The CALM Act goes into effect at midnight

Ernest Worthing

Ernest Worthing

Finally!

I'd been waiting for this to happen one day when they first start talking about it a couple of years ago. It's finally here. Rejoice!

Here's some info about it:

"NEW YORK (AP) — TV viewing could soon sound a little calmer. The CALM Act, which limits the volume of TV commercials, goes into effect on Thursday.CALM stands for Commercial Advertisement Loudness Mitigation. The act is designed to prevent TV commercials from blaring at louder volumes than the program content they accompany. The rules govern broadcasters as well as cable and satellite operators.The rules are meant to protect viewers from excessively loud commercials.The Federal Communications Commission adopted the rules a year ago, but gave the industry a one-year grace period to adopt them.Suspected violations can be reported by the public to the FCC on its website.___Online: www.fcc.gov"



Don't forget to report violations :)




Source: http://inagist.com/all/279000358024523776/
 
government intrusion on a free market system... if the ads are loud.. turn the channel... geeze its not like were slaves to the tube..oh wait.. I guess we are.. nevermind
 
Hehe, wheaty you would say that. :)

The ban of sales of crack cocaine is a government intrusion on the free market. So is the ban on prostitution.

You know those handy ingredient lists you can read on the labels of food products? Government intrusion on a free market system! Why can't we advertise cigarettes to children? Government intrusion!

Government intrusion isn't always a bad thing. Those commercials are too damn loud. They be messin with my nap-time, sheeeeeeiiiiiiit! :D
 
I actually find loud adds that are louder than the program to be quite irritating after a while of having to constantly adjust volumes. I like this idea.
 
MileCreations said:
While this will not affect Australia, I hope they see it and act, so that this problem is fixed for us also
Click to expand...

Interestingly, I haven't really noticed it since switching to pay tv (Foxtel), perhaps they're using central compressors, or have different standards.

I guess it also depends if they're talking about actual loudness, or perceived loudness - a TVC with heavy compression that has all it's levels sit just under regulated standard is going to sound louder than a quiet program with transients sitting at a similar level, even though technically it would be accepted.
 
jax_rox said:
Interestingly, I haven't really noticed it since switching to pay tv (Foxtel), perhaps they're using central compressors, or have different standards.

I guess it also depends if they're talking about actual loudness, or perceived loudness - a TVC with heavy compression that has all it's levels sit just under regulated standard is going to sound louder than a quiet program with transients sitting at a similar level, even though technically it would be accepted.
Click to expand...

I still only have free tv, but thinking about it there are only a few stand out ads that are always 'loud'. Harvey Norman is the first to come to mind
 
A few points to consider:

1. The CALM act doesn't just affect the "loudness" of commercials but of all broadcast programming. This is obvious if you think about it, to stop commercials being a different loudness to the programs, both the commercials and the programs have to be the same loudness.

2. The tolerances of the specifications (laid out in ATSC A85) to comply with the CALM act are very tight. You are not going to be able to guess and there is no such thing as "in the ball park" or "close enough", it's either within spec or it's rejected, no exceptions, ever!!

3. Although the CALM act only applies to the USA, most other developed countries are also applying the ATSC A85 standard or the European equivalent (EBU R128). I don't know when it goes into effect or if it has already done so but I remember some months ago hearing a discussion on the new specs for Australian broadcast. Canada has already adopted the ATSC A85 specs.

G
 
So who pays the fine?

The spot producer
The spot purchaser
The company who accepts the spot for trans coding
The company who uploads the spot to the sat
The company who download the sat feed and sticks that on the cable
The cable provider
The cable box provider
The tv manufacture

any and all of theses systems could affect the loudness of a commercial vs not commercial programming..

Just for fun, consider this example: the cable company could cut a deal with the advertisers (the people who actually PAY for programming we all love) to modify the set top box to bump the volume back up during commercials.. who would be fined for that? Broadcast was within standard..

See regulation only ever benefits the big guy!

little broadcasters will not be able to meet this new government regulation and go out of biz...

The largest growing job market.. government compliance engineering

Freaking commit conspiracy I tell ya.. (warming up for my next CHRIST (yes I said CHRIST) mass video! Take your happy holidays and bake it a fruit cake! lol
 
wheatgrinder said:
So who pays the fine?
Click to expand...

No, you've misunderstood what the CALM act does.

When any programming (commercials or other content) is supplied to a TV broadcaster it first has to pass quality control (QC). This QC is either carried out by a QC department run by the TV station or goes to a third party QC or compliance company. If the submitted programming fails to meet the QC specs, it is rejected, IE., sent back to the producer and not broadcast until it does meet delivery specs. This basic procedure has not changed, all the major TV stations have been doing this for many years already, although each broadcaster had it's own individual specifications. Some of the tiny regional broadcasters did not have any specifications or QC though.

So to answer your question, it's the TV channel who will be fined or the cable company if they change the audio levels supplied to them by the TV channel. Standard QC practises will mean that the TV channel will never broadcast anything out of spec, just as they wouldn't before.

What's changed with the CALM act is the method of measurement for QC and that these new measurements must be implemented the same by all broadcasters. The previous method of measurement was based on audio levels, whereas the new method is based on perceived loudness. There were ways around the old system, you could have a TV program and a commercial which had the same levels but the commercial could sound much louder than the other programming. These old tricks do not work with the new ATSC A85 and EBU R128 specifications, so not only should the commercials sound the same volume as the TV programs but changing to a different channel should also maintain the same volume.

The actual loudness of the programs you listen to is still up to you, the CALM act just makes sure the perceived loudness is the same relative to all other programming (across all other channels) but the actual level you listen to in your home is still dependant on your TV/sound system and where you set the volume control. So, whatever volume you chose should be the same (relatively) when you change channel or when the commercials are on.

G
 
Last edited:
AudioPostExpert said:
What's changed with the CALM act is the method of measurement for QC and that these new measurements must be implemented the same by all broadcasters. The previous method of measurement was based on audio levels, whereas the new method is based on perceived loudness. There were ways around the old system, you could have a TV program and a commercial which had the same levels but the commercial could sound much louder than the other programming. These old tricks do not work with the new ATSC A85 and EBU R128 specifications, so not only should the commercials sound the same volume as the TV programs but changing to a different channel should also maintain the same volume.
Click to expand...

So it is perceived loudness? Interesting..
 
jax_rox said:
So it is perceived loudness? Interesting..
Click to expand...

I won't go into the details because it's quite technical but in a nutshell, programs are measured for an average "loudness" level as well as peak level. This average loudness measurement uses some standard RMS averaging techniques along with filters which mimic the response to frequency of the human ear. The result is that the measurement quite accurately equates to perceived loudness. This new measurement unit for the ATSC A85 is the LKFS unit and for the EBU R128 it is the LUFS, peak limits are now measured in dBTP rather than the dBFS scale used in NLEs and DAWs. The result should be an increased dynamic range for broadcast programs but the same long term average between programming and channels.

G
 
Most broadcasters, and their advertisers, have been complying with the CALM act for about a year now. I noticed the difference about six months after it was passed. What I'm really liking is the pay channels now have to comply with CALM. They were the worst offenders in the last several months, probably because most everyone else had already been complying and they stuck out in comparison.
 
AudioPostExpert said:
No, you've misunderstood what the CALM act does.

When any programming (commercials or other content) is supplied to a TV broadcaster it first has to pass quality control (QC). This QC is either carried out by a QC department run by the TV station or goes to a third party QC or compliance company. If the submitted programming fails to meet the QC specs, it is rejected, IE., sent back to the producer and not broadcast until it does meet delivery specs. This basic procedure has not changed, all the major TV stations have been doing this for many years already, although each broadcaster had it's own individual specifications. Some of the tiny regional broadcasters did not have any specifications or QC though.

So to answer your question, it's the TV channel who will be fined or the cable company if they change the audio levels supplied to them by the TV channel. Standard QC practises will mean that the TV channel will never broadcast anything out of spec, just as they wouldn't before.

What's changed with the CALM act is the method of measurement for QC and that these new measurements must be implemented the same by all broadcasters. The previous method of measurement was based on audio levels, whereas the new method is based on perceived loudness. There were ways around the old system, you could have a TV program and a commercial which had the same levels but the commercial could sound much louder than the other programming. These old tricks do not work with the new ATSC A85 and EBU R128 specifications, so not only should the commercials sound the same volume as the TV programs but changing to a different channel should also maintain the same volume.

The actual loudness of the programs you listen to is still up to you, the CALM act just makes sure the perceived loudness is the same relative to all other programming (across all other channels) but the actual level you listen to in your home is still dependant on your TV/sound system and where you set the volume control. So, whatever volume you chose should be the same (relatively) when you change channel or when the commercials are on.

G
Click to expand...

So what is the enforcement agency? Are there COMPLIANCE OFFICERS that make sure each station spends money on either developing a QC department or spend money on out sourcing it? What if they dont have the money.. oh well shut down.. You didn't say WHO PAYS when there is a violation? Or how a violation is detected? How in the heck are you going to PROVE that someone aired material that FAILED to pass this requirement? Please don't tell me that only spots that are pre-approved by a government agency (or corp contracted to the gov) will be allowed to air? That sounds like an incredibly corruptible setup... consider political ramifications of the government in power having pre-approval rights to what the opposition can air?

Spots are not always give to tv stations, for national advertising air time is sold, the spots are inserted at the head end (no tv station involved other than selling the time) so how is it their fault if the company providing the spot is out of compliance..

again, follow the money.. there are obviously people that want the CALM act because like I said, regulation benefits large biz as they have the overhead to implement it, where as the little guy goes out of biz. This is GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX activity at its finest..

https://www.federalregister.gov/art...al-advertisement-loudness-mitigation-calm-act


Oh, look, just what I thought.. read the COMPLIANCE and ENFORCEMENT section.. what a freaking nightmare of bloated nothingness.. Anyone looking for a new carer.. CALM ACT compliance specialist.

The big boys already do it, extremereach, who I have worked with in the past is awesome.. have an incredibly fantastic automation system.. which is EXPENSIVE to use.. guess the gubmentcorporatecomplex wins again..
 
oh this is good..
the station can have "safe harbor" from the rules if they agree to only use "certified" material.. .

34. A station or MVPD will be eligible for the safe harbor with regard to the embedded commercials in particular programming if the supplier of the programming has provided a certification that its programming is compliant with the RP, and the station or MVPD has no reason to believe the certification is false.

that's just wonderful.. how do independent minded small biz people get suckered like this Ill never understand.. tisk tisk...
 
wheatgrinder said:
So what is the enforcement agency? Are there COMPLIANCE OFFICERS that make sure each station spends money on either developing a QC department or spend money on out sourcing it?
Click to expand...

No, you are still missing the point. Stations do not need to set up QC departments, they've already had QC departments and strict audio specs for a couple of decades or so! The CALM act was brought into force because of the huge number of consumer complaints regarding loudness. In fact, consumer complaints about varying loudness out numbered all the other consumer technical complaints put together!

As I understand it, the enforcement agency is effectively the public. If complaints are made about the loudness of a program, commercial or station, it will be investigated and the station fined for each breach of the ATSC specs.

wheatgrinder said:
What if they dont have the money.. oh well shut down..
Click to expand...

Again, you are missing the point. There have been rules and guidelines in place for decades and to stay within those rules broadcasters had to install complex and expensive limiting and signal management equipment. Now the broadcasters/stations do not need that equipment because everything should be compliant with the ATSC A85 specs. In other words, if the station only allows ATSC A85 spec audio to be broadcast, they would have no need of the $26k Dolby DP600 unit you mentioned!

wheatgrinder said:
You didn't say WHO PAYS when there is a violation?
Click to expand...

The system is such that there should be no violations. In effect the person who pays would be the Producer of the program content because the program will fail QC and be rejected by the broadcaster and the Producer will have to have the audio re-done. When a producer is contracted, it will be in their contract that they must comply with delivery specs, failure to do so would constitute a breach of contract. If the station does somehow broadcast out of spec audio, it would be the broadcaster who pays the fine.

wheatgrinder said:
...again, follow the money.. there are obviously people that want the CALM act because like I said, regulation benefits large biz as they have the overhead to implement it, where as the little guy goes out of biz. This is GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX activity at its finest..
Click to expand...

As I understand it you are wrong! It's not a case of "follow the money" but more a case of "follow the voters"! I have no idea how many complaints there were but I should imagine it was at least in the hundreds of thousands if not millions over the years. The overheads for the vast majority of broadcasters of the CALM act are negligible because it's just a case of adjusting the existing specs NOT of creating whole new departments. On balance, when fully implemented, the ATSC A85 specs could well costing less to implement than the older specs!

It should also be mentioned that the ATSC A85 specs were designed for the digital age, whereas most of the broadcaster's audio specs were still based on analogue broadcast. The ATSC A85 specs therefore allow for a wider dynamic range and other audio quality benefits compared to the older specs.

G
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top