Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.electronics.design > #453470 > unrolled thread

Why Can't My Volume Go to 11?

Back to article view | Back to sci.electronics.design

Contents

  Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 19:45 -0400
    Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2017-03-25 01:13 +0000
    Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-03-24 21:56 -0700
      Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-03-25 11:20 -0500
        Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-03-25 22:14 -0700
          Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-26 02:45 -0400
            Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-03-27 09:58 -0700
              Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 18:25 -0400
                Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-03-27 23:44 -0700
    Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? George Herold <gherold@teachspin.com> - 2017-03-25 09:34 -0700
      Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> - 2017-03-25 18:22 -0400
      Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-25 16:25 -0700
        Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? George Herold <gherold@teachspin.com> - 2017-03-25 19:56 -0700
          Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-25 23:43 -0400
        Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2017-03-27 07:53 +0000
    Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? legg <legg@nospam.magma.ca> - 2017-03-25 13:19 -0400
      Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? boB K7IQ <boB@everett.wa> - 2017-03-25 11:37 -0700
        Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> - 2017-03-26 02:29 -0400
          Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? boB K7IQ <boB@everett.wa> - 2017-03-26 11:54 -0700
            Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> - 2017-04-02 01:51 -0400
              Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? boB K7IQ <boB@everett.wa> - 2017-04-03 17:49 -0700
                Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> - 2017-04-05 07:43 -0400
    Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? Wanderer <wanderer@dialup4less.com> - 2017-03-25 12:58 -0700
      Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2017-03-25 17:46 -0400
    Re: Why Can't My Volume Go to 11? Johann Klammer <klammerj@NOSPAM.a1.net> - 2017-03-25 21:54 +0100

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#453470 — Why Can't My Volume Go to 11?

When watching videos on my laptop there are some which just don't have 
enough volume.  Setting everything as high as I can it is still not loud 
enough.  So what determines the highest setting of the volume?

Is the application simply adjusting an attenuator somewhere in the 
signal chain of my laptop?  Or does the application intercept the audio 
data and apply it's own volume control by manipulating the data stream?

If the latter, it should be able to let me set the volume to 11, or 12 
or 1200 if that is what I need.

-- 

Rick C

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#453485

On 2017-03-24, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:
> When watching videos on my laptop there are some which just don't have 
> enough volume.  Setting everything as high as I can it is still not loud 
> enough.  So what determines the highest setting of the volume?
>
> Is the application simply adjusting an attenuator somewhere in the 
> signal chain of my laptop?  Or does the application intercept the audio 
> data and apply it's own volume control by manipulating the data stream?
>
> If the latter, it should be able to let me set the volume to 11, or 12 
> or 1200 if that is what I need.

that depends to some extent on the codec and the operating system

Pulseaudio gives me several gain controls in addition to the hardware
ones 

-- 
This email has not been checked by half-arsed antivirus software 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453513

On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 19:45:29 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:

>When watching videos on my laptop there are some which just don't have 
>enough volume.  Setting everything as high as I can it is still not loud 
>enough.  So what determines the highest setting of the volume?

There are three (or more) places to set the volume level.  One is in
your unspecified video player application.  Another is in your
unspecified operating system under Sound and Audio Devices.
There is also a "mixer" application running under Sound and Audio
Devices that has controls for both its input and output.  I'll assume
that you're NOT running an external USB audio device as these have
their own audio level settings.  Low audio usually means that one of
these is set too low.  

Another possibility is that your unspecified model laptop has tiny
speakers that are insufficient to produce decent audio.  I suggest you
try some external amplified speakers for a comparison.  Of course, the
amplified speakers have their own volume control.  One can never have
enough volume controls.  Also try earphones.  

If you're running Windoze 7 and above, you'll might need to set the
type of speaker or earphone somewhere in  
  Control Panel -> Sounds and Audio Devices
The system allegedly compensates for different types of speaker
systems, which might affect the audio levels.  It's been a while since
I've played with the settings and I don't recall the exact effects.

Good luck.




-- 
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453563

On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 21:56:14 -0700, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

> On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 19:45:29 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>When watching videos on my laptop there are some which just don't have
>>enough volume.  Setting everything as high as I can it is still not loud
>>enough.  So what determines the highest setting of the volume?
> 
> There are three (or more) places to set the volume level.  One is in
> your unspecified video player application.  Another is in your
> unspecified operating system under Sound and Audio Devices.
> There is also a "mixer" application running under Sound and Audio
> Devices that has controls for both its input and output.  I'll assume
> that you're NOT running an external USB audio device as these have their
> own audio level settings.  Low audio usually means that one of these is
> set too low.
> 
> Another possibility is that your unspecified model laptop has tiny
> speakers that are insufficient to produce decent audio.  I suggest you
> try some external amplified speakers for a comparison.  Of course, the
> amplified speakers have their own volume control.  One can never have
> enough volume controls.  Also try earphones.
> 
> If you're running Windoze 7 and above, you'll might need to set the type
> of speaker or earphone somewhere in
>   Control Panel -> Sounds and Audio Devices
> The system allegedly compensates for different types of speaker systems,
> which might affect the audio levels.  It's been a while since I've
> played with the settings and I don't recall the exact effects.
> 
> Good luck.

Even nicer would be if YouTube could figure out a way to auto-correct 
volume.  It's really irritating to switch from one video to another, and 
either not be able to hear the new one, or have your ears blasted out.

-- 
Tim Wescott
Control systems, embedded software and circuit design
I'm looking for work!  See my website if you're interested
http://www.wescottdesign.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453683

On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 11:20:11 -0500, Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com>
wrote:

>Even nicer would be if YouTube could figure out a way to auto-correct 
>volume.  It's really irritating to switch from one video to another, and 
>either not be able to hear the new one, or have your ears blasted out.

YouTube, Netflix, and others have been auto-adjusting the video
resolution and data rate to match the users connection capabilities
since they were founded.  One would think that a simple thing like
normalizing the audio would trivial.  You're right.  They should
normalize the audio, but don't.

Of course, everything that goes wrong requires a corresponding
conspiracy theory.  In this case, broadcast, cable, and satellite TV
stations have always processed, compressed, and reduced the volume of
their content, while boosting the volume of their advertisements to a
higher volume.  YouTube does have commercials, which do tend to be
louder than the entertainment, errr... information videos, but not as
much as with TV.  My guess(tm) is that Google is waiting until YouTube
commercials are accepted (or tolerated) by their audience, before
following the broadcasters lead and raising the volume on commercials.

Meanwhile, if you watch YouTube on a computah (instead of a player
like my Roku 3), you can use Normalizing Software such as:
<http://mp3gain.sourceforge.net>
<http://mp4gain.com>
<http://normalize.nongnu.org>
etc...  Note that some of these only work on locally saved files and
not on streaming.

Win 7 and up have a built in "Loudness Equalization" feature which
sometimes works.  It's under:
Sound -> Playback -> Speaker -> Speaker Properties -> Enhancements
<https://www.howtogeek.com/115656/3-ways-to-normalize-sound-volume-on-your-pc/>
More:
<http://listoffreeware.com/best-free-audio-normalizer-software-windows/>

I sometimes use VLC for the purpose:
<http://www.videolan.org/vlc/>
but not so much for normalizing audio, but rather as a player to deal
with lip sync problems, mostly on YouTube.
<https://www.vlchelp.com/syncing-audio-vlc-media-player/>
<http://lifehacker.com/5910943/fix-out-of-sync-audio-in-vlc-with-a-keyboard-shortcut>



-- 
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453698

On 3/26/2017 1:14 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 11:20:11 -0500, Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Even nicer would be if YouTube could figure out a way to auto-correct
>> volume.  It's really irritating to switch from one video to another, and
>> either not be able to hear the new one, or have your ears blasted out.
>
> YouTube, Netflix, and others have been auto-adjusting the video
> resolution and data rate to match the users connection capabilities
> since they were founded.  One would think that a simple thing like
> normalizing the audio would trivial.  You're right.  They should
> normalize the audio, but don't.

I had a conversation with my local PBS station about this once.  I was 
getting them over the air using a digital to analog TV converter.  This 
set up worked ok until a show came on that had a rather low volume 
level.  I couldn't get the sound loud enough to hear easily.

So I called the station and ended up talking to an "engineer".  The 
conversation basically went from "The sound levels are set according to 
our VU meters" to "If the program originators wanted the sound level 
low, we aren't going to mess with it".  I asked if he thought the 
program "originators" didn't want me to be able to hear the program?

It was obvious that there was a problem somewhere in the volume setting. 
  Even if the problem wasn't in the station, would it have been morally 
wrong to adjust it to be view-able?

-- 

Rick C

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453895

On Sun, 26 Mar 2017 02:45:13 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:

>It was obvious that there was a problem somewhere in the volume setting. 
>  Even if the problem wasn't in the station, would it have been morally 
>wrong to adjust it to be view-able?

Yes, it is morally wrong.  The problem is that between the original
content producer, and the station transmitters, are a long chain of
audio and video processors, any of which can turn the audio or video
to garbage.  The person you talked to was probably nowhere near the
transmitter, could not hear or see the resultant audio/video, and was
running things by remote control via computah over an STL (station to
transmitter link) link or over the internet.  The PBS content was
likely being simultaneously distributed by multiple transmitters and
CATV (cable TV) feeds, few of which are monitored directly.  Much time
and engineering was spent getting the picture and audio levels and
delays just right via all these feeds.  Making on the fly changes for
a single complaining caller is a great way to break the chain and
possibly oneself get fired.  Little wonder the station engineer was
not interested in fixing your problem.

Stations and networks do respond to caller complaints.  However, they
wait until there's a deluge of calls and emails confirming that there
really is a problem.  When all the phones light up at once, you know
it's for real.  Single calls are usually ignored and are usually an
equipment or operational failure at the owners end.

I realize that this doesn't help solve your problem, but might help
you understand the situation.


-- 
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453920

On 3/27/2017 12:58 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Mar 2017 02:45:13 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> It was obvious that there was a problem somewhere in the volume setting.
>>  Even if the problem wasn't in the station, would it have been morally
>> wrong to adjust it to be view-able?
>
> Yes, it is morally wrong.  The problem is that between the original
> content producer, and the station transmitters, are a long chain of
> audio and video processors, any of which can turn the audio or video
> to garbage.  The person you talked to was probably nowhere near the
> transmitter, could not hear or see the resultant audio/video, and was
> running things by remote control via computah over an STL (station to
> transmitter link) link or over the internet.  The PBS content was
> likely being simultaneously distributed by multiple transmitters and
> CATV (cable TV) feeds, few of which are monitored directly.  Much time
> and engineering was spent getting the picture and audio levels and
> delays just right via all these feeds.  Making on the fly changes for
> a single complaining caller is a great way to break the chain and
> possibly oneself get fired.  Little wonder the station engineer was
> not interested in fixing your problem.
>
> Stations and networks do respond to caller complaints.  However, they
> wait until there's a deluge of calls and emails confirming that there
> really is a problem.  When all the phones light up at once, you know
> it's for real.  Single calls are usually ignored and are usually an
> equipment or operational failure at the owners end.
>
> I realize that this doesn't help solve your problem, but might help
> you understand the situation.

What you are saying makes little sense.  This has nothing to do with a 
"long chain of audio" processors.  This has to do with the volume of the 
original program source.  Just as I adjust the volume control when I 
change stations, watch a different video or put in a different CD, the 
volume of any source material from the broadcasting station could be 
changed between materials.

Everything else you said was based on unfounded speculation.

-- 

Rick C

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453958

On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 18:25:25 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 3/27/2017 12:58 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Sun, 26 Mar 2017 02:45:13 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> It was obvious that there was a problem somewhere in the volume setting.
>>>  Even if the problem wasn't in the station, would it have been morally
>>> wrong to adjust it to be view-able?
>>
>> Yes, it is morally wrong.  The problem is that between the original
>> content producer, and the station transmitters, are a long chain of
>> audio and video processors, any of which can turn the audio or video
>> to garbage.  The person you talked to was probably nowhere near the
>> transmitter, could not hear or see the resultant audio/video, and was
>> running things by remote control via computah over an STL (station to
>> transmitter link) link or over the internet.  The PBS content was
>> likely being simultaneously distributed by multiple transmitters and
>> CATV (cable TV) feeds, few of which are monitored directly.  Much time
>> and engineering was spent getting the picture and audio levels and
>> delays just right via all these feeds.  Making on the fly changes for
>> a single complaining caller is a great way to break the chain and
>> possibly oneself get fired.  Little wonder the station engineer was
>> not interested in fixing your problem.
>>
>> Stations and networks do respond to caller complaints.  However, they
>> wait until there's a deluge of calls and emails confirming that there
>> really is a problem.  When all the phones light up at once, you know
>> it's for real.  Single calls are usually ignored and are usually an
>> equipment or operational failure at the owners end.
>>
>> I realize that this doesn't help solve your problem, but might help
>> you understand the situation.

>What you are saying makes little sense.  This has nothing to do with a 
>"long chain of audio" processors.  This has to do with the volume of the 
>original program source.  Just as I adjust the volume control when I 
>change stations, watch a different video or put in a different CD, the 
>volume of any source material from the broadcasting station could be 
>changed between materials.
>
>Everything else you said was based on unfounded speculation.

Well, you're partly correct.  It's been a long time since I had much
to do with broadcasting and that was with AM and FM stations, not TV.
I am very much out of date on station operation procedures and
technology.  However, you weren't getting any answers to your
complaint from the perspective of the TV station, so I thought I might
give it a try.  I guess that wasn't adequate.  If you want an
authoritative answer to your complaint, there should be some forums
and newsgroups related to broadcast TV.  Your local TV station may
also operate an online forum.  Or, you can call the station again and
continue to pursue the matter.

In my college days, working part time at a local FM station, nobody
was allowed to tweak anything that might get the attention of the FCC
or cause complications.  That was reserved for the station chief
engineer (or contract engineer) who signed the logs when something was
adjusted.  When something went wrong, I had to wake up the chief
engineer and ask him what I should do.  These days, automation runs,
monitors, and logs everything.  It is rare that anyone is on site and
able to make adjustments.  If the transmitted audio was as low as you
indicate for an extended period, a "dead air" alarm would have been
sent.

FCC and unattended operation:
<https://www.fcc.gov/media/radio/unattended-operation>

PBS TV network map:
<http://i.imgur.com/flnLHNF.png>



-- 
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453567

On Friday, March 24, 2017 at 7:45:35 PM UTC-4, rickman wrote:
> When watching videos on my laptop there are some which just don't have 
> enough volume.  Setting everything as high as I can it is still not loud 
> enough.  So what determines the highest setting of the volume?
> 
> Is the application simply adjusting an attenuator somewhere in the 
> signal chain of my laptop?  Or does the application intercept the audio 
> data and apply it's own volume control by manipulating the data stream?
> 
> If the latter, it should be able to let me set the volume to 11, or 12 
> or 1200 if that is what I need.
> 
I added some inline audio amps (external speakers) to the computers at work.  
The production people like to listen to music and stuff on the computer.
It does add another wall wart to the power strip.  

George H. 
(
> -- 
> 
> Rick C

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453616

On 03/25/2017 12:34 PM, George Herold wrote:
> On Friday, March 24, 2017 at 7:45:35 PM UTC-4, rickman wrote:
>> When watching videos on my laptop there are some which just don't have
>> enough volume.  Setting everything as high as I can it is still not loud
>> enough.  So what determines the highest setting of the volume?
>>
>> Is the application simply adjusting an attenuator somewhere in the
>> signal chain of my laptop?  Or does the application intercept the audio
>> data and apply it's own volume control by manipulating the data stream?
>>
>> If the latter, it should be able to let me set the volume to 11, or 12
>> or 1200 if that is what I need.
>>
> I added some inline audio amps (external speakers) to the computers at work.
> The production people like to listen to music and stuff on the computer.
> It does add another wall wart to the power strip.
>
> George H.

My 21st century workshop audio solution:

One of these Nyrius Bluetooth stereo audio adapters:

<https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B00EVYJ4VC/ref=dp_olp_0?ie=UTF8&condition=all>

Then the stereo output into a pair of Alesis Elevate 3 monitors I got on 
a Christmas sale a few years ago for $49:

<http://www.musiciansfriend.com/pro-audio/alesis-elevate-3-studio-monitor-pair?cntry=us&source=3WWRWXGP&gclid=CLejuvHX8tICFYuNswodDl0NJA&kwid=productads-adid^156403583515-device^c-plaid^140859210981-sku^H80524000000000@ADL4MF-adType^PLA>

And the 1/8" subwoofer out from the speakers into a used powered sub.

Sounds great, play any song I want from my iPod wirelessly for under
$100

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453628

On Saturday, 25 March 2017 16:34:56 UTC, George Herold  wrote:
> On Friday, March 24, 2017 at 7:45:35 PM UTC-4, rickman wrote:
> > When watching videos on my laptop there are some which just don't have 
> > enough volume.  Setting everything as high as I can it is still not loud 
> > enough.  So what determines the highest setting of the volume?
> > 
> > Is the application simply adjusting an attenuator somewhere in the 
> > signal chain of my laptop?  Or does the application intercept the audio 
> > data and apply it's own volume control by manipulating the data stream?
> > 
> > If the latter, it should be able to let me set the volume to 11, or 12 
> > or 1200 if that is what I need.
> > 
> I added some inline audio amps (external speakers) to the computers at work.  
> The production people like to listen to music and stuff on the computer.
> It does add another wall wart to the power strip.  
> 
> George H. 

Why do they do that, use wallwarts for pc speakers? With a differential input one can simply use the PC's power.


NT

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453667

On Saturday, March 25, 2017 at 7:25:59 PM UTC-4, tabb...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, 25 March 2017 16:34:56 UTC, George Herold  wrote:
> > On Friday, March 24, 2017 at 7:45:35 PM UTC-4, rickman wrote:
> > > When watching videos on my laptop there are some which just don't have 
> > > enough volume.  Setting everything as high as I can it is still not loud 
> > > enough.  So what determines the highest setting of the volume?
> > > 
> > > Is the application simply adjusting an attenuator somewhere in the 
> > > signal chain of my laptop?  Or does the application intercept the audio 
> > > data and apply it's own volume control by manipulating the data stream?
> > > 
> > > If the latter, it should be able to let me set the volume to 11, or 12 
> > > or 1200 if that is what I need.
> > > 
> > I added some inline audio amps (external speakers) to the computers at work.  
> > The production people like to listen to music and stuff on the computer.
> > It does add another wall wart to the power strip.  
> > 
> > George H. 
> 
> Why do they do that, use wallwarts for pc speakers? With a differential input one can simply use the PC's power.

Power from the speaker jack?? 

This is our own audio amp. 
(It does DC.. two LM675's one splits the power rail.  
It's kinda a dumb circuit, copied from app notes, 
but we've sold a lot (~500.. which is a 
lot for us, and no complaints! :^)  
I guess everyone uses wall warts for the same reason. 
Cheap, certified, protected... I like Phihong, 

George H.    
> 
> 
> NT

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453675

On 3/25/2017 10:56 PM, George Herold wrote:
> On Saturday, March 25, 2017 at 7:25:59 PM UTC-4, tabb...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Saturday, 25 March 2017 16:34:56 UTC, George Herold  wrote:
>>> On Friday, March 24, 2017 at 7:45:35 PM UTC-4, rickman wrote:
>>>> When watching videos on my laptop there are some which just don't have
>>>> enough volume.  Setting everything as high as I can it is still not loud
>>>> enough.  So what determines the highest setting of the volume?
>>>>
>>>> Is the application simply adjusting an attenuator somewhere in the
>>>> signal chain of my laptop?  Or does the application intercept the audio
>>>> data and apply it's own volume control by manipulating the data stream?
>>>>
>>>> If the latter, it should be able to let me set the volume to 11, or 12
>>>> or 1200 if that is what I need.
>>>>
>>> I added some inline audio amps (external speakers) to the computers at work.
>>> The production people like to listen to music and stuff on the computer.
>>> It does add another wall wart to the power strip.
>>>
>>> George H.
>>
>> Why do they do that, use wallwarts for pc speakers? With a differential input one can simply use the PC's power.
>
> Power from the speaker jack??
>
> This is our own audio amp.
> (It does DC.. two LM675's one splits the power rail.
> It's kinda a dumb circuit, copied from app notes,
> but we've sold a lot (~500.. which is a
> lot for us, and no complaints! :^)
> I guess everyone uses wall warts for the same reason.
> Cheap, certified, protected... I like Phihong,

I find it hard to send much power over Bluetooth.  :)

-- 

Rick C

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453849

On 2017-03-25, tabbypurr@gmail.com <tabbypurr@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Why do they do that, use wallwarts for pc speakers? With a
> differential input one can simply use the PC's power.   

A PC's 12V rail is pretty messy, and is not directly regulated. with cheap amplifiers
you get screeches, warbles, and twitters depending on what the disk and CPU and video
are doing,  still some brands provide a DC out jack on the back to power the audio
system.

-- 
This email has not been checked by half-arsed antivirus software 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453575

On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 19:45:29 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:

>When watching videos on my laptop there are some which just don't have 
>enough volume.  Setting everything as high as I can it is still not loud 
>enough.  So what determines the highest setting of the volume?
>
>Is the application simply adjusting an attenuator somewhere in the 
>signal chain of my laptop?  Or does the application intercept the audio 
>data and apply it's own volume control by manipulating the data stream?
>
>If the latter, it should be able to let me set the volume to 11, or 12 
>or 1200 if that is what I need.


There may be something in the GUI of the video rendering SW that sets
up levels each time the program is opened. Restarting the program may
reset this if all levels aren't set to their highest limits, at that
time. It may be a misguided attempt at normalization.

I notice this specifically with VLC. After setting all levels in W7
'volume mixer' to medium, restarting the VLC program allows subsequent
volume increases.

RL

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453590

On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 13:19:43 -0400, legg <legg@nospam.magma.ca> wrote:

>On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 19:45:29 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>When watching videos on my laptop there are some which just don't have 
>>enough volume.  Setting everything as high as I can it is still not loud 
>>enough.  So what determines the highest setting of the volume?
>>
>>Is the application simply adjusting an attenuator somewhere in the 
>>signal chain of my laptop?  Or does the application intercept the audio 
>>data and apply it's own volume control by manipulating the data stream?
>>
>>If the latter, it should be able to let me set the volume to 11, or 12 
>>or 1200 if that is what I need.
>
>
>There may be something in the GUI of the video rendering SW that sets
>up levels each time the program is opened. Restarting the program may
>reset this if all levels aren't set to their highest limits, at that
>time. It may be a misguided attempt at normalization.
>
>I notice this specifically with VLC. After setting all levels in W7
>'volume mixer' to medium, restarting the VLC program allows subsequent
>volume increases.
>
>RL


My TV is good on the gain and it goes to external powered monitors so
that's fine.  What can be bad sometimes on cable networks is 
that they turn down the program audio levels and then some commercials
are raised 10 dB or more so they're in your ear.  For this as well as
gain increase you could add an external compressor and/or AGC with
gain adjust.

On my laptops of late, they use these awful sound cards that can not
raise the gain and thoe low level sources are way too low of volume !

I agree that Youtube should offer audio level maximization.

It's always the video that gets the attention it seems.

boB

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453694

boB K7IQ wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 13:19:43 -0400, legg <legg@nospam.magma.ca> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 19:45:29 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> When watching videos on my laptop there are some which just don't have
>>> enough volume.  Setting everything as high as I can it is still not loud
>>> enough.  So what determines the highest setting of the volume?
>>>
>>> Is the application simply adjusting an attenuator somewhere in the
>>> signal chain of my laptop?  Or does the application intercept the audio
>>> data and apply it's own volume control by manipulating the data stream?
>>>
>>> If the latter, it should be able to let me set the volume to 11, or 12
>>> or 1200 if that is what I need.
>>
>>
>> There may be something in the GUI of the video rendering SW that sets
>> up levels each time the program is opened. Restarting the program may
>> reset this if all levels aren't set to their highest limits, at that
>> time. It may be a misguided attempt at normalization.
>>
>> I notice this specifically with VLC. After setting all levels in W7
>> 'volume mixer' to medium, restarting the VLC program allows subsequent
>> volume increases.
>>
>> RL
>
>
> My TV is good on the gain and it goes to external powered monitors so
> that's fine.  What can be bad sometimes on cable networks is
> that they turn down the program audio levels and then some commercials
> are raised 10 dB or more so they're in your ear.  For this as well as
> gain increase you could add an external compressor and/or AGC with
> gain adjust.
>
> On my laptops of late, they use these awful sound cards that can not
> raise the gain and thoe low level sources are way too low of volume !
>
> I agree that Youtube should offer audio level maximization.
>
> It's always the video that gets the attention it seems.


    I'm thinking of building a box to mute the speakers if the sound 
jumps more than a preset level. That will kill all of the loud 
commercials, and badly made videos. It will be part of a small stereo 
mixer for all the various computers & TV in my room.


-- 
Never piss off an Engineer!

They don't get mad.

They don't get even.

They go for over unity! ;-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#453788

On Sun, 26 Mar 2017 02:29:31 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

>boB K7IQ wrote:
>> On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 13:19:43 -0400, legg <legg@nospam.magma.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 19:45:29 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> When watching videos on my laptop there are some which just don't have
>>>> enough volume.  Setting everything as high as I can it is still not loud
>>>> enough.  So what determines the highest setting of the volume?
>>>>
>>>> Is the application simply adjusting an attenuator somewhere in the
>>>> signal chain of my laptop?  Or does the application intercept the audio
>>>> data and apply it's own volume control by manipulating the data stream?
>>>>
>>>> If the latter, it should be able to let me set the volume to 11, or 12
>>>> or 1200 if that is what I need.
>>>
>>>
>>> There may be something in the GUI of the video rendering SW that sets
>>> up levels each time the program is opened. Restarting the program may
>>> reset this if all levels aren't set to their highest limits, at that
>>> time. It may be a misguided attempt at normalization.
>>>
>>> I notice this specifically with VLC. After setting all levels in W7
>>> 'volume mixer' to medium, restarting the VLC program allows subsequent
>>> volume increases.
>>>
>>> RL
>>
>>
>> My TV is good on the gain and it goes to external powered monitors so
>> that's fine.  What can be bad sometimes on cable networks is
>> that they turn down the program audio levels and then some commercials
>> are raised 10 dB or more so they're in your ear.  For this as well as
>> gain increase you could add an external compressor and/or AGC with
>> gain adjust.
>>
>> On my laptops of late, they use these awful sound cards that can not
>> raise the gain and thoe low level sources are way too low of volume !
>>
>> I agree that Youtube should offer audio level maximization.
>>
>> It's always the video that gets the attention it seems.
>
>
>    I'm thinking of building a box to mute the speakers if the sound 
>jumps more than a preset level. That will kill all of the loud 
>commercials, and badly made videos. It will be part of a small stereo 
>mixer for all the various computers & TV in my room.


I would think that a mute circuit would be more annoying than just a
compressor that turns the sound down to keep it leveled ?

A mute circuit would be a bit easier though.  There are some decent
VCAs and log amps that make this pretty easy stuff to design but I
think I'd just buy a cheap stereo compressor with mono'd side chains
to reduce volume of left and right channels equally.  IF I didn't
happen to have a couple laying around but most of mine are 19 inch
rack mount so not as nice for a television system.

Oh, maybe one of those new-fangled rPi or single board computers with
decent audio I/O might be right for the job.

boB

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#454737

boB K7IQ wrote:
>
> I would think that a mute circuit would be more annoying than just a
> compressor that turns the sound down to keep it leveled ?
>
> A mute circuit would be a bit easier though.  There are some decent
> VCAs and log amps that make this pretty easy stuff to design but I
> think I'd just buy a cheap stereo compressor with mono'd side chains
> to reduce volume of left and right channels equally.  IF I didn't
> happen to have a couple laying around but most of mine are 19 inch
> rack mount so not as nice for a television system.
>
> Oh, maybe one of those new-fangled rPi or single board computers with
> decent audio I/O might be right for the job.


    The annoying channel is an online feed, with the commercials & 
promos +20dB or more than the programs, and for three to five minute 
blocks. I would just use it as a reverse squelch circuit. I too have 
rack mounted audio processors, but who wants a relay rack in a small 
bedroom?  Who needs a processor, when a sample & hold with a half second 
to one second delay to trigger the muting?


-- 
Never piss off an Engineer!

They don't get mad.

They don't get even.

They go for over unity! ;-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.electronics.design

csiph-web