# C.A.L.M (Commercial Advertisement Loudness Mitigation)



## Blurayfan (Nov 16, 2005)

Congress has passed a law to tell commercial producers enough with the loud commercials.

H.R.6209 - Commercial Advertisement Loudness Mitigation Act
H.R.1084 - Referred to Senate committee. Status: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
S.2847 - (Enrolled Bill [Final as Passed Both House and Senate] - ENR)

Latest Major Action: Became Public Law No: 111-311

FCC acts to quiet blaring TV commercials


----------



## dgsiiinc (Jan 25, 2007)

I love how they tacked on "migration" at the end of the name so the bill could have a cool acronym.

Edit: never mind my comment, I see that it's actually "mitigation," which makes a lot more sense. They misread the title of the bill on Marketplace yesterday.


----------



## cjever19 (Jun 2, 2007)

This is great news, if it passes!


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

There's an earlier thread on this int he Watercooler forum, but I'm not sure if everyone has access to it ...

House votes to turn down volume of noisy TV ads


----------



## Blurayfan (Nov 16, 2005)

Drew2k said:


> There's an earlier thread on this int he Watercooler forum, but I'm not sure if everyone has access to it ...
> 
> House votes to turn down volume of noisy TV ads


Only DBSTalk Club Members can view threads in the watercooler.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

This may actually help advertisers as viewers will be less likely to mute the commercials.

From a technical point of view, I think it is vague and unenforceable.


----------



## je4755 (Dec 11, 2006)

The local company that built and upgrades my home entertainment system had recommended a new mid-range Denon receiver in substantial measure because its “Audyssey Dynamic Volume” feature would eliminate jumps between commercials and regular programming (although there also is considerable disparity between our local SD channels – no HD LIL yet – and the rest of DirecTV’s offerings). If this legislation passes and actually is implemented, I could avoid a substantial expenditure. Here’s hoping!


----------



## zudy (Jul 23, 2009)

That would be great if it passes.


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

DVDKingdom said:


> Congress is in the process of creating a law to tell commercial producers enough with the loud commercials.
> 
> H.R.6209 - Commercial Advertisement Loudness Mitigation Act
> CALM Act Passed the House of Representatives December 15, 2009
> ...


Your second link isn't working. Did it work previously?

I'm not sure this should have gone to the Congress, but there ya go. I would love to read this to see what it says. Does anyone have a good link?


----------



## Starchy77 (Jul 18, 2008)

You would expect congress to have more important things to do than worry about the volume of commercials! Things like, I dont know, maybe keeping our soldiers at war safe, reducing the deficit (and the debt), and creating jobs in the private sector. But hey, if they can regulate drug use in professional sports and the temperatures of our homes, why not television volumes too I guess.... :bang


----------



## Blurayfan (Nov 16, 2005)

smiddy said:


> Your second link isn't working. Did it work previously?
> 
> I'm not sure this should have gone to the Congress, but there ya go. I would love to read this to see what it says. Does anyone have a good link?


The links were updated since the bill was referred to the senate.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.1084:


----------



## islesfan (Oct 18, 2006)

Starchy77 said:


> You would expect congress to have more important things to do than worry about the volume of commercials! Things like, I dont know, maybe keeping our soldiers at war safe, reducing the deficit (and the debt), and creating jobs in the private sector. But hey, if they can regulate drug use in professional sports and the temperatures of our homes, why not television volumes too I guess.... :bang


+1

I just skip the commercials anyway.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

[strike]Let's continue discussion here:

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=169789[/strike]

DVDKingdom has convinced me of the merits of keeping this thread open.


----------



## Blurayfan (Nov 16, 2005)

A PDF of the version passed by the house has been made available, so I attached it to the original post.


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

Thanks for posting it!


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I'm moving this to legislative issues.


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

If I read the bill correctly it could be 3 years before we will see any results.


----------



## Blurayfan (Nov 16, 2005)

No Updates to the status but still monitoring the bill for movement.


----------



## itzme (Jan 17, 2008)

Thanks for following and posting on this bill. I was just going to post and ask about this, when I did a search and found this thread.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

DVDKingdom said:


> Congress is in the process of creating a law to tell commercial producers enough with the loud commercials.
> 
> H.R.6209 - Commercial Advertisement Loudness Mitigation Act
> H.R.1084 - Latest Major Action: 12/16/2009 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
> ...


Not to mention Dish ads, Comcast ads, and others.

This is a long-overdue loophole in broadcast standards that needs to be filled.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

> Reporting from Washington -
> 
> Taking aim at a national annoyance, Congress has sent President Obama legislation that lowers the volume on loud TV ads.
> "Consumers have been asking for a solution to this problem for decades, and today they finally have it,'' said Rep. Anna G. Eshoo (D-Menlo Park), chief sponsor of the Commercial Advertisement Loudness Mitigation, or CALM, Act.


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-loud-commercials-20101204,0,7086074.story

I don't see it really helping anything.


----------



## trh (Nov 3, 2007)

Shades228 said:


> I don't see it really helping anything.


Probably need to give it a chance first. The bill hasn't been passed yet and advertisers have 1 year to implement it.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

trh said:


> Probably need to give it a chance first. The bill hasn't been passed yet and advertisers have 1 year to implement it.


It doesn't change the issue of commercial volume though. It just says they can't be higher than what TV shows are allowed to be at. TV shows use different sound ranges. Commercials go full blast so again I really don't see it doing anything. Reducing volume 1-5 db will not really do much.


----------



## trh (Nov 3, 2007)

Lets hope the regulations the FCC has to develop as a result of this bill take that into account.


----------



## kenglish (Oct 2, 2004)

Trouble is, there's no way to take in to account how "loud" the program was preceding the commercial, or how "loud" it will be after the commercial, or how the the mood of the program relates to the commercial.
So, stations will likely just boost the levels of the program to max, matching the commercials. That takes away all the dynamic range of the program itself.

There are already methods in place to substantially regulate the "volume", using Dolby Digital, by matching levels of normal dialogue. Trouble is, everybody's tastes are different, and "if you don't want to hear the commercial, then it's always TOO LOUD".


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

How about this? When they go to commercial, your set auto-mutes and those who want to hear would have to hit the mute button to un-mute and hear the ads.


----------



## shedberg (Jan 20, 2007)

I have sent emails to the program manager at local stations with loud commercials and they have always responded to my emails and the problem usually goes away the day after my email.


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

By the time congress makes this happen we'll all be tone deaf.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

MysteryMan said:


> By the time congress makes this happen we'll all be tone deaf.


!rolling

What? Huh? Did you say something? :lol:

The fact that the *industry* would require an act of Congress to address this long-time major annoyance says plenty about just how responsive they are to the American public.

Hallelujah.


----------



## kenglish (Oct 2, 2004)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> !rolling
> 
> What? Huh? Did you say something? :lol:
> 
> ...


The "industry" has been working on an answer to this for years. The answer has always been, "crank the dynamic range out of the program, so it matches the commercial". Congress always thinks their answer is "simple". But, it just means that the programs will sound bad. 
There's still no way to legislate taste, or loudness.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

kenglish said:


> The "industry" has been working on an answer to this for years. The answer has always been, "crank the dynamic range out of the program, so it matches the commercial". Congress always thinks their answer is "simple". But, it just means that the programs will sound bad.
> *There's still no way to legislate taste, or loudness*.


Hmmm....that's interesting. I guess having a DB sound range standard wouldn't work then.


----------



## kenglish (Oct 2, 2004)

Nope. It has to match the (perceived) sound level of the programming that precedes, and that follows, the announcement.
That's why no one has ever been able to come up with a real solution.
It's all too subjective. 

Dolby had the right idea, with Dialogue Normalization, but some people aren't even satisfied with that.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

kenglish said:


> Nope. It has to match the (perceived) sound level of the programming that precedes, and that follows, the announcement.
> That's why no one has ever been able to come up with a real solution.
> It's all too subjective.
> 
> Dolby had the right idea, with Dialogue Normalization, but some people aren't even satisfied with that.


Wondering why a simple signal can't be sent to a receiver, especially those with noise max limits built in already, to restrict the volume.

I'm still convinced that if the right limited range of DB for commercials was set universally, the problem could be controlled.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

I still can't figure out why TBS (for example) is at a different volume level than A&E (for example). Why can't Dish, Direct, Comcast, et al equalize the volume levels on all channels delivered to their subscribers. They receive them all, retransmit them, turn them on or off, insert their own ads, etc., so why can't they adjust the levels?


----------



## kenglish (Oct 2, 2004)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Wondering why a simple signal can't be sent to a receiver, especially those with noise max limits built in already, to restrict the volume.....


That's sort of what Dolby Digital does. The normal level of dialogue (an average voice...not shouting, not whispering) is set as a standard. Levels are held to a point that matches that....a standard voice always will come out at the same level, every time, on every channel.

The "magic" is, that standard level can be TRANSMITTED at different levels, to allow for headroom in the system, allowing for more headroom during, say, an explosion or whatever. The DD bitstream carries metadata that pulls the volume back to the correct level right in your receiver.
The second part of the "magic' is, the audio is sent with full dynamic range, but the producer can specify how to restrict the dynamics at your receiver, and the bitstream carries a control voltage to your receiver that pulls up the quiet sounds, and lowers the high volume sounds, all centered on the standard "normal voice level" dialogue. So, when you listen in "Midnight Mode" (or, whatever your receiver maker calls it), the dynamic range is reduced. And, if just listening to stereo or mono from a converter box, it can be restricted even more. The guy with the big HT system still hears full dynamic range, but you can set your own system for limited dynamics (still artistically-controlled by the producers), and it all comes from one transmitted digital audio stream.
They also tell your receiver how to downmix the 5.1 (or, whatever) to stereo or mono, under the direction of the audio producer.

Dolby also has methods that we use to measure "Equivalent Loudness", and that is what really needs to match. A quiet scene, going to a normal commercial, is always going to be jarring, and a commercial leading in to a loud scene is also going to stand out. Both sound "wrong", but are really being sent at the same "volume" level, as far as any measurements (besides "Loudness Equivalence") are concerned.


----------



## HIPAR (May 15, 2005)

You turn up the volume so you can hear soft dialog in the presence of background sounds and music and get blasted when the commercial comes on.

--- CHAS


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

My mother has pass. She was one that truly hated loud commercials. So I would say, they're a few decades LATE!


----------



## kenglish (Oct 2, 2004)

HIPAR said:


> You turn up the volume so you can hear soft dialog in the presence of background sounds and music and get blasted when the commercial comes on.
> --- CHAS


That ain't how it's supposed to be, for sure.
Using the Dolby Digital DialNorm correctly should limit it. If watching at a time when too much dynamic range would be a problem, use "Midnight Mode" (as some manufacturers call it), to limit the huge swings.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

Remains to be seen how well this will (or won't) work.

Now if we could just get a stop to the tampering with closing credits so we could read the cast and guest star names, the overlapping of program starts and ends and incessant bugs and promos that interfere with the programs themselves.


----------



## Blurayfan (Nov 16, 2005)

Status of bill changed. The 111th Congress (House and Senate) passed the bill, passed version PDF added to first post.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

DVDKingdom said:


> Status of bill changed. The 111th Congress (House and Senate) passed the bill, passed version PDF added to first post.


The president signed the bill last month ...
12/2/2010: Cleared for White House. 
12/3/2010: Presented to President. 
12/15/2010: Signed by President. 
12/15/2010: Became Public Law No: 111-311.​http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:SN02847:@@@X


----------



## Blurayfan (Nov 16, 2005)

James Long said:


> The president signed the bill last month ...
> 12/2/2010: Cleared for White House.
> 12/3/2010: Presented to President.
> 12/15/2010: Signed by President.
> 12/15/2010: Became Public Law No: 111-311.​http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:SN02847:@@@X


Thanks James for the extra details.
Updated OP.


----------



## HIPAR (May 15, 2005)

If you can show audio peaks on the commercials set more bits than does the program material, you can cite the media provider as not being in compliance with the law. This is straightforwardly measurable.

But, there are well known techniques that compress the peaks allowing the average power in the modulating signal envelope to increase. So it's possible to make the commercial audio sound louder even if the audio peaks don't set as many bits.

That's more the essence of perceived loudness.

The FCC handles the complex technical details of a simply worded law. So, somehow, they must determine exactly what loudness is and establish a technical standard for measuring it though its rule making process. 

--- CHAS


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

> Monday, June 06, 2011Last Update: 1:46 PM PT
> 
> FCC to Shush Commercials
> By TRAVIS SANFORD
> ...


http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/06/06/37131.htm

FCC Document: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-06-03/html/2011-13822.htm


----------



## Blurayfan (Nov 16, 2005)

FCC acts to quiet blaring TV commercials


----------

