In article ,
Brian Gaff wrote:
I've also noticed that on a friends tv, a Samsung, that hd sound is
generally quieter than sd on all the channels that are duplicated.
Mind you I'm not very surprised having listened to the dogs dinner on their
I player output as far as level is concerned.

Not really my question, Brian. It's why the two 'tuners' appear to give
different levels from HD, while adjusted for the same from SD.

The reason why the levels differ between SD and HD on a single tuner is
simple. The broadcasters don't care.

--
*Proofread carefully to see if you any words out or mispeld something *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Oh, I see, but surely if you are correct, then each tuner has a different
idea of the difference, or your example would b be the same on all tuners.
Some time ago, I read that in DAB it was possible to get the sound of all
stations equal, but very few radios impliment this. I wonder as this is
after all digital whether some very basic processing on the audio side might
make this problem go away. After all we are always being told that Sony or
Panasonic have video processing to get better looking bpictures, what about
better matched sound as well, or are they all assuming we are interested in
silence?
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Brian Gaff wrote:
I've also noticed that on a friends tv, a Samsung, that hd sound is
generally quieter than sd on all the channels that are duplicated.
Mind you I'm not very surprised having listened to the dogs dinner on
their
I player output as far as level is concerned.

Not really my question, Brian. It's why the two 'tuners' appear to give
different levels from HD, while adjusted for the same from SD.

The reason why the levels differ between SD and HD on a single tuner is
simple. The broadcasters don't care.

--
*Proofread carefully to see if you any words out or mispeld something *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article , Brian Gaff
wrote:
Oh, I see, but surely if you are correct, then each tuner has a
different idea of the difference, or your example would b be the same on
all tuners.

"Tuner" is probably too wide a term here. What probably matters is the way
the audio part of the stream is handled at a relatively late stage of the
process. e.g. where the mpeg/dolby/aac is converted to LPCM or mixed down
from surround, etc.


Some time ago, I read that in DAB it was possible to get the
sound of all stations equal, but very few radios impliment this. I
wonder as this is after all digital whether some very basic processing
on the audio side might make this problem go away.

I guess the problem at root is the same as Dave has found with TV. That the
broadcasts and receivers aren't all following exactly the same 'standards'.

To get levels to match across broadcasters they'd either have to do that at
source or use a common mode way of flagging what correction a receiver
needed to make. *And* have all the makers of recievers adopt it in exactly
the same way. Given the way the industry behaves I suspect being successful
at herding cats is more likely! :-/

After all we are
always being told that Sony or Panasonic have video processing to get
better looking bpictures, what about better matched sound as well, or
are they all assuming we are interested in silence? Brian

Then there's the question of what 'matched sound' would mean when you
include R1 and R3 with Karsk FM. *And* on items from small bedside radios
to large high-quality hifi/AV systems. Even ignoring the differences
between stereo and surround.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html