Case Study: Delivering Audio Description Using Zoom
Two reports by Olivia Munk & Jessica Bickel-Barlow of Part of the Main and Yusuf Osman, Visual Impairment Awareness Trainer and Access Consultant.
Below, you can read the reports in a number of ways: Google Docs on large print, download them as PDFs, listen to them as audio files, or read them on this web page.
Read Part of the Main’s report on Google Docs (Large Print)
Read Yusuf’s report on Google Docs (Large Print)
Report 1:
Case Study: Delivering Audio Description Using Zoom
Conducted and reviewed by Olivia Munk and Jessica Bickel-Barlow of Part of the Main
Context
Part of the Main’s (POTM) interest in alternative modes of audio description grew out of our identity as a company that makes work with emerging artists, and our desire to improve the accessibility of our work. Much of our work is performed in fringe venues or festivals and we often work with slim budgets. Providing in-ear audio description in these contexts can be challenging. Traditional options for delivering audio description include via radio waves (usually using technology designed for tour guides) and infrared. Most fringe venues do not have radio or infrared equipment in stock and it can be expensive to rent from hire companies. Additionally, many fringe venues are not purpose-built but are instead converted from found, often unusual spaces, and, in the festival context, may not even be theatres year round.
POTM found that these qualities can prove architecturally challenging for radio technology, in particular. In 2023, we delivered audio described performances of Bloody Mary: Live! and The Tinker at VAULT Festival, which takes place in underground tunnels. However, radio did not work consistently underground, prompting us to look for other modes of delivery that we hoped could either provide a solution for venues that aren’t compatible with more traditional technology or be a cost-effective alternative for small companies that wouldn’t otherwise be able to afford to offer audio description.
Process
We decided to use our performances of Bloody Mary: Live! at the Pleasance Theatre in Islington, London to trial audio description via existing apps available on personal devices like iPads and smartphones.
We considered Zoom, Discord, and WhatsApp as possibilities and scheduled time in the Pleasance Theatre to trial with Roz Chalmers, a leading audio describer who has worked at theatres like the National Theatre and the Old Vic.
To conduct our test, we met in the Main House of the Pleasance, where Bloody Mary: Live! was set to perform across Easter Weekend 2024. The testers were Roz Chalmers, Olivia Munk, and Jessica Bickel-Barlow.
Jessica sat in the technical box, where the describer would need to sit during performances as there was no live relay to watch the show on in another room. The box did not have a glass window, but was rather opened to the audience, which caused an initial challenge: the audience could hear the describer as they spoke. While this is not related to the use of Zoom or other applications to deliver audio description, it is a common issue that describers and audio description users face during audio described performances in venues not permanently set-up with their own equipment and infrastructure to deliver audio description.
Jessica started a Zoom meeting on a laptop connected to the Pleasance WiFi while Roz and Olivia sat in different parts of the theatre to test connectivity and sound. Roz and Olivia trialed both calling into the Zoom meeting using mobile data, as well as joining the Zoom meeting using the application on WiFi. We found that while there was a latency between the describer speaking and the user hearing their voice of about 1 second, this was reduced when mobile data was used versus WiFi. We also determined that users would need to mute themselves, or the describer could manually mute users on the Zoom call. It was acknowledged that a member of the production team would likely need to be present to support users to access the Zoom call, either via dialling in or joining via the mobile application, since this method is not as common or tactile as typical audio description equipment like tour guide sets.
We also trialled WhatsApp and Discord, which were trickier to use from a user standpoint and did not allow as much control for the describer in terms of muting or allowing users to join the call. As such, it was decided that Zoom would be the right application to use for delivery during our forthcoming performances.
During our dress rehearsal for Bloody Mary: Live! two weeks later, consultant Yusuf Osman, who is visually impaired, attended a dress rehearsal of the show to give us feedback on the user experience. He also attended the first performance of the show.
Benefits of Zoom
After our trials with Roz Chalmers, we selected Zoom as our chosen platform for the following reasons:
A Zoom subscription is very cheap for the company to acquire, many people already use it for work and are therefore familiar with it as a platform (whereas Discord is less ubiquitous), and unlike WhatsApp, it allows the host of the meeting to control the meeting, ensuring only the audio describer is heard and all the users are muted. It is also important for the audio describer to easily be able to mute themselves between lines of description. This helps prevent background noise from the describer's end, like breathing or room tone, from interrupting the listener’s experience of the show’s dialogue. While this button was relatively easy to manipulate on the Zoom interface, we were able to purchase an affordable headset with a microphone and manual mute button along the cord that made this even easier.
An overall benefit of using an app-based delivery system (not limited to Zoom) is that audiences are able to use their own equipment, which they are already comfortable and familiar with. Personal headphones are often more comfortable to wear than the ones provided by venues with in-house headsets, so this may also be preferable.
Audio description equipment such as Sennheiser systems, while available at many theatres with the infrastructure for description, are very costly to rent and must be charged in advance of performances. It can be challenging for small companies to project how many audio description users may attend a performance, thus increasing the risk of hiring too few receivers and headsets for a performance or hiring too many at a high cost. This may serve to reduce the incentive for fringe or emerging artists to offer audio described performances, and thus reduce the availability of types of performances that blind or visually impaired audiences can attend. The lower cost of Zoom or other application-based delivery may serve to increase the amount of smaller or new performances that can offer audio description in venues that may not have previously offered audio description, widening entertainment available to blind or visually impaired audiences.
Limitations
Using Zoom relies on the audience bringing their personal devices and headphones to the performance. While most people will travel to the theatre with their phone, it is more likely that audience members will arrive without headphones, especially if they do not receive or miss advance instructions from the venue partner to bring them or forget.
Although providing backup devices and headsets is a possible solution, this can introduce further issues: for example, compatibility between headsets and devices, especially as some devices no longer have audio jacks, and difficulty for users in troubleshooting issues on an unfamiliar device in the event they become disconnected.
For example, an audio description user attended our first performance of Bloody Mary: Live!, but did not remember to bring a charged phone and headphones. While he was set up with an iPad and bluetooth headphones by the production team, the headphones unfortunately disconnected from the iPad during the performance.
Another prohibitive problem we experienced was an up-to-1-second delay between the transmission of the description and reception from the user using Zoom. This caused issues with the audio describer crashing into dialogue at certain moments in the script, a problem that became more glaring in performance when audience reactions and participation filled more of the pauses and the performer picked up pace in response to the energy of the crowd.
Consultant Yusuf Osman has written a report of his experience as a blind audience member using Zoom to access audio description, which is attached to this report.
Next steps
In the future, we would consider trialling methods of boosting the speed of the describer’s WiFi, such as setting up our own WiFi network or using a WiFi booster to see if these measures resolved the lag in transmission. Because of the benefits for fringe companies who wouldn’t otherwise be able to offer description, it’s worth looking for further solutions that could broaden the accessibility of the fringe sector, but more development is needed before this method is formally implemented as a viable alternative to traditional audio description equipment.
In the meantime, it is imperative that venues take on the onus of ensuring they provide the infrastructure and equipment necessary for their visiting companies to deliver audio description. Such preparation can include setting up a video relay in a separate room from the performance so that audio description is only heard through headsets; purchasing radio or infrared audio description equipment so that visiting companies can rely on the equipment being compatible with the building ; training staff on how to use this equipment, troubleshoot any issues, and successfully welcome blind and visually impaired audience members; ensure their marketing departments develop relationships with local blind and visually impaired organisations or groups so that they are aware and welcomed to audio described performances; and subsidise costs related to audio description such as hiring describers, incentivising companies and shows of all sizes to deliver accessible performances.
POTM is very fortunate that we have recently been able to purchase our own radio audio description equipment thanks to a Starting Out grant from Unlimited. We plan to rent this equipment to fellow small companies at a low cost, reducing the current barriers to delivering audio description in fringe venues.
Report 2:
Thoughts on using Zoom to deliver Audio Description
By Yusuf Osman
During February and March 2024 I worked alongside Olivia Munk from Part of the Main to support advertising to blind and visually impaired audiences for 3 audio described performances of Bloody Mary Live at the Pleasance Theatre, deliver Visual Impairment Awareness Training to staff from the Pleasance and other interested artists and test the provision of live audio description delivered via the Zoom meetings platform. This document outlines my thoughts on whether Zoom is an effective platform for delivering audio description at live events.
I am a totally blind Android user and for this trial a Google Pixel7 Pro running the latest official version of Android and the Zoom App was used. Due to being blind I use Android’s in-built Screenreader, Talkback. I used my Pixel phone in conjunction with Aftershokz Trekz Air Bone Conducting headphones. The reason for using these particular Bluetooth headphones was to keep my ears open in order to hear the artist.
Theoretically Zoom could provide a relatively inexpensive way for small theatre companies to deliver audio description. Zoom accounts can cost as little as £129.99 per year per user. Users could use their own technology with their own headphones which should make things easier for them as they will be familiar with the technology already. Zoom is a large provider and this has meant that its software has been accessible to Screenreader users. Where users are not comfortable with Zoom or touch screen based mobile phones/tablets company members/theatres could provide appropriate hardware to support access.
Zoom was tested out during the dress rehearsal and performance of Bloody Mary Live on 28 March 2024. The following issues were noticed.
When entering the Zoom meeting the volume of Talkback dropped considerably. Without any ambient noise it was still possible to operate the phone. However, once stage sounds began hearing Talkback became impossible thus making use of the phone impossible without sighted assistance. This only became obvious just prior to and during the actual performance. It was necessary to get sighted assistance to ensure that Do Not Disturb was turned on and to exit the meeting after the performance. It should be noted that on leaving the meeting the volume of Talkback returned to normal.
It became apparent that there was a certain delay between what was said by the audio describer and it being heard by the listener. This is known as latency. This made itself felt through some crashing of the dialogue. That is where the audio description was heard over the dialogue. Latency appeared to be around a second. Although in this situation the issue of crashing was not too noticeable there will be occasions where it will cause major problems. Someone with some sight may notice this more than someone with no sight. This may explain why I didn’t notice it as much.
Other issues
Using Zoom to deliver audio description places a requirement on users to have the appropriate equipment and knowledge to access this platform. This includes ensuring that their phone/other device has sufficient battery and they bring appropriate headphones. It will also be important for users to know how to put their devices into do not disturb mode including understanding how to deactivate any options that allow this facility to be overridden should someone call more than 3 times in a row.
If someone uses a device provided by the theatre company they may not have sufficient knowledge/sight levels to be able to deal with any issues that may occur during the performance. It should be noted that during the performance an iPad provided to another user stopped delivering the audio description part-way through the performance.
Although Zoom has generally been accessible to screenreader users this may not always be the case. If an update were to break access blind users might find themselves locked out of the audio descriptive experience.
Conclusion
My view is that given the issue with Talkback’s volume dropping and latency Zoom should not be used as a solution to delivering audio description without further research and answers being found to the following questions.
Can the drop in Talkback volume be replicated across other devices/platforms and if so can a cause and resolution be found to this issue?
Is there any way of circumventing the issue of latency?
In the meantime an alternative solution might be for groups of theatres/companies to band together and apply for joint funding for radio based equipment which can be shared between them. Radio has the least latency and therefore is the best delivery method to support the audio describer in not crashing the dialogue.
