Learn Hardcore Spanish (Spain): Mi amiga dijo que el sonido era raro en la videollamada. - My friend said that the sound was strange in the video call.

dijo = preterite, a completed action: she said (once, at a specific moment).
- Used for single, finished events in the past.
- Here, it refers to one specific time your friend commented on the sound during (or after) the call.
decía = imperfect, an ongoing/repeated action: she was saying / she used to say.
- You’d use decía if you wanted to stress duration, repetition, or background:
  - Mi amiga decía que el sonido era raro en las videollamadas.
    My friend used to say that the sound was weird on video calls.

In the original sentence there’s one concrete act of speaking, so dijo is the natural choice.

Why is it era raro and not fue raro?

Both are past tense of ser, but:

era raro (imperfect) describes an ongoing state or background situation at that time.
Here, the sound was weird during the call, as a continuing condition.
fue raro (preterite) would present the weirdness as a single, completed event, often understood as it turned out to be weird or it was weird (as a one‑off, whole event).

In reported speech, Spanish often uses the imperfect to “backshift” from present:

Direct speech: Mi amiga dijo: “El sonido es raro en la videollamada.”
Reported: Mi amiga dijo que el sonido era raro en la videollamada.

fue raro is grammatically possible, but here it sounds more natural to treat “being weird” as a state in progress during the call, so era fits better.

Why do we need que after dijo?

que introduces a subordinate clause, just like that in English:

Mi amiga dijo que el sonido era raro...
= My friend said *that the sound was weird...*

Without que, the sentence would be incomplete:

Mi amiga dijo el sonido era raro… – incorrect in standard Spanish.

So que is the conjunction that links what was said (el sonido era raro en la videollamada) to the verb dijo.

Could I say Mi amiga me dijo que el sonido era raro…? What’s the difference?

Yes, that’s also correct, but it changes the meaning slightly:

Mi amiga dijo que el sonido era raro…
- My friend said that the sound was weird…
- We don’t know whom she said it to. It could be to anyone, in general.
Mi amiga me dijo que el sonido era raro…
- My friend told me that the sound was weird…
- The indirect object pronoun me shows that she said it specifically to me.

So dijo vs me dijo is like said vs told me.

Why is it el sonido and not just sonido without the article?

Spanish usually needs a definite article where English often omits the:

English can say: The sound was weird or even Sound was weird (in informal speech, like a note).
Standard Spanish needs: El sonido era raro.

Reasons:

We’re talking about a specific sound (the sound of this call).
Abstract or general nouns often take the article in Spanish:
- Me gusta el café. = I like coffee.
- El sonido era raro. = The sound was weird.

Leaving the article out (Sonido era raro) sounds ungrammatical in this context.

What’s the difference between sonido and ruido?

Both relate to “sound,” but they’re not interchangeable:

sonido = sound (neutral word)
- Any sound: music, voice, audio quality.
- El sonido era raro en la videollamada.
  → Focuses on the audio itself (quality, tone, echo, etc.).
ruido = noise (often annoying / unwanted sound)
- Había mucho ruido en la videollamada.
  → There was a lot of noise on the call (background sounds, interference).

In your sentence, sonido is better because it’s about how the audio of the call sounded, not just about noisy disturbance.

What does raro really mean here? Does it mean “rare” or “weird”?

In this context, raro means strange / odd / weird, not “rare” in the sense of “infrequent event.”

Common meanings of raro:

strange, odd, weird
- El sonido era raro. → The sound was weird / strange.
unusual, uncommon
- Es raro ver nieve aquí. → It’s unusual to see snow here.

So in your sentence, your friend is saying the audio sounded off, strange, not “rare” like a rare stamp.

Why is it en la videollamada and not something like por la videollamada or durante la videollamada?

All three are possible, but they mean slightly different things:

en la videollamada = on/in the video call
- Locates where the weird sound occurred.
- Neutral and very natural: the call is the “place” where the sound was weird.
durante la videollamada = during the video call
- Focuses on the time period.
- El sonido era raro durante la videollamada.
  → Emphasis on when the sound was weird.
por la videollamada can suggest:
- because of the video call (cause), or
- through/by means of the video call (medium).
- El sonido era raro por la videollamada.
  → Could be understood as because it was a video call, the sound was weird.

In the original, en la videollamada is the most straightforward and natural way to say on the video call.

Why is it la videollamada and not el videollamada? How do we know the gender?

The gender comes from the main noun inside the compound:

videollamada = video
- llamada.
llamada (call) is feminine: la llamada.
The whole compound keeps that gender: la videollamada.

So:

Singular: la videollamada
Plural: las videollamadas

Similarly:

el videoclub (from club, masculine)
la videocámara (from cámara, feminine)

Could I change the word order to Mi amiga dijo que en la videollamada el sonido era raro?

Yes, that word order is also correct.

Mi amiga dijo que el sonido era raro en la videollamada.
Mi amiga dijo que en la videollamada el sonido era raro.

Both are natural. The second version puts slightly more emphasis on en la videollamada (on that call in particular), but in everyday speech the difference is minimal. Spanish word order is relatively flexible as long as the grammar is clear.

Why is it mi amiga and not la amiga or una amiga?

Because you’re specifying whose friend it is.

mi amiga = my friend
- Possessive adjective mi replaces the article:
  - You say mi amiga, not la mi amiga.

Compare:

mi amiga – my friend (the listener knows she’s your friend).
una amiga – a (female) friend (non‑specific; not yet identified).
la amiga de mi hermano – my brother’s friend (here you use the article la, because there is no possessive adjective before amiga).

So mi already does the job of specifying; no article is needed.

If the original words were “El sonido es raro en la videollamada”, why do we change es to era in reported speech?

This is the typical “backshift” in Spanish reported speech:

Direct speech:
- Mi amiga dijo: “El sonido es raro en la videollamada.”
Reported speech:
- Mi amiga dijo que el sonido era raro en la videollamada.

When the reporting verb (dijo) is in the past, it’s very common to move the present tense (es) into the imperfect (era) to show that it was true at that time.

However, if you want to emphasise that it is still true now, you can keep the present:

Mi amiga dijo que el sonido es raro en la videollamada.
→ Suggests that, in her opinion, the sound is generally / still weird on video calls.

So both es and era are possible, but era is the default if you’re talking about that specific past situation.