The narrator.

As I said last week, I’m not a big audiobook listener. But when I have listened to audiobooks, the thing that’s make-or-break for me is the narrator.

Why?

Because a bad or boring narrator can ruin a good story.

Sure, I’ll pick out a book to listen to based on the author and the book description—the story. But what makes the story worth listening to—or not—is the quality of the narrator. A great narrator can make an average story sound exciting. A less-good narrator can send me to sleep with even the most exciting scene (and that’s A Bad Thing, given I tend to listen to audiobooks while I’m driving).

The most important thing I listen for in an audiobook is the narrator’s accent and tone.

My very British grandmother would only listen to audiobooks with British narrators. I’m not so fussy, but I do like the accent to match the characters and setting. Books set in England and featuring British characters should probably have a British narrator—unless the main character in the book is American.

Even more important is tone.

The best narrators can play multiple characters—male or female, British or American. They can give each point of view character a distinctive voice, so listening to the audiobook is more like listening to a radio play.

But I’ve started audiobooks where the narrator spoke in a monotone, to the point I couldn’t tell the difference between the point of view characters, or even between the male and female characters. There was such a complete lack of expression, even when the point of view character thought they’d come upon a mass murder scene, that I thought I was listening to a computer read. I wasn’t—I checked.

So if I was going to start listening to audiobooks, I’d make sure I checked the audio sample first. Because the narrator is definitely the most important thing to me.

What about you? Which do you think is more important in an audiobook—the story, the author, or the narrator?

I’m not a big audiobook listener, for two reasons:

1. I’m a fast reader, so find it’s quicker to read than to listen.

If I’m enjoying a story, I want to get on with it … which means reading faster and faster, not waiting for the audio to catch up with my thoughts. Yes, I know audiobooks (well, some audiobooks) can be played at 1.5 times or 2 times speed, but then they can end up sounding like Alvin and the Chipmunks …

2. I don’t spend a lot of time in my car or doing tasks that would make listening an option.

Where I do have car time, I tend to listen to podcasts—they’re shorter, and it doesn’t matter if you miss a couple of details (the really important content, like the links, will be in the show notes). With a novel, it’s important to be able to see/hear and retain all the details because missing an important detail might affect your overall enjoyment or appreciation of the book.

Also, audiobooks are long—usually eight to ten hours, and sometimes longer.

I can see the appeal of audiobooks for someone who has an hour or more a day of otherwise dead time e.g., driving or waiting for children, or even exercising (assuming they’re going for a quiet walk, not taking a class or exercising in a gym pumping loud music out of the speakers).

If you’ve got a good chunk of time each day and can get through an audiobook in a week or two, then I can see them as a great way to pep up otherwise useless driving or waiting time. But they are less good for someone like me who would only be listening in ten or fifteen-minute slots two or three times a week. It would take forever to get into the story, and would be too easy to forget the details between sessions.

But that’s me. What about you? Do you listen to audiobooks? Why, or why not?