I first need to admit that at this time, an audiobook I read has a much smaller chance of being reviewed than a paper book (nook books don’t have a track record yet).
There are several reasons for this:
- An audiobook isn’t likely to be a book I recieved for review (although I hope this changes), and review books have priority for getting reviews written.
- An audiobook is more likely to be a just for fun read, due to the way I end up picking them out, and I’m less likely to have something to say about it.
- Not having an easy way to go back and check on details and not knowing the spelling of names (and honestly, often not remembering the characters names) discourages me and sends me on to other reviews.
Still, I do write audiobook reviews, and hope to start writing more.
In general, I review audiobooks the same way I review other books. I’m primarily reviewing them as books, rather than as audiobooks.
In the past, I might not have referred to the audio aspects except in passing, unless there was something noteworthy about the narrator or the production. Even before this week, I’d been debating changing that.
Some books work better than others as audiobooks. I still hope to get to another post this week on why this is true– sometimes it is the book itself; sometimes it is the production.
I’m thinking of adding a section at the end of each audiobook review, with a short comment on
Narrator: I’m not overly judgmental, but sometimes one contributes to a story by use of accents or voices, and sometimes a narrator just doesn’t quite sound right to me.
Better in audio?: For the most part, I think books work equally well for me as audiobooks or as traditional reads. This would call out those where I’m glad or sorry I listened.
Is it worth adding these each time, even if they’re usually just “I liked the narrator” and “Either audio or paper would be fine for this book”?
Any ideas for catchy tags for each of them?
I’m looking forward to reading about how everyone else writes reviews of audiobooks.