates with a work of art, as opposed to any other typical recording. As they word it, they’re “manipulating reality to a degree” in order to stir emotion and connection within the story.

The hosts then use historical events to discuss the reception of sound on a physical and biological level. In 1913, the play Rite of Spring used new music that did not sit well with its audience. Riots arose in response to music that was unheard of at the time. The reason for this is scientifically speculated to be caused by a massive release of dopamine exerted when the neurons in the auditory cortex cannot accurately decode the new sounds attempting to be processed. This release literally caused insanity. However a year later, when the play was re-introduced, the crowd was openly receptive… possibly because the music had already been introduced, and therefore able to be decoded.

Abumrad and Krulwich use this event to represent how the brain processes sound, and uses art as a means to create new meaning based on what has already been introduced. To further exemplify this idea, a clip of sound designer Walter Murch is played on the podcast. In this clip, Murch tells how he accidentally adjusted his neuronal musical receptors to solely understand Gregorian chants (for a project he was working on at the time.) He discovered he had reset his brain when hearing a later piece by Bach, which he momentarily interpreted as rough noise. Murch’s story shows the listeners how, as radio hosts and sound editors, one must reset how they’re able to tell stories, just as their brain resets to understand new sound. The auditory effects used in Adumrad and Krulwich’s examples further illustrate the connection they’re trying to create between the listener and story.

As they say, if they’re doing their jobs right, there is no need for visuals in storytelling. 

Do you think stories are best told in a blatant and "raw" manner? Or best told after editing, elaborating, and embellishment?

Have you ever listened to stories told solely through audio, if not would you? If not, then why not?

As for creativity and innovation, do you believe our brains reset themselves based off of what it already knows in order to create new work? Or do you believe it is one continual stream of creation?