A folder containing final, final-new and final-new-again asks the listener to guess. An audio revision becomes easier to review when its name and accompanying note describe its place in the process.
Choose a stable stem
Use the project or episode name, a version number and a clear status. An invented example is “garden-interview-v03-review”. Keep the same pattern for later versions rather than adding emotional labels such as better or perfect.
Do not put private interview details into a filename that may be shared outside the project.
Explain the change beside the file
A short note can list the two decisions that matter: the opening was shortened and a factual correction was inserted at a named point. Separate those changes from questions that remain unresolved.
If you deliver several formats, identify which one the reviewer should hear. A smaller listening copy and a production export should not silently compete as the approved version.
Close the loop
When feedback arrives, record which version it refers to. A comment about an old edit may already have been addressed, but the filename should let you check.
This practice pairs with asking for specific audio feedback. Clear version naming will not make the editorial decision for you; it makes the decision and its evidence easier to follow.