Comment on this TV auto volume device?

your cellphone?)

Not really much info on their site. They claim it is patented technology, but no link or info. Two output impedance listings; one in mV?? Aligns the audio and video signal for perfectly synchronized picture and sound--what do they think your TV is, a VCR? I especially liked the statement that it is great for the hearing impared - that is what the volume control and/or hearing aid are for. Funny, I never learned that the audio was part of the composite video; part of the RF signal, yes. If they are separately messing with the left and right channels ("for true stereo sound"), they will likely screw up real stereo sound. I am real glad the response time is fast enough for the really fast listeners - 2 microseconds!

Philips, among others, has had some deriviative of smart sound for years. Even cable boxes tried to get in on the act, but some of those bomed. I recall on older Cox box that automatically raised and lowered the volume. However, it raised it really high during silence, so it blasted you out of the room when the noise started.

Might be better to be fast-fingered on the remote - either volume or mute (my favorite commercial button). Of course, I only watch about 6 hours of TV a week, and I only truly enjoy about two of that. Too much garbage on the screen - graphics about what you are watching, what is coming on next, what will be on tomorrow, weather, and the station and network logos. Not much room left for the show.(/Editorial>

I'd be willing to bet it doesn't works nearly as well as the site states. However, if they want to send you one to review (for free, of course), the unbiased opinion of someone who has actually used one would be nice.

Richard

Automatic Gain Control (compression) is nothing new.

With modular entertainment systems becoming more popular, this seems like a natural offering. It appears to go between the TV and an external sound system and you mute the speaker in the TV.

The specifications are bulls**t, The response time of 2 uS is ridiculous for a frequency response down to 20 Hz! I wonder if its even got any active circuit in it. It doesn't mention ANYTHING about a power supply or battery. If it hasn't got one, then the only approch I can imagine actually working is a LED driven off the signal illuminating an ORP12 in an attenuator circuit.

If you want an interesting project, Sample the sound output with a microphone at the speaker. compare with your desired level and generate Vol + or Vol - signals to send to the TV via an IR LED.

--
Ian Malcolm.   London, ENGLAND.  (NEWSGROUP REPLY PREFERRED)
ianm[at]the[dash]malcolms[dot]freeserve[dot]co[dot]uk [at]=@, [dash]=- & 
[dot]=.
*Warning* SPAM TRAP set in header, Use email address in sig. if you must.

when you demodulste antenna signal you out the baseband video signal and the sound signal FM modulated a few MHZ (precice value differing with different video standards)

NICAM otoh is transmitted in the video band during the horiozontal blanking period...

once the advertisers figure out how it works they'll find a way to defeat it.

Bye. Jasen

If you record audio from a TV & look at the envelope of th signal, you will see that the peak signal levels during the progra is the same as durin the commercials. But, during the commercials the signal is heavily compressed, to put more average audio power in

So what I think may be happening here, is the TV audio is bein

compressed ALL the time (makes no difference to the commercials, bu brings up quiet passages in the normal priogram material). thi enables the volume level setting to be backed off & th commercials no longer appear relatively loud I feel sorry for anyone who owns a TV though

Paul Perry wrote (WITHOUT CONTEXT):

I notice that you're relatively new to Usenet.

I would have sworn that you post from Google Groups--but nope.

Folks on Usenet like to see a bit of the previous post included with (actually, above) the text of your post. This is called **context**. If you observe how most folks post, you'll see what I mean.

Most newsreaders blockquote the entire previous post for you so that you can easily snip out those portions which don't apply, leaving just enough to give context to your addition.

Rich Grise (pointedly) remarks on context here:

The sub-thread was about Google posters; you can easily see why I figured that you posted from there.

The guidelines for Usenet are here: http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:8PaSp2kKbWoJ:

*-top-*-*-message+do-not-*-*-*-original+zzz+One-to-Many-Communication+qqq+to-give-a-context (Worth scanning--especially the parts I've highlighted.)

Paul Perry wrote (WITHOUT CONTEXT)

I notice that you're relatively new to Usenet Folks on Usenet like to see a bit of the previous pos included with (actually, above) the text of your post This is called **context** If you observe how most folks post, you'll see what I mean Most newsreaders blockquote the entire previous post for yo so that you can easily snip out those portions which don't apply leaving just enough to give context to you addition..)[/quote:1a694ead07

Ah, my apologies! I'm posting at

and had no idea this was related in any way to Usenet. Obviously have much to learn. In other places, I've been abused for quoting

A better Web-based interface here:

(You can search it with the Google engine.)

If your ISP provides usable access to Usenet [1] and if you are in the majority (I'm not. 8-) ), you will likely appreciate the features (e.g., configurability; ability to "plonk" some people) of a real newsreader.

. . [1] If your ISP's access to Usenet stinks: