DGN: The Disc Golf Network

[ru4por]

I have an old video of me and a few others disc golfing you could watch. It's titled, "Why We Are Not On Tour".

I relish the chance to watch the grainy Central Scrutinizer videos, you have to believe I would gladly sit here all day and watch you and some of your guys play!!

 

[Ryan P.]

Since I am stuck working today. Actually had to go into work for a 12 hour gig. I am bored and looking to watch disc golf. Is there going to be free live coverage of the LVC today?

yup https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sy_4B7oc7Dc

 

[gooberau]

I'd love to better understand your reasoning for that. (Assuming you mean you prefer Ian over Terry) I understand if you don't want to reply, but I wouldn't mind a respectful dialog why some people prefer Ian over Terry as I think there is an incredible difference between them that makes it easy for me to prefer Terry over Ian.

Doss is starting to grow on me. I never thought I would say that.

Sure, bearing in mind I am in Australia and have almost zero knowledge of these people. I have only been playing a couple of years. I think Terry is the "disc golf guy" who seems to follow lead cards around and lurk in the background looking at his phone all the time. Ian is the Central Coast "champs and chumps" guy.

Terry seemed to me to make several errors in commentary ("putting for birdie", when it was for par, etc), and seemed to need to speak for the sake of speaking. He was just okay but it felt a little forced.

Ian, worlds apart. Felt natural and fresh. He seemed to know the bags/discs the players were throwing, which was excellent. Seemed to have a great rapport with the co-commentators, seemed very smooth.

Hope that's okay and I haven't offended anybody

 

[Ahildy13]

The only actually good announcers are the Jomez boys. Some of the others are serviceable, but no one has an actual personality, so they are just forgettable. Honestly, it's probably all Jerm.
I watched 1 DGN round, and stopped bothering after. The post-produced stuff is just so much better.

I'm conflicted.
Obviously, DGN is only going to get better if people subscribe. They need to be able to go to potential investors after this season and say "we have XXXX subscribers, if you give us $XX Million look where we will go." Even if I never watch another second of DGN coverage, $5 a month towards potentially better coverage next year could be worth it.

On the flipside, I hate supporting bad businesses, and DGN is terrible at this point in time. I don't want to be stuck with this company for my disc golf coverage, when there are competitors creating a better product.

 

[brutalbrutus]

Except those competitors are providing a different product.

 

[foreputt]

Ask any fan of anything if they like announcers and they'll give you the same answer. It's worse in disc golf where it's someone watching the same video feed as you and announcing the same thing you just watched together. Imagine if your friend watching tv next to you kept narrating what you just saw. Now imagine it's not even your friend it's just some guy. Oh, you don't have to imagine it because you just watched disc golf.

Tip of the hat to Ian announcing the discs. That is added value.

 

[ChrisWoj]

My biggest disappointment was that I thought I'd read about an increase in cameras - and I'd been hopeful we would be seeing coverage of 2 or even 3 cards. I bought a year subscription though. Hopefully enough so that they can expand coverage. Single card coverage is just too slow.

 

[Rocketnumber9]

They really need to play the sounds from the course more. I've emailed them and told them this numerous times. That is really my biggest complaint. Especially when the players are discussing rules or OB and stuff. Instead we get the commentators guessing at what is going on sometimes, when if we could just hear what they're saying we would know.

 

[Steve West]

They really need to play the sounds from the course more. I've emailed them and told them this numerous times. That is really my biggest complaint. Especially when the players are discussing rules or OB and stuff. Instead we get the commentators guessing at what is going on sometimes, when if we could just hear what they're saying we would know.

What bugs me most is when they refer to something funny a player said, but the volume I get is way lower than what the announcers are listening to.

 

[gooberau]

Nate Sexton in the booth for Waco? He dropped that nugget on his podcast.

 

[aredoubles]

They really need to play the sounds from the course more. I've emailed them and told them this numerous times. That is really my biggest complaint. Especially when the players are discussing rules or OB and stuff. Instead we get the commentators guessing at what is going on sometimes, when if we could just hear what they're saying we would know.

Terry and Jonny V of DGN/Smashboxx discuss things along these lines towards the end of last week's show, starting around the 2:52:06 mark (but lots of really good general discussion about the DGN production from 2:19:00 onwards, for people who want a glimpse of what goes into the broadcast).

https://youtu.be/peE-6liHcAA?t=10326

Basically, like a lot of suggestions/demands that people have for DGN, this is 1000x more complicated and expensive than people realize.
Jonny is already completely overstretched with the video switching + producing required, with a whole team of people in his ear at all times. Top-notch broadcast teams have a wholly separate person who handles the audio switching, as it's a wholly separate task with different focus areas.
Ideally DGN would love to hire someone to do that, and they've requested it. But that takes a lot of money + equipment + training, that they could use instead to hire a replay operator, additional cameramen, paying for higher-quality video streaming, or countless other suggestions/angry-demands that people have for DGN. All of those things are extremely expensive, so how should they prioritize?

 

[Ahildy13]

Terry and Jonny V of DGN/Smashboxx discuss things along these lines towards the end of last week's show, starting around the 2:52:06 mark (but lots of really good general discussion about the DGN production from 2:19:00 onwards, for people who want a glimpse of what goes into the broadcast).

https://youtu.be/peE-6liHcAA?t=10326

Basically, like a lot of suggestions/demands that people have for DGN, this is 1000x more complicated and expensive than people realize.
Jonny is already completely overstretched with the video switching + producing required, with a whole team of people in his ear at all times. Top-notch broadcast teams have a wholly separate person who handles the audio switching, as it's a wholly separate task with different focus areas.
Ideally DGN would love to hire someone to do that, and they've requested it. But that takes a lot of money + equipment + training, that they could use instead to hire a replay operator, additional cameramen, paying for higher-quality video streaming, or countless other suggestions/angry-demands that people have for DGN. All of those things are extremely expensive, so how should they prioritize?

Sounds to me like they should have sought out more initial investment.
If you can't put out the product you want, you shouldn't put out the prototype.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

The only actually good announcers are the Jomez boys. Some of the others are serviceable, but no one has an actual personality, so they are just forgettable. Honestly, it's probably all Jerm.
I watched 1 DGN round, and stopped bothering after. The post-produced stuff is just so much better.

I enjoy the Jomez coverage myself, but commenting live coverage has to be orders of magintude more challenging than providing post production commentary, when you have the foresight of what happens and the ability to actually think about what you want to say.

Much tougher to fill the voids in live coverage knowing what to say and when when to talk, and perhaps most importantly, when not to talk.

 

[Ahildy13]

I enjoy the Jomez coverage myself, but commenting live coverage has to be orders of magintude more challenging than providing post production commentary, when you have the foresight of what happens and the ability to actually think about what you want to say.

Much tougher to fill the voids in live coverage knowing what to say and when when to talk, and perhaps most importantly, when not to talk.

I don't know that I agree. From the sound of most post production coverage, the announcers usually know the final outcome of the rounds, but they still seem to be watching the video for the first time. In this way they are still responsible for speaking at the correct times, there is just less empty time to fill in.
I will stick with my first claim that it really all is Jerm. Announcing is a skill, which is why the really good ones do multiple sports/entertainment events and can become cultural icons.
We're in the infancy of this, in theory the market for this should sort itself out.

 

[DiscFifty]

I will stick with my first claim that it really all is Jerm. Announcing is a skill, which is why the really good ones do multiple sports/entertainment events and can become cultural icons. We're in the infancy of this, in theory the market for this should sort itself out.

Nate's first test at becoming that "cultural icon" will be in Waco. He's has plenty of experience in the safety of doing post where you stop/edit/rewind/retake, etc. Let's see how he does live. I'm rooting for him because he has a pleasing vocal timbre combined with a very clear speaking voice which is incredibly important during a long...broadcast.

 

[Flick Maniac]

I will stick with my first claim that it really all is Jerm. Announcing is a skill, which is why the really good ones do multiple sports/entertainment events and can become cultural icons.
We're in the infancy of this, in theory the market for this should sort itself out.

I am not 100% sure what your first claim was in its entirety, but for me (and from what I read, a lot of other folks) Sexton is like 80% of why Jomez post pro commentary kicks ass. Jerm annoys me a lot of the time. Going off on weird tangents, on and on while missing action that merits commentary, trying too hard to be too funny, milking the same joke over and over again.

Even when he's with Ulibarri, I think Ulibarri takes the #1 seat.

FWIW, Having 3 people was too much for me. Granted, I didnt watch the LVC rounds too much but what I saw, seems to me having 3 people is the commentary is even more prone to going off on weird tangents, joking around excessiely etc.

 

[glassila]

I think Uli is the best announcer. Nate and Jeremy are awesome as well.
There is a pretty steep drop off after those 3 and there are a couple of people I can't stand listening to.

 

[Hampstead]

Nate's first test at becoming that "cultural icon" will be in Waco. He's has plenty of experience in the safety of doing post where you stop/edit/rewind/retake, etc. Let's see how he does live. I'm rooting for him because he has a pleasing vocal timbre combined with a very clear speaking voice which is incredibly important during a long...broadcast.

Yeah, I bet those Champs and Chumps must have had a dozen takes for him to get the on the fly commentary just right.

 

[DiscFifty]

Yeah, I bet those Champs and Chumps must have had a dozen takes for him to get the on the fly commentary just right.

Valid point! I just never took those as anything more than a light hearted round of golf where goofy commentary is the norm.

 

[ChrisWoj]

I think Uli is the best announcer. Nate and Jeremy are awesome as well.
There is a pretty steep drop off after those 3 and there are a couple of people I can't stand listening to.

I continue to stand by the notion that Barry Schultz is REALLY good doing commentary. We could use more videos with him on the mic.