Congress Gets It Right!

[Pappy]

Please take this as it is intended, a link to a report on a new law that will benefit almost everyone. Kudos to the House for sending this bill to the President for signature.

http://portal.grandecom.net/news/rea...&cps=0&lang=en

Unfortunately it could be up to 2 years before we hear the results.

[Mr__Bill]

I saw in the news when that was proposed, never thought congress would have the nerve to do something for the people that a lobbyist hadn't paid for.

I under stand the wait is so someone can figure out how to do it. Problem is on the VU meter it's not really louder it's just that all the sound is in the frequencies that we hear better and thus it sound a lot louder. Of course the broadcasters could be lying about that too. Until it's real I'll just have to do what we all seem to be doing now, mute the sound and then forget to watch the rest of the show. I don't think I really miss much.

Bill
a bit cynical over here in the rain

[LCHIEN]

Interesting Parallel

its interesting they seek to tackle this problem that has been a complaint for 30 or 40 years.

One of the problems is metrics - the measurement of loudness that takes into account the perceived loudness vs. the actual measurables in the face of severe compression and other techniques used to make the volume changes wake you up from your stupor to hear the commercials.

If you can't measure it you can't enforce it.

So I looked up a bunch of articles touting the bill and found they reference to the ATSC committee on TV standards which studied the issues and made a recommended practice document. After a longish search I finally found them http://www.atsc.org/cms/standards/a_85-2009.pdf - I haven't read the technical details yet to see if there's any merit to them but I was intrigued by the opening preamble which says:

"Note: The user's attention is called to the possibility that compliance with this recommended

practice may require use of an invention covered by patent rights. By publication of this
document, no position is taken with respect to the validity of this claim or of any patent rights in
connection therewith. One or more patent holders may have filed a statement regarding the terms
on which such patent holder(s) may be willing to grant a license under these rights to individuals

or entities desiring to obtain such a license."

which to paraphrase says following this audio loudness practice (upon which the law will require) requires use of a patent held by a company.

So, substitute "Audio loudness" with "power tool safety" and substitute "company" with "Steve Gass of Saw Stop" and what do you have???

So I'm not leaning either way but here you have a law being passed after all these years based upon a document that will require use of a patent to the benefit of a particular patent-holding company that probably had a great deal to do with the writing of the document and probably some lobbying to that effect.

Intersting parallel. Just like power tool safety, at first blush everyone is for loudness mitigation but behind the scenes I imagine there was some intense lobbying by the holder of a patent (who probably stands to profit handsomely when every broadcast station is required to buy one), just that few people have heard about it. So now how do your feel about the law?

Disclaimer: this is all hypothetical, I don't know if this patent holder is asking for excessive royalties or how hard he pushed for it, It's all speculation.

[Pappy]

Intersting parallel. Just like power tool safety, at first blush everyone is for loudness mitigation but behind the scenes I imagine there was some intense lobbying by the holder of a patent (who probably stands to profit handsomely when every broadcast station is required to buy one), just that few people have heard about it. So now how do your feel about the law?

How many disabled or bypassed of the audio controls on their TV causing or allowing the volume to be higher during commercials?

One point in the article was that the peak volume in some commercials may not be higher but the range between that and the lows is lessened, making the entire commercial seem louder.

[herb fellows]

While we're on a noise abatement roll, maybe they could attend to the morons who drive around with their radios/sound systems at 200 decibels.

I saw a pair of morons the other day with the van actually shaking from the vibrations, windows up, and kids inside! IMHO, these people should be arrested for endangering the welfare of a child.

[jziegler]

I saw in the news when that was proposed, never thought congress would have the nerve to do something for the people that a lobbyist hadn't paid for.

I under stand the wait is so someone can figure out how to do it. Problem is on the VU meter it's not really louder it's just that all the sound is in the frequencies that we hear better and thus it sound a lot louder. Of course the broadcasters could be lying about that too. Until it's real I'll just have to do what we all seem to be doing now, mute the sound and then forget to watch the rest of the show. I don't think I really miss much.

Bill
a bit cynical over here in the rain

There actually is already a way to measure it, and it was supposed to be used for the trailers in movie theaters about 10 years ago by industry agreement, but I'm not sure that it ever happened.

http://www.tasatrailers.org

The measurement does take frequency into account, as well as many other factors. I haven't kept up with the film sound industry since I left it in early 2001, so I don't know details, but I'd imagine that applying the same measurement to TV commercials would be a possible solution.

[Bruce Cohen]

Correct me if I'm wrong (which I probably am). but didn't the FCC once have guidelines regarding the amount of loudness commercials could be in relation to regular programming.

Bruce

[twistsol]

And of course there has to be a curmudgeon in every crowd. I have a VCR that automatically fast forwards through commercials based on the volume change. With two DVR's I haven't used it in a few years but I'm sure there is someone out there ready to complain about this.

[Ed62]

All I know is those loud commercials really get my hackles up.

Ed

[Kristofor]

There are people who still watch commercials? My condolences. Time shifting FTW.

[Pappy]

While we're on a noise abatement roll, maybe they could attend to the morons who drive around with their radios/sound systems at 200 decibels.

I saw a pair of morons the other day with the van actually shaking from the vibrations, windows up, and kids inside! IMHO, these people should be arrested for endangering the welfare of a child.

A lot of the cities in Texas have ordinances against that. In Austin if your stereo can be heard 2 car lengths away you can be cited. Enforcement is another thing, though.

[Cubsfan]

While we're on a noise abatement roll, maybe they could attend to the morons who drive around with their radios/sound systems at 200 decibels.

I saw a pair of morons the other day with the van actually shaking from the vibrations, windows up, and kids inside! IMHO, these people should be arrested for endangering the welfare of a child.

I would think the same argument could be used against people using power tools outside.

[BobSch]

A lot of the cities in Texas have ordinances against that. In Austin if your stereo can be heard 2 car lengths away you can be cited. Enforcement is another thing, though.

We've got the same kind of ordinance up here and enforcement is the last thing the cops worry about.

My only pleasant thought is that they'll probably be deaf by the time they're thirty.

[chopnhack]

As important an issue as this may be I am still waiting for congress to tackle the real issues! I guess they are cutting their teeth on the easy problems first

[twistsol]

As important an issue as this may be I am still waiting for congress to tackle the real issues! I guess they are cutting their teeth on the easy problems first

Maybe they're looking to tackle just one issue that they probably won't make even worse.