I have a SKY+ box and am new to the forum. I suspect my query is not
really a SKY issue, but maybe the experts here can advise anyway
please.

A major factor that spoils TV for me is that frequently I cannot hear
what actors are saying because the background sound track drowns them
out. Whether it's music or special effects, it seems many decibels
louder than the speech track. Why the heck do they do that? And is
there any way I can do anything about it please? (Apart from a measure
I sometimes resort to with DVDs - switching on the English subtitles!)

FWIW, my sound system is limited to the TV speakers, due to room and
furniture limitations.

-- 
Terry, East Grinstead, UK

On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 08:12:45 +0100, Terry Pinnell
 wrote:

>I have a SKY+ box and am new to the forum. I suspect my query is not
>really a SKY issue, but maybe the experts here can advise anyway
>please.
>
>A major factor that spoils TV for me is that frequently I cannot hear
>what actors are saying because the background sound track drowns them
>out. Whether it's music or special effects, it seems many decibels
>louder than the speech track. Why the heck do they do that? And is
>there any way I can do anything about it please? (Apart from a measure
>I sometimes resort to with DVDs - switching on the English subtitles!)
>
>FWIW, my sound system is limited to the TV speakers, due to room and
>furniture limitations.

I am not familiar with the SKY+ box, but it sounds like in either the
TV sound option settings menu or in the SKY+ box sound options menu
settings (if there is one), you have it set to "Surround Sound"
instead of "Stereo".

"Terry Pinnell"  wrote in message 
news:u71k5454h3g8pnsopcj8oo0an6gdb55b48@4ax.com...
>I have a SKY+ box and am new to the forum. I suspect my query is not
> really a SKY issue, but maybe the experts here can advise anyway
> please.
>
> A major factor that spoils TV for me is that frequently I cannot hear
> what actors are saying because the background sound track drowns them
> out. Whether it's music or special effects, it seems many decibels
> louder than the speech track. Why the heck do they do that? And is
> there any way I can do anything about it please? (Apart from a measure
> I sometimes resort to with DVDs - switching on the English subtitles!)
>
> FWIW, my sound system is limited to the TV speakers, due to room and
> furniture limitations.



you either have your sound settings badly set or bad hearing - as much as 
people complain about this, those with normal hearing don't suffer the 
problem.



-- 
Gareth.

that fly...... is your magic wand....

> as much as
> people complain about this, those with normal hearing don't suffer the
> problem.

There are many complaints from people with excellent hearing.
Adjusting bass and treble doesn't help.

"The dog from that film you saw"  
wrote in message news:6bveehF3d390mU1@mid.individual.net...
>
<snip>
>
> you either have your sound settings badly set or bad hearing - as 
> much as people complain about this, those with normal hearing don't 
> suffer the problem.
>

Define 'normal hearing'.....

In article <g3e1tn$mi0$1@registered.motzarella.org>,
	:Jerry: wrote:

> "The dog from that film you saw"  
> wrote in message news:6bveehF3d390mU1@mid.individual.net...
> <snip>
>> you either have your sound settings badly set or bad hearing - as 
>> much as people complain about this, those with normal hearing don't 
>> suffer the problem.

> Define 'normal hearing'..... 

At right angles to the head. Well, you did ask...

-- 
Paul Martin

"Paul Martin"  wrote in message 
news:slrng5l3di.qb9.pm@thinkpad.nowster.org.uk...
> In article <g3e1tn$mi0$1@registered.motzarella.org>,
> :Jerry: wrote:
>
>> "The dog from that film you saw" 
>> wrote in message news:6bveehF3d390mU1@mid.individual.net...
>> <snip>
>>> you either have your sound settings badly set or bad hearing - as
>>> much as people complain about this, those with normal hearing 
>>> don't
>>> suffer the problem.
>
>> Define 'normal hearing'.....
>
> At right angles to the head. Well, you did ask...
>

...your coat, sir, is over there! ===>>>

On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 16:33:28 GMT, ato_zee@hotmail.com wrote:

>Adjusting bass and treble doesn't help.

Neither does complaining to the broadcaster.

-- 
Alan White
Mozilla Firefox and Forte Agent.
Twenty-eight miles NW of Glasgow, overlooking Lochs Long and Goil in Argyll, Scotland.
Webcam and weather:- http://windycroft.gt-britain.co.uk/weather

"Terry Pinnell"  wrote in message 
news:u71k5454h3g8pnsopcj8oo0an6gdb55b48@4ax.com...
>I have a SKY+ box and am new to the forum. I suspect my query is not
> really a SKY issue, but maybe the experts here can advise anyway
> please.
>
> A major factor that spoils TV for me is that frequently I cannot hear
> what actors are saying because the background sound track drowns them
> out. Whether it's music or special effects, it seems many decibels
> louder than the speech track. Why the heck do they do that? And is
> there any way I can do anything about it please? (Apart from a measure
> I sometimes resort to with DVDs - switching on the English subtitles!)
>
> FWIW, my sound system is limited to the TV speakers, due to room and
> furniture limitations.
>
> -- 
> Terry, East Grinstead, UK
>

I agree.
Law & Order (Hallmark) is a good example.  Keeping the volume low enough 
that the frequent boom-boom doesn't wake my other half, it is then a 
struggle to hear the dialogue.

On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 20:57:12 +0100, "fox" <Someone@somewhere> wrote:

>
>"Terry Pinnell"  wrote in message 
>news:u71k5454h3g8pnsopcj8oo0an6gdb55b48@4ax.com...
>>I have a SKY+ box and am new to the forum. I suspect my query is not
>> really a SKY issue, but maybe the experts here can advise anyway
>> please.
>>
>> A major factor that spoils TV for me is that frequently I cannot hear
>> what actors are saying because the background sound track drowns them
>> out. Whether it's music or special effects, it seems many decibels
>> louder than the speech track. Why the heck do they do that? And is
>> there any way I can do anything about it please? (Apart from a measure
>> I sometimes resort to with DVDs - switching on the English subtitles!)
>>
>> FWIW, my sound system is limited to the TV speakers, due to room and
>> furniture limitations.
>>
>> -- 
>> Terry, East Grinstead, UK
>>
>
>I agree.
>Law & Order (Hallmark) is a good example.  Keeping the volume low enough 
>that the frequent boom-boom doesn't wake my other half, it is then a 
>struggle to hear the dialogue. 
>

The original poster has not come back to us (which is typical), but I
still think its a "Surround Sound" versus "Stereo" set-up problem.

"Anti-Spam"  wrote in message 
news:421r541qltamgk1jh6u44vklriqhrh6rpa@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 20:57:12 +0100, "fox" <Someone@somewhere> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Terry Pinnell"  wrote in message
>>news:u71k5454h3g8pnsopcj8oo0an6gdb55b48@4ax.com...
>>>I have a SKY+ box and am new to the forum. I suspect my query is not
>>> really a SKY issue, but maybe the experts here can advise anyway
>>> please.
>>>
>>> A major factor that spoils TV for me is that frequently I cannot hear
>>> what actors are saying because the background sound track drowns them
>>> out. Whether it's music or special effects, it seems many decibels
>>> louder than the speech track. Why the heck do they do that? And is
>>> there any way I can do anything about it please? (Apart from a measure
>>> I sometimes resort to with DVDs - switching on the English subtitles!)
>>>
>>> FWIW, my sound system is limited to the TV speakers, due to room and
>>> furniture limitations.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Terry, East Grinstead, UK
>>>
>>
>>I agree.
>>Law & Order (Hallmark) is a good example.  Keeping the volume low enough
>>that the frequent boom-boom doesn't wake my other half, it is then a
>>struggle to hear the dialogue.
>>
>
> The original poster has not come back to us (which is typical), but I
> still think its a "Surround Sound" versus "Stereo" set-up problem.
>
Sky+ Choices are: Audio - Output Stereo or Mono, Optical Output - DolbyD or 
normal.

We now have a Denon receiver and 5 speaker surround sound where we should be 
able lower the boom boom effect but its so damn complicated to operate. 
Sounds amazing but there are the odd progs like Law and Order that need 
adjusting and as the setup works brilliantly for most things, we leave it 
alone!

On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 12:14:03 +0100, "fox" <Someone@somewhere> wrote:

>
>"Anti-Spam"  wrote in message 
>news:421r541qltamgk1jh6u44vklriqhrh6rpa@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 20:57:12 +0100, "fox" <Someone@somewhere> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Terry Pinnell"  wrote in message
>>>news:u71k5454h3g8pnsopcj8oo0an6gdb55b48@4ax.com...
>>>>I have a SKY+ box and am new to the forum. I suspect my query is not
>>>> really a SKY issue, but maybe the experts here can advise anyway
>>>> please.
>>>>
>>>> A major factor that spoils TV for me is that frequently I cannot hear
>>>> what actors are saying because the background sound track drowns them
>>>> out. Whether it's music or special effects, it seems many decibels
>>>> louder than the speech track. Why the heck do they do that? And is
>>>> there any way I can do anything about it please? (Apart from a measure
>>>> I sometimes resort to with DVDs - switching on the English subtitles!)
>>>>
>>>> FWIW, my sound system is limited to the TV speakers, due to room and
>>>> furniture limitations.
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Terry, East Grinstead, UK
>>>>
>>>
>>>I agree.
>>>Law & Order (Hallmark) is a good example.  Keeping the volume low enough
>>>that the frequent boom-boom doesn't wake my other half, it is then a
>>>struggle to hear the dialogue.
>>>
>>
>> The original poster has not come back to us (which is typical), but I
>> still think its a "Surround Sound" versus "Stereo" set-up problem.
>>
>Sky+ Choices are: Audio - Output Stereo or Mono, Optical Output - DolbyD or 
>normal.
>
>We now have a Denon receiver and 5 speaker surround sound where we should be 
>able lower the boom boom effect but its so damn complicated to operate. 
>Sounds amazing but there are the odd progs like Law and Order that need 
>adjusting and as the setup works brilliantly for most things, we leave it 
>alone! 
>

I think the set-up problem (if I am right) might be with his TV as he
said his DVD was doing the same.

Anti-Spam  wrote:

>On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 20:57:12 +0100, "fox" <Someone@somewhere> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Terry Pinnell"  wrote in message 
>>news:u71k5454h3g8pnsopcj8oo0an6gdb55b48@4ax.com...
>>>I have a SKY+ box and am new to the forum. I suspect my query is not
>>> really a SKY issue, but maybe the experts here can advise anyway
>>> please.
>>>
>>> A major factor that spoils TV for me is that frequently I cannot hear
>>> what actors are saying because the background sound track drowns them
>>> out. Whether it's music or special effects, it seems many decibels
>>> louder than the speech track. Why the heck do they do that? And is
>>> there any way I can do anything about it please? (Apart from a measure
>>> I sometimes resort to with DVDs - switching on the English subtitles!)
>>>
>>> FWIW, my sound system is limited to the TV speakers, due to room and
>>> furniture limitations.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Terry, East Grinstead, UK
>>>
>>
>>I agree.
>>Law & Order (Hallmark) is a good example.  Keeping the volume low enough 
>>that the frequent boom-boom doesn't wake my other half, it is then a 
>>struggle to hear the dialogue. 
>>
>
>The original poster has not come back to us (which is typical), but I
>still think its a "Surround Sound" versus "Stereo" set-up problem.

First, apologies for the delay in following-up. BTW, that's certainly
not 'typical' in my case, but I'll assume you meant it generically ;-)

As fox pointed out, the SKY+ box does not offer Surround sound. I have
its sound mode correctly set to Stereo. I have increased the treble a
little but that makes no discernible difference.

Nor do any of the options on the TV make any difference. It's a
Panasonic TX-32LXD52 32" LCD and under its Sound menu there are a
couple of options that looked promising but proved to be irrelevant:

'Mode: Sound quality can be improved when watching music scene or
drama by selecting the appropriate MUSIC or SPEECH mode.' I have it
set to the latter.

'Ambience: Ambience provides a dynamic enhancer to simulate improved
spatial effects.' Whether ON or OFF, the relative volumes of the
speech versus 'music' track remain unchanged.

If this issue was limited to a minority of films/dramas then it would
be tolerable. But it seems true of the *majority*. I can't understand
why there's not been more adverse reaction about it. Do the producers
not trial their creations with test audiences in realistic conditions?
If books were published with 1 in 3 sentences illegible, would we be
as tolerant?

-- 
Terry, East Grinstead, UK

"Terry Pinnell"  wrote in message 
news:k3r364pm523r79btlf1a1edmm811m4c810@4ax.com...
> Anti-Spam  wrote:
> First, apologies for the delay in following-up. BTW, that's certainly
> not 'typical' in my case, but I'll assume you meant it generically ;-)
>
> As fox pointed out, the SKY+ box does not offer Surround sound. I have
> its sound mode correctly set to Stereo. I have increased the treble a
> little but that makes no discernible difference.
>
> Nor do any of the options on the TV make any difference. It's a
> Panasonic TX-32LXD52 32" LCD and under its Sound menu there are a
> couple of options that looked promising but proved to be irrelevant:
>
> 'Mode: Sound quality can be improved when watching music scene or
> drama by selecting the appropriate MUSIC or SPEECH mode.' I have it
> set to the latter.
>
> 'Ambience: Ambience provides a dynamic enhancer to simulate improved
> spatial effects.' Whether ON or OFF, the relative volumes of the
> speech versus 'music' track remain unchanged.
>
> If this issue was limited to a minority of films/dramas then it would
> be tolerable. But it seems true of the *majority*. I can't understand
> why there's not been more adverse reaction about it. Do the producers
> not trial their creations with test audiences in realistic conditions?
> If books were published with 1 in 3 sentences illegible, would we be
> as tolerant?
>
> -- 
> Terry, East Grinstead, UK

I think the point is most of us don't suffer this to anything like the 
extent you do.
Therefore I would suspect your hearing  or your TV is the problem.

But a way forward is to get an av amp with  5.1 and prologic then the 
centre speaker  you can adjust the speech channel to the way that best suits 
you..

Just a thought

Gary

"Gary"  wrote in message 
news:vqq8k.52494$GF6.19698@newsfe27.ams2...
>
<snip>
>
> I think the point is most of us don't suffer this to anything like 
> the extent you do.
> Therefore I would suspect your hearing  or your TV is the problem.

No, the solution is for the TV production companies to stop making 
programmes only for those with the hearing equivalent of 20/20 vision, 
*most* people in this country have some form of hearing loss or 
problem, bedding and background music and effects are the icing and 
not the sponge, only the most glutinous of person would expect a the 
whole cake to be nothing but icing but that is what many of the 
current programme makers are supplying and the broadcasters 
accepting - it's bad enough having such crap production standards on 
TV programmes, were the picture (or indeed teletext) can often fill in 
munged dialogue, but we are now even hearing such standards being used 
in radio. Well one can dream of getting the correct solution...

>
> But a way forward is to get an av amp with  5.1 and prologic then 
> the centre speaker  you can adjust the speech channel to the way 
> that best suits you..
>

That assumes that the programme has been mixed correctly, that a 5.1 
feed is available and that one has the space for such - extra - 
equipment, many don't, indeed if you bother to read the OPs original 
message you will notice that he states that he doesn't have such a set 
up due to "room and furniture limitations".

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gary" 
To: "Jerry" <INVALID@INVALID.INVALID>
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 3:33 PM
Subject: Re: Sound volume: speech versus background


>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Jerry" <INVALID@INVALID.INVALID>
> Newsgroups: uk.tech.tv.sky
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 1:54 PM
> Subject: Re: Sound volume: speech versus background
>
>
>>
>> "Gary"  wrote in message 
>> news:vqq8k.52494$GF6.19698@newsfe27.ams2...
>>>
>> <snip>
>>>
>>> I think the point is most of us don't suffer this to anything like the 
>>> extent you do.
>>> Therefore I would suspect your hearing  or your TV is the problem.
>>
>> No, the solution is for the TV production companies to stop making 
>> programmes only for those with the hearing equivalent of 20/20 vision, 
>> *most* people in this country have some form of hearing loss or problem, 
>> bedding and background music and effects are the icing and not the 
>> sponge, only the most glutinous of person would expect a the whole cake 
>> to be nothing but icing but that is what many of the current programme 
>> makers are supplying and the broadcasters accepting - it's bad enough 
>> having such crap production standards on TV programmes, were the picture 
>> (or indeed teletext) can often fill in munged dialogue, but we are now 
>> even hearing such standards being used in radio. Well one can dream of 
>> getting the correct solution...
>>
>>>
>>> But a way forward is to get an av amp with  5.1 and prologic then the 
>>> centre speaker  you can adjust the speech channel to the way that best 
>>> suits you..
>>>
>>
>> That assumes that the programme has been mixed correctly, that a 5.1 feed 
>> is available and that one has the space for such - extra - equipment, 
>> many don't, indeed if you bother to read the OPs original message you 
>> will notice that he states that he doesn't have such a set up due to 
>> "room and furniture limitations".
>>
>
 The size of a room is not the issue with a surround sound system. It is the
 desire to have one that is important.

 I am not a person with 20/20 sound but I would not expect to inflect my
 handicap on to the masses that can have the experience of the sound as
 transmitted.

 The Program has only to have sound for the setup to produce a centre 
speaker
 channel ( on mine any way)
 Mono will come out of the centre speaker in 3 stereo mode. and stereo in 3
 stereo mode will produce "Most" of the dialogue from the middle.

 Pro logic mode has to be mixed. but then it is  and it will produce middle
 from normal stereo.
 5.1 will come out as mixed or it can be mixed by the amp for prologic or 3
 stereo or normal stereo

 In a nutshell  any source can have a middle speaker feed and that would be
 mostly dialogue.

 if space for the speakers is a problem. don't use the other speakers just
 get the amp and have 1 speaker connected to the middle.

 Hay lets not have colour effects so as to stop colour blind people missing
 the good bits.
 Or better still lets have Black and white TV with sub titles only. No sound
 so we all get the benefit equally.
 Radio has good pictures in colour and high def lets all have only radio.
 Sorry that wont work, back to the sound not being equal.  and you cant read
 the subs on radio. ( DAB you can).

 Sorry  I am being flippant but Your asursion that all of us are suffering 
to
 the same extent is not correct. It is unfair to have a go at people who
 don't suffer the same problems or prescribe that the minority should have
 the say in the sound mix.for the majority who don't have a problem.

 Think of an av amp as a really good hearing aid.

 Gary

"Gary"  wrote in message 
news:5Ks8k.127756$Ek2.122850@newsfe17.ams2...
>
<snip>
> Sorry  I am being flippant


Actually I think you are not being flippant, although you are being 
very ignorant, very arrogant and that you are to young to remember 
when content was king - no TV programme should require a 5.1 audio 
system just be able to hear the dialogue, if it does it just proves 
that the original mixing was done by someone who don't understand his 
or her craft, that the cake sponge is more important than the icing, 
but then perhaps you are one of those people who would be happy to buy 
a cake and find it all sugar and water with no body...

"Jerry" <INVALID@INVALID.INVALID> wrote in message 
news:g3toat$i4j$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>
> "Gary"  wrote in message 
> news:5Ks8k.127756$Ek2.122850@newsfe17.ams2...
>>
> <snip>
>> Sorry  I am being flippant
>
>
> Actually I think you are not being flippant, although you are being very 
> ignorant, very arrogant and that you are to young to remember when content 
> was king - no TV programme should require a 5.1 audio system just be able 
> to hear the dialogue, if it does it just proves that the original mixing 
> was done by someone who don't understand his or her craft, that the cake 
> sponge is more important than the icing, but then perhaps you are one of 
> those people who would be happy to buy a cake and find it all sugar and 
> water with no body...

I suffer from this to the extent of bugging the hell out of whoever happens 
to be in the room with "What did he say ?"
However, if I turn the volume up I can hear speech fine but the FX are a bit 
loud.

My hearing isn't that great (self inflicted by playing in too many loud 
bands - Always wear earplugs ), but I think  a lot of 5.1, DPL, is just 
mixed to be played loud.

Certainly films are mixed for a cinema, so why not the rest ?

P

In article <g3toat$i4j$1@registered.motzarella.org>,
	Jerry wrote:
> Actually I think you are not being flippant, although you are being 
> very ignorant, very arrogant...

Are you feeling well, Jerry? That was almost polite.

I suspect the monitoring used (quiet studio, good speakers) contrasts
with most domestic configurations (the set's built-in speakers,
external traffic noise, etc.)

Using a surround sound setup does help a viewer understand the
dialogue, as most music is stereo but the dialogue is centred (mono).
Not everyone can do this.

It may even be an advantage for the viewer to turn off the stereo
function on their TV and watch with the sound in mono. All those whoosh
bang surround effects will be squashed by being mixed down to mono.

-- 
Paul Martin

"Jerry" <INVALID@INVALID.INVALID> wrote in message 
news:g3toat$i4j$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>
> "Gary"  wrote in message 
> news:5Ks8k.127756$Ek2.122850@newsfe17.ams2...
>>
> <snip>
>> Sorry  I am being flippant
>
>
> Actually I think you are not being flippant, although you are being very 
> ignorant, very arrogant and that you are to young to remember when content 
> was king - no TV programme should require a 5.1 audio system just be able 
> to hear the dialogue, if it does it just proves that the original mixing 
> was done by someone who don't understand his or her craft, that the cake 
> sponge is more important than the icing, but then perhaps you are one of 
> those people who would be happy to buy a cake and find it all sugar and 
> water with no body...
>

No you are just patronising and rude.

The studios spend £millions on the sound and you think it should all sound 
good to a minority who have bad hearing.

MOST people don't have a problem, if you do have a problem then sort it for 
yourself. don't condemn the majority to the lower standard of the minority.

Gary

"Gary"  wrote in message 
news:4DJ8k.129457$Ek2.117905@newsfe17.ams2...
>
> "Jerry" <INVALID@INVALID.INVALID> wrote in message 
> news:g3toat$i4j$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>>
>> "Gary"  wrote in message 
>> news:5Ks8k.127756$Ek2.122850@newsfe17.ams2...
>>>
>> <snip>
>>> Sorry  I am being flippant
>>
>>
>> Actually I think you are not being flippant, although you are being 
>> very ignorant, very arrogant and that you are to young to remember 
>> when content was king - no TV programme should require a 5.1 audio 
>> system just be able to hear the dialogue, if it does it just proves 
>> that the original mixing was done by someone who don't understand 
>> his or her craft, that the cake sponge is more important than the 
>> icing, but then perhaps you are one of those people who would be 
>> happy to buy a cake and find it all sugar and water with no body...
>>
>
> No you are just patronising and rude.

If that is how you see people prove you wrong so be...

>
> The studios spend £millions on the sound and you think it should all 
> sound

They don't need to though, it's like the 'LIVE from the scene' crap 
that we now get (with freezing pictures and sound), they do so because 
*they can* and not *because they should* or the necessity.

> good to a minority who have bad hearing.

Oh right,. so all TVs have a 5.1 sound system built in...

>
> MOST people don't have a problem, if you do have a problem then sort 
> it for yourself. don't condemn the majority to the lower standard of 
> the minority.
>

The NHS wouldn't agree with you on that, the H&S executive wouldn't, 
most who have contributed to this thread don't seem to be agreeing - 
OK, if you don't want to admit that something that quacks, waddles and 
loves water isn't a duck that is your choice, just don't expect 
everyone else to do likewise.

In article <4DJ8k.129457$Ek2.117905@newsfe17.ams2>,
	Gary wrote:

> The studios spend £millions on the sound and you think it should all sound 
> good to a minority who have bad hearing.

No, they should get it right. Very few people in their audience have
perfect hearing. Even those who do have good hearing struggle to hear
the dialogue above the atmospherics* that surround it.

* In both the sense of mood and of radio interference.
-- 
Paul Martin

"Jerry" <INVALID@INVALID.INVALID> wrote in message 
news:g3vr7l$c9g$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>
> "Gary"  wrote in message 
> news:4DJ8k.129457$Ek2.117905@newsfe17.ams2...
>>
>> "Jerry" <INVALID@INVALID.INVALID> wrote in message 
>> news:g3toat$i4j$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>>>
>>> "Gary"  wrote in message 
>>> news:5Ks8k.127756$Ek2.122850@newsfe17.ams2...
>>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>> Sorry  I am being flippant
>>>
>>>
>>> Actually I think you are not being flippant, although you are being very 
>>> ignorant, very arrogant and that you are to young to remember when 
>>> content was king - no TV programme should require a 5.1 audio system 
>>> just be able to hear the dialogue, if it does it just proves that the 
>>> original mixing was done by someone who don't understand his or her 
>>> craft, that the cake sponge is more important than the icing, but then 
>>> perhaps you are one of those people who would be happy to buy a cake and 
>>> find it all sugar and water with no body...
>>>
>>
>> No you are just patronising and rude.
>
> If that is how you see people prove you wrong so be...
>
>>
>> The studios spend £millions on the sound and you think it should all 
>> sound
>
> They don't need to though, it's like the 'LIVE from the scene' crap that 
> we now get (with freezing pictures and sound), they do so because *they 
> can* and not *because they should* or the necessity.
>
>> good to a minority who have bad hearing.
>
> Oh right,. so all TVs have a 5.1 sound system built in...

What planet do you exsist in where that is true?

>> MOST people don't have a problem, if you do have a problem then sort it 
>> for yourself. don't condemn the majority to the lower standard of the 
>> minority.
>>
>
> The NHS wouldn't agree with you on that, the H&S executive wouldn't, most 
> who have contributed to this thread don't seem to be agreeing -

Has the thread changed.?

> OK, if you don't want to admit that something that quacks, waddles and 
> loves water isn't a duck that is your choice, just don't expect everyone 
> else to do likewise.

This is confusing. What is this bit trying to say. Is it a duck or not?


I can certainly recognise what you are.

I was trying to point out a way to get past the problem for the original 
poster. You ,your just Nasty for the sake of it..
I will let you carry on moaning,. enough said.. You have let everyone know 
what you are.

Gary

"Gary"  wrote in message 
news:9PW8k.45379$aE7.44690@newsfe16.ams2...
>
<snip>
>
> I can certainly recognise what you are.

Yes, correct and not afraid of showing up idiots like you!