Yea, because the users of iPads can't install software or browser plugins to block the ads.
Kinda sucks losing control over one's hardware huh?
Don't be ridiculous about always being able to control what you own. I've owned a number of TVs for the last 50 years and I was never able to block TV commercials. Nor was it possible for me to block radio commercials. I still had a choice as to whether I'd watch/listen or not.
The report from Andrew Vanacore said it's likely that news organizations will hold back free content from their websites in the future, opting instead to provide news to users who subscribe on tablet-style devices like the iPad. And although Apple has already sold 2 million iPads, the market will have to become much larger for it to have a major effect on a news organization's bottom line.
Anticipate agonized howls from the "why would I get an iPad, when I can just view news websites for free on my netbook" crowd.
iPad readers also spend a great deal more time with content. Publisher Conde Nast revealed that the average reader spends 60 minutes with a monthly issue on Apple's device, compared with the average website visit length of less than 5 minutes per month.
How does Condé Nast know this?
Do they run a survey?
If so, How do they determine who bought their iPad apps?
If no survey, Does the iPad app spy on the user and monitor the time the user spends in the app, and then report back to Condé Nast?
If so, is the user made aware of this?
It is my understanding that:
-- Apple does not provide the names, emails etc. of individuals who buy an app to the Developer (Condé Nast, in this case).
-- If the Developer chooses, it can have app ask the user register with the developer, or require that information as part of an in-app purchase.
I bought the Wired app, and I did not see a survey, request for information, online registration, in-app purchase, or a request for approval to monitor my activity within the app.
So, again, the question is: How does Condé Nast know this?
If annoying ads wasn't a problem then there wouldn't be a need for ad blocking mechanisms, it wouldn't bother people enough to do something about it.
I don't think people like denying their favorite sites a means of support, but many have little choice in the matter.
Advertisers feel some need to create energy in the viewers of their ads to get them respond, annoying or distracting them with blinking, animation, sound and popups/unders that demand a response.
The viewers respond alright, by using Firefox and the Ad Block Plus plug-in, which by the way can whitelist certain sites like this one.
I agree with what you are saying, but I actually think the solution is to avoid using the website. I used to look at the San Jose Sharks website often, but they added an add for a crappy little Smart car which has to run before you can view the site, so I've gone elsewhere for my hockey news.
I think if the sites start seeing a reduction in traffic when they put on an annoying ad, they will do something about it. The problem with ad blockers is that the advertisers will see a reduction in click-through and (advertising people being as they are) will probably crank up the annoyance factor, thus irritating the people who don't use ad blockers even more!
Personally I hope things like iAd work and demonstrates the value of quality advertising, which would then hopefully spill over onto the web.
Apple should buy a substantial interest in Omnicom next and "help" them to repurpose their digital advertising. Put those idle billions to work, Apple!
Don't be ridiculous about always being able to control what you own. I've owned a number of TVs for the last 50 years and I was never able to block TV commercials. Nor was it possible for me to block radio commercials. I still had a choice as to whether I'd watch/listen or not.
Well I'm not as old as you, but certainly had the pleasure of device that could block TV commercials using signals in shows that a break was coming and for how long.
No one said you had to see those magazines... it's really for those that are interested in the content of those magazines.
It's also true that ads in glossy print magazines are all part of the enjoyment of the magazine. Who hasn't perused a magazine in the dentist's waiting room reading mainly the ads? The point is, and I think that was SJ's whole point about iAd, the ads in web pages and apps suck and all we want to do is get them out of the way. I hope what Apple will do with iAd is make the ads so appealing people will even browse them to kill time as they do with a magazine. SJ also promised there will always be a cancel button so this, if true, would be an improvement over being forced to watch some 30 second Flash video before something you want to see.
Well I'm not as old as you, but certainly had the pleasure of device that could block TV commercials using signals in shows that a break was coming and for how long.
I'm not aiming this comment at you SpotOn it was just a convenient point to enter the anti ad conversation. I get sick of ads on TV just like the next guy but at some point you have to consider if the wish for no ads were to come true just how we'd get the content? I love listening to NPR and watching PBS now and then and do contribute but I can't see CBS, ABC or NBC stopping programming for a week to ask for donations!
Well I'm not as old as you, but certainly had the pleasure of device that could block TV commercials using signals in shows that a break was coming and for how long.
I am not doubting you for a second but can you send me links on such a device (even historical info) I would love to read about them. I have heard of them before but never seen one. My company used to make TV shows and send them off to ESPN, ESPN2 all finished but I never came across any such system and we certainly never added any such signal to the shows we made. I assume the station sent it out in parallel somehow as all shows are redistributed and obviously the Networks couldn't encode this. But which stations, all of them? Were they all using the same system nationally? I look forward to being educated on something I always wanted to get to the bottom of. What fascinates me is why this was never an option in Tivo et al, wow that would have been useful! You used it with what other equipment and in what way? Was this to pause a recording device ... if so how? Sorry so many questions but I am really interested to learn more.
Well I'm not as old as you, but certainly had the pleasure of device that could block TV commercials using signals in shows that a break was coming and for how long.
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
I am not doubting you for a second but can you send me links on such a device (even historical info) I would love to read about them. I have heard of them before but never seen one. My company used to make TV shows and send them off to ESPN, ESPN2 all finished but I never came across any such system and we certainly never added any such signal to the shows we made. I assume the station sent it out in parallel somehow as all shows are redistributed and obviously the Networks couldn't encode this. But which stations, all of them? Were they all using the same system nationally? I look forward to being educated on something I always wanted to get to the bottom of. What fascinates me is why this was never an option in Tivo et al, wow that would have been useful! You used it with what other equipment and in what way? Was this to pause a recording device ... if so how? Sorry so many questions but I am really interested to learn more.
I can't provide links, but I can point you in the right direction to begin a search.
Muzac was a early attempt to provide commercial-free radio (elevator music) before cassette recorders, transistor radios, etc. The way it was explained to me was this:
The Muzac company contracted with local Music-only radio stations to add special, inaudible signals before and after each commercial. Then they rented Muzac radio receivers to business to supply background music. These were special radios tuned to the contracted frequency (channel). These receivers would detect the inaudible signals, and lower the volume before a commercial and then raise it again after the commercial.
In essence, the circuitry in the special radio would use the signals to squelch the commercials-- so it was called a squelch circuit, .
A couple of things:
-- the term "squelch circuit" was loosley applied to this and other purposes, such as eliminating background noise..
-- the time the commercials were playing (with the volume off) was simulated "dead air" time when nothing was heard
-- the inaudible signals were not entirely inaudible... you could recognize a certain length pause, a certain-length tone, and a certain-length pause.
Enterprising radio techies (my Dad was one) could design their own squelch circuit and play commercial-free radio at no cost except their own inventiveness.
In early TV broadcasts, the networks broadcast through local affiliates. Most of the commercials were broadcast from "network central". However, a system was in place (similar to the squelch circuit) to notify the affiliate to electronically switch "local ads".
Here again, the TV techies could detect the signals and eliminate the "local commercials". Some went even further, and would anticipate many "normal" 30-second and 6o-second commercial breaks at fixed times (the top and bottom of the hour). Some of these are required bt the FCC-- to identify the station "over the air" every hour (or so).
The broadcasters caught on to what the Techies were doing to bypass commercials and started a cat and mouse game of moving the commercials around (similar to the cat and mouse game that Apple plays with JailBreakers).
The cable companies added another level, replacing the affiliate with the local cable rebroadcaster.
There is [at least] one other way that the broadcast (cable or over-the-air) signals can be switched, That is the Federal and Local EWS (early Warning System) where the government involved interrupts broadcasts to deliver disaster instructions such as tornado warnings, evacuation instructions, etc.
Somewhere, there is this big broadcast server in the sky, that sorts out who sees what commercials and when.
...And, someone, somewhere has the content! Where's the content? Who's got the content? Did you take the content?
I can't provide links, but I can point you in the right direction to begin a search.
Muzac was a early attempt to provide commercial-free radio (elevator music) before cassette recorders, transistor radios, etc. The way it was explained to me was this:
The Muzac company contracted with local Music-only radio stations to add special, inaudible signals before and after each commercial. Then they rented Muzac radio receivers to business to supply background music. These were special radios tuned to the contracted frequency (channel). These receivers would detect the inaudible signals, and lower the volume before a commercial and then raise it again after the commercial.
In essence, the circuitry in the special radio would use the signals to squelch the commercials-- so it was called a squelch circuit, .
A couple of things:
-- the term "squelch circuit" was loosley applied to this and other purposes, such as eliminating background noise..
-- the time the commercials were playing (with the volume off) was simulated "dead air" time when nothing was heard
-- the inaudible signals were not entirely inaudible... you could recognize a certain length pause, a certain-length tone, and a certain-length pause.
Enterprising radio techies (my Dad was one) could design their own squelch circuit and play commercial-free radio at no cost except their own inventiveness.
In early TV broadcasts, the networks broadcast through local affiliates. Most of the commercials were broadcast from "network central". However, a system was in place (similar to the squelch circuit) to notify the affiliate to electronically switch "local ads".
Here again, the TV techies could detect the signals and eliminate the "local commercials". Some went even further, and would anticipate many "normal" 30-second and 6o-second commercial breaks at fixed times (the top and bottom of the hour). Some of these are required bt the FCC-- to identify the station "over the air" every hour (or so).
The broadcasters caught on to what the Techies were doing to bypass commercials and started a cat and mouse game of moving the commercials around (similar to the cat and mouse game that Apple plays with JailBreakers).
The cable companies added another level, replacing the affiliate with the local cable rebroadcaster.
There is [at least] one other way that the broadcast (cable or over-the-air) signals can be switched, That is the Federal and Local EWS (early Warning System) where the government involved interrupts broadcasts to deliver disaster instructions such as tornado warnings, evacuation instructions, etc.
Somewhere, there is this big broadcast server in the sky, that sorts out who sees what commercials and when.
...And, someone, somewhere has the content! Where's the content? Who's got the content? Did you take the content?
HTH
Dick
Thanks so much for all the info ... analog and all its limitations is so hard to imagine now isn't it!
So I think I see this now. Our shows which had several two minute black sections left in for ads on the tapes were probably pre marked with a count down by a techy at the Network when they first received the tapes. This would trigger the automated drop in of four thirty second ads at the affiliate or cable station rebroadcasting. The light bulb comes on... This amateur equipment simply detected these signals. As to what end though ... were amateurs using these signals to pause their VHS decks? Or was it they just had a light bulb light up saying pee break in ten seconds?
Seriously a squelch circuit on the audio during ads would be pretty nice! Even now ... I hate the fact ads are twice as loud as the shows a nasty habit I am also hearing with web ads now too. Macs and ATV should come with automatic audio leveling to prevent this (reading this SJ?)
Thanks so much for all the info ... analog and all its limitations is so hard to imagine now isn't it!
So I think I see this now. Our shows which had several two minute black sections left in for ads on the tapes were probably pre marked with a count down by a techy at the Network when they first received the tapes. This would trigger the automated drop in of four thirty second ads at the affiliate or cable station rebroadcasting. The light bulb comes on... This amateur equipment simply detected these signals. As to what end though ... were amateurs using these signals to pause their VHS decks? Or was it they just had a light bulb light up saying pee break in ten seconds?
Seriously a squelch circuit on the audio during ads would be pretty nice! Even now ... I hate the fact ads are twice as loud as the shows a nasty habit I am also hearing with web ads now too. Macs and ATV should come with automatic audio leveling to prevent this (reading this SJ?)
Ha!
There was a TV set, a few decades back, that did this! I think it was a Magnavoz, Zenith or Motorola (when they still made TVs). The trouble is, you had to buy a new TV to get the feature (a major purchase at that time)
I did some googling and found this: under TV automatic volume control:
Quote:
Loud annoying TV commercials
by Michael D. Grissom on Wed Mar 26, 2003 9:04 pm
After thousands of complaints to the FCC about this problem, a battle was fought and the end results were that TV commercials could no longer be INCREASED in volume. Unfortunately, the ruling did NOT say that the TV show (program) could not be REDUCED in volume so, the problem continues. Also, they have added audio compression to TV commercials to make them SOUND louder without increasing the volume so much. This is info obtained from the FCC web site.
I have patented such a device and it became a Senior Engineering project at NCSU this semester. It is working almost perfectly and the preproduction proto will be complete in May. If and when it goes into production, I'll send you one for free -- just for fun.
If you must have one NOW you can find three types available on the net (keywords: "ZAPPER" & "TV commercials") and several more types built into VCR's and cable boxes like TIVO. Unfortunately, the built in ones require that you record everything, then rewind, then send it all the way through the tape again so that it can "mark" (not erase) all the commercials and rewind again before you can watch commercial free. When a commercial is encountered, your screen will go black for about 15 to 30 seconds while it Fast Forwards through all the commercials. BTW, I have Smart Sound and its effects are barely detectable which is why the search for a better solution is still viable.
Hope this brightens your day a tad. You had a great idea that our marketing research shows 35 million US residence would buy today for under $35.
But your idea, let's call it a "Billy May" filter is excellent-- something in between the cable and the TV that moderates volume.! If people would pay $35 for a "Billy MAy" filter, would they pay $100 for one that included AppleTV?
As a side note, iPhone OS 4.0 has added a ton of sophisticated math APIs, especially for DSP (Digital Signal Processing). So, an AppleTV (or even a headless iPod) running iPhone OS...
I am not doubting you for a second but can you send me links on such a device (even historical info) I would love to read about them. I have heard of them before but never seen one. My company used to make TV shows and send them off to ESPN, ESPN2 all finished but I never came across any such system and we certainly never added any such signal to the shows we made. I assume the station sent it out in parallel somehow as all shows are redistributed and obviously the Networks couldn't encode this. But which stations, all of them? Were they all using the same system nationally? I look forward to being educated on something I always wanted to get to the bottom of. What fascinates me is why this was never an option in Tivo et al, wow that would have been useful! You used it with what other equipment and in what way? Was this to pause a recording device ... if so how? Sorry so many questions but I am really interested to learn more.
My old man was in the TV business from the early days, before solid state TV's came along and wiped out the TV repair guys. So he and his coworkers knew all the secrets.
Guess one can find out a lot with a degree in electronics, a oscilloscope and some hardware hacking.
Sadly I was just a user and a abuser, so I can't help you.
Comments
Yea, because the users of iPads can't install software or browser plugins to block the ads.
Kinda sucks losing control over one's hardware huh?
Don't be ridiculous about always being able to control what you own. I've owned a number of TVs for the last 50 years and I was never able to block TV commercials. Nor was it possible for me to block radio commercials. I still had a choice as to whether I'd watch/listen or not.
The report from Andrew Vanacore said it's likely that news organizations will hold back free content from their websites in the future, opting instead to provide news to users who subscribe on tablet-style devices like the iPad. And although Apple has already sold 2 million iPads, the market will have to become much larger for it to have a major effect on a news organization's bottom line.
Anticipate agonized howls from the "why would I get an iPad, when I can just view news websites for free on my netbook" crowd.
In response, traditional media outlets(tv, newspapers, magazines, billboards...) should raise their prices for Apple ads.
iPad readers also spend a great deal more time with content. Publisher Conde Nast revealed that the average reader spends 60 minutes with a monthly issue on Apple's device, compared with the average website visit length of less than 5 minutes per month.
How does Condé Nast know this?
Do they run a survey?
If so, How do they determine who bought their iPad apps?
If no survey, Does the iPad app spy on the user and monitor the time the user spends in the app, and then report back to Condé Nast?
If so, is the user made aware of this?
It is my understanding that:
-- Apple does not provide the names, emails etc. of individuals who buy an app to the Developer (Condé Nast, in this case).
-- If the Developer chooses, it can have app ask the user register with the developer, or require that information as part of an in-app purchase.
I bought the Wired app, and I did not see a survey, request for information, online registration, in-app purchase, or a request for approval to monitor my activity within the app.
So, again, the question is: How does Condé Nast know this?
There are privacy issues involved!
.
If annoying ads wasn't a problem then there wouldn't be a need for ad blocking mechanisms, it wouldn't bother people enough to do something about it.
I don't think people like denying their favorite sites a means of support, but many have little choice in the matter.
Advertisers feel some need to create energy in the viewers of their ads to get them respond, annoying or distracting them with blinking, animation, sound and popups/unders that demand a response.
The viewers respond alright, by using Firefox and the Ad Block Plus plug-in, which by the way can whitelist certain sites like this one.
I agree with what you are saying, but I actually think the solution is to avoid using the website. I used to look at the San Jose Sharks website often, but they added an add for a crappy little Smart car which has to run before you can view the site, so I've gone elsewhere for my hockey news.
I think if the sites start seeing a reduction in traffic when they put on an annoying ad, they will do something about it. The problem with ad blockers is that the advertisers will see a reduction in click-through and (advertising people being as they are) will probably crank up the annoyance factor, thus irritating the people who don't use ad blockers even more!
Personally I hope things like iAd work and demonstrates the value of quality advertising, which would then hopefully spill over onto the web.
Don't be ridiculous about always being able to control what you own. I've owned a number of TVs for the last 50 years and I was never able to block TV commercials. Nor was it possible for me to block radio commercials. I still had a choice as to whether I'd watch/listen or not.
Well I'm not as old as you, but certainly had the pleasure of device that could block TV commercials using signals in shows that a break was coming and for how long.
No one said you had to see those magazines... it's really for those that are interested in the content of those magazines.
It's also true that ads in glossy print magazines are all part of the enjoyment of the magazine. Who hasn't perused a magazine in the dentist's waiting room reading mainly the ads? The point is, and I think that was SJ's whole point about iAd, the ads in web pages and apps suck and all we want to do is get them out of the way. I hope what Apple will do with iAd is make the ads so appealing people will even browse them to kill time as they do with a magazine. SJ also promised there will always be a cancel button so this, if true, would be an improvement over being forced to watch some 30 second Flash video before something you want to see.
Well I'm not as old as you, but certainly had the pleasure of device that could block TV commercials using signals in shows that a break was coming and for how long.
I'm not aiming this comment at you SpotOn it was just a convenient point to enter the anti ad conversation. I get sick of ads on TV just like the next guy but at some point you have to consider if the wish for no ads were to come true just how we'd get the content? I love listening to NPR and watching PBS now and then and do contribute but I can't see CBS, ABC or NBC stopping programming for a week to ask for donations!
Well I'm not as old as you, but certainly had the pleasure of device that could block TV commercials using signals in shows that a break was coming and for how long.
I am not doubting you for a second but can you send me links on such a device (even historical info) I would love to read about them. I have heard of them before but never seen one. My company used to make TV shows and send them off to ESPN, ESPN2 all finished but I never came across any such system and we certainly never added any such signal to the shows we made. I assume the station sent it out in parallel somehow as all shows are redistributed and obviously the Networks couldn't encode this. But which stations, all of them? Were they all using the same system nationally? I look forward to being educated on something I always wanted to get to the bottom of. What fascinates me is why this was never an option in Tivo et al, wow that would have been useful! You used it with what other equipment and in what way? Was this to pause a recording device ... if so how? Sorry so many questions but I am really interested to learn more.
Well I'm not as old as you, but certainly had the pleasure of device that could block TV commercials using signals in shows that a break was coming and for how long.
I am not doubting you for a second but can you send me links on such a device (even historical info) I would love to read about them. I have heard of them before but never seen one. My company used to make TV shows and send them off to ESPN, ESPN2 all finished but I never came across any such system and we certainly never added any such signal to the shows we made. I assume the station sent it out in parallel somehow as all shows are redistributed and obviously the Networks couldn't encode this. But which stations, all of them? Were they all using the same system nationally? I look forward to being educated on something I always wanted to get to the bottom of. What fascinates me is why this was never an option in Tivo et al, wow that would have been useful! You used it with what other equipment and in what way? Was this to pause a recording device ... if so how? Sorry so many questions but I am really interested to learn more.
I can't provide links, but I can point you in the right direction to begin a search.
Muzac was a early attempt to provide commercial-free radio (elevator music) before cassette recorders, transistor radios, etc. The way it was explained to me was this:
The Muzac company contracted with local Music-only radio stations to add special, inaudible signals before and after each commercial. Then they rented Muzac radio receivers to business to supply background music. These were special radios tuned to the contracted frequency (channel). These receivers would detect the inaudible signals, and lower the volume before a commercial and then raise it again after the commercial.
In essence, the circuitry in the special radio would use the signals to squelch the commercials-- so it was called a squelch circuit, .
A couple of things:
-- the term "squelch circuit" was loosley applied to this and other purposes, such as eliminating background noise..
-- the time the commercials were playing (with the volume off) was simulated "dead air" time when nothing was heard
-- the inaudible signals were not entirely inaudible... you could recognize a certain length pause, a certain-length tone, and a certain-length pause.
Enterprising radio techies (my Dad was one) could design their own squelch circuit and play commercial-free radio at no cost except their own inventiveness.
In early TV broadcasts, the networks broadcast through local affiliates. Most of the commercials were broadcast from "network central". However, a system was in place (similar to the squelch circuit) to notify the affiliate to electronically switch "local ads".
Here again, the TV techies could detect the signals and eliminate the "local commercials". Some went even further, and would anticipate many "normal" 30-second and 6o-second commercial breaks at fixed times (the top and bottom of the hour). Some of these are required bt the FCC-- to identify the station "over the air" every hour (or so).
The broadcasters caught on to what the Techies were doing to bypass commercials and started a cat and mouse game of moving the commercials around (similar to the cat and mouse game that Apple plays with JailBreakers).
The cable companies added another level, replacing the affiliate with the local cable rebroadcaster.
There is [at least] one other way that the broadcast (cable or over-the-air) signals can be switched, That is the Federal and Local EWS (early Warning System) where the government involved interrupts broadcasts to deliver disaster instructions such as tornado warnings, evacuation instructions, etc.
Somewhere, there is this big broadcast server in the sky, that sorts out who sees what commercials and when.
...And, someone, somewhere has the content! Where's the content? Who's got the content? Did you take the content?
HTH
Dick
I can't provide links, but I can point you in the right direction to begin a search.
Muzac was a early attempt to provide commercial-free radio (elevator music) before cassette recorders, transistor radios, etc. The way it was explained to me was this:
The Muzac company contracted with local Music-only radio stations to add special, inaudible signals before and after each commercial. Then they rented Muzac radio receivers to business to supply background music. These were special radios tuned to the contracted frequency (channel). These receivers would detect the inaudible signals, and lower the volume before a commercial and then raise it again after the commercial.
In essence, the circuitry in the special radio would use the signals to squelch the commercials-- so it was called a squelch circuit, .
A couple of things:
-- the term "squelch circuit" was loosley applied to this and other purposes, such as eliminating background noise..
-- the time the commercials were playing (with the volume off) was simulated "dead air" time when nothing was heard
-- the inaudible signals were not entirely inaudible... you could recognize a certain length pause, a certain-length tone, and a certain-length pause.
Enterprising radio techies (my Dad was one) could design their own squelch circuit and play commercial-free radio at no cost except their own inventiveness.
In early TV broadcasts, the networks broadcast through local affiliates. Most of the commercials were broadcast from "network central". However, a system was in place (similar to the squelch circuit) to notify the affiliate to electronically switch "local ads".
Here again, the TV techies could detect the signals and eliminate the "local commercials". Some went even further, and would anticipate many "normal" 30-second and 6o-second commercial breaks at fixed times (the top and bottom of the hour). Some of these are required bt the FCC-- to identify the station "over the air" every hour (or so).
The broadcasters caught on to what the Techies were doing to bypass commercials and started a cat and mouse game of moving the commercials around (similar to the cat and mouse game that Apple plays with JailBreakers).
The cable companies added another level, replacing the affiliate with the local cable rebroadcaster.
There is [at least] one other way that the broadcast (cable or over-the-air) signals can be switched, That is the Federal and Local EWS (early Warning System) where the government involved interrupts broadcasts to deliver disaster instructions such as tornado warnings, evacuation instructions, etc.
Somewhere, there is this big broadcast server in the sky, that sorts out who sees what commercials and when.
...And, someone, somewhere has the content! Where's the content? Who's got the content? Did you take the content?
HTH
Dick
Thanks so much for all the info ... analog and all its limitations is so hard to imagine now isn't it!
So I think I see this now. Our shows which had several two minute black sections left in for ads on the tapes were probably pre marked with a count down by a techy at the Network when they first received the tapes. This would trigger the automated drop in of four thirty second ads at the affiliate or cable station rebroadcasting. The light bulb comes on...
Seriously a squelch circuit on the audio during ads would be pretty nice! Even now ... I hate the fact ads are twice as loud as the shows a nasty habit I am also hearing with web ads now too. Macs and ATV should come with automatic audio leveling to prevent this (reading this SJ?)
Thanks so much for all the info ... analog and all its limitations is so hard to imagine now isn't it!
So I think I see this now. Our shows which had several two minute black sections left in for ads on the tapes were probably pre marked with a count down by a techy at the Network when they first received the tapes. This would trigger the automated drop in of four thirty second ads at the affiliate or cable station rebroadcasting. The light bulb comes on...
Seriously a squelch circuit on the audio during ads would be pretty nice! Even now ... I hate the fact ads are twice as loud as the shows a nasty habit I am also hearing with web ads now too. Macs and ATV should come with automatic audio leveling to prevent this (reading this SJ?)
Ha!
There was a TV set, a few decades back, that did this! I think it was a Magnavoz, Zenith or Motorola (when they still made TVs). The trouble is, you had to buy a new TV to get the feature (a major purchase at that time)
I did some googling and found this: under TV automatic volume control:
Loud annoying TV commercials
by Michael D. Grissom on Wed Mar 26, 2003 9:04 pm
After thousands of complaints to the FCC about this problem, a battle was fought and the end results were that TV commercials could no longer be INCREASED in volume. Unfortunately, the ruling did NOT say that the TV show (program) could not be REDUCED in volume so, the problem continues. Also, they have added audio compression to TV commercials to make them SOUND louder without increasing the volume so much. This is info obtained from the FCC web site.
I have patented such a device and it became a Senior Engineering project at NCSU this semester. It is working almost perfectly and the preproduction proto will be complete in May. If and when it goes into production, I'll send you one for free -- just for fun.
If you must have one NOW you can find three types available on the net (keywords: "ZAPPER" & "TV commercials") and several more types built into VCR's and cable boxes like TIVO. Unfortunately, the built in ones require that you record everything, then rewind, then send it all the way through the tape again so that it can "mark" (not erase) all the commercials and rewind again before you can watch commercial free. When a commercial is encountered, your screen will go black for about 15 to 30 seconds while it Fast Forwards through all the commercials. BTW, I have Smart Sound and its effects are barely detectable which is why the search for a better solution is still viable.
Hope this brightens your day a tad. You had a great idea that our marketing research shows 35 million US residence would buy today for under $35.
http://www.creativitypool.com/viewtopic.php?t=535
But your idea, let's call it a "Billy May" filter is excellent-- something in between the cable and the TV that moderates volume.! If people would pay $35 for a "Billy MAy" filter, would they pay $100 for one that included AppleTV?
As a side note, iPhone OS 4.0 has added a ton of sophisticated math APIs, especially for DSP (Digital Signal Processing). So, an AppleTV (or even a headless iPod) running iPhone OS...
.
I am not doubting you for a second but can you send me links on such a device (even historical info) I would love to read about them. I have heard of them before but never seen one. My company used to make TV shows and send them off to ESPN, ESPN2 all finished but I never came across any such system and we certainly never added any such signal to the shows we made. I assume the station sent it out in parallel somehow as all shows are redistributed and obviously the Networks couldn't encode this. But which stations, all of them? Were they all using the same system nationally? I look forward to being educated on something I always wanted to get to the bottom of. What fascinates me is why this was never an option in Tivo et al, wow that would have been useful! You used it with what other equipment and in what way? Was this to pause a recording device ... if so how? Sorry so many questions but I am really interested to learn more.
My old man was in the TV business from the early days, before solid state TV's came along and wiped out the TV repair guys. So he and his coworkers knew all the secrets.
Guess one can find out a lot with a degree in electronics, a oscilloscope and some hardware hacking.
Sadly I was just a user and a abuser, so I can't help you.
http://www.consumerismcommentary.com...sed-the-house/