10

I'm preparing an application where people can proofread other people's texts, but they can also review other's audios as well. Review could be a good word to use, but I'm already using this to... well, review, visual contents.

This kind of reviews are always cross checks, I mean, you'd never have to validate your own contents, but you do accept/reject other people's ones.

So, the question is:

Is there a direct equivalent of proofread, but focused on audios?

Improve this question
10
  • Good question. But if there isn't, would you settle for something that is not up to your specifications?
    – vickyace
    Commented Apr 29, 2016 at 9:09
  • There are always apt substitutes.
    – vickyace
    Commented Apr 29, 2016 at 9:10
  • @vickyace well of course, I could stick to "Review audios", of course. But because of the interface design, the less words, the better
    – Sergi Juanola
    Commented Apr 29, 2016 at 9:13
  • Transcription proofreading, exists. But that works in two steps. First write down what is heard. Then proofread the written text. Also there may be digital versions of it, so technically no written text may be visible.
    – NVZ ♦
    Commented Apr 29, 2016 at 9:23
  • @NVZ But what I'm looking for is a word that refers to "reviewing an audio", for instance, playing it and deciding if there's background noise, it's hard to understand, etc.
    – Sergi Juanola
    Commented Apr 29, 2016 at 9:26

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
3

The term proof-listen seems to be in use. For example:

Proof-listening is the process of listening to a recording in order to catch recording mistakes, and verify that the file meets the technical requirements. All recordings are "prooflistened" to catch repeats, big stumbles or long pauses.
LibriVox

Improve this answer
1
  • Seems perfect for me!
    – Sergi Juanola
    Commented May 1, 2016 at 14:48
4

The shortest word would be vet

It means to check or evaluate for approval, correction or acceptance.

Improve this answer
4
  • 4
    This could get confused with the short of veterinarian.
    – bb216b3acfd8f72cbc8f899d4d6963
    Commented Apr 29, 2016 at 11:08
  • @Peanut Yes it would. But it would also prompt people to look into it and learn something new.
    – vickyace
    Commented Apr 29, 2016 at 11:39
  • Despite the idea of learning something new every day is somewhat important, and although one of the exceptions of the word is somehow review, vet would probably not make it clear –at least at first sight
    – Sergi Juanola
    Commented Apr 29, 2016 at 12:21
  • 1
    @Korcholis That is the second concern on the agenda I believe. First is to find a word that semantically fits the description. Nevertheless, you can go with "review" if nothing else.
    – vickyace
    Commented Apr 29, 2016 at 12:35

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .