OT: Why do people shout into mobile phones?

[N_Cook]

Or is it just a UK pervertion. Anyone would think the technology consists of
baked bean cans separated by a long piece of string.

 

[Adrian C]

Or is it just a UK pervertion. Anyone would think the technology consists of
baked bean cans separated by a long piece of string.

Four reasons.

* Attitude,
* Deafness,
* Can't align earhole with speaker,
* Can't change speaker volume.

 

[Ken]

Or is it just a UK pervertion. Anyone would think the technology
consists of baked bean cans separated by a long piece of string.

The same stupid people are here in Sweden.

 

[N_Cook]

The same stupid people are here in Sweden.

If the intent is for clarity then woefully wrong - overloads the
system/compression/codec or whatever is in the transmission system so
clipped/semi-garbled voice at the receiving end

 

[Phil Allison]

"N_Cook"

Or is it just a UK pervertion.

** The reason is they cannot hear their own voice in their ear.

Which is quite unlike a wired phone.



...... Phil

 

[N_Cook]

"N_Cook"



** The reason is they cannot hear their own voice in their ear.

Which is quite unlike a wired phone.



..... Phil

I've only ever seen single earpiece mobile phones, surely all these shouters
are not deaf in their other ear.

 

[amdx]

Or is it just a UK pervertion. Anyone would think the technology consists
of
baked bean cans separated by a long piece of string.

If you repeat everything they say immediately after they say it, they seem
to quiet down.

Mike

 

[Phil Allison]

"N_Kook"

Phil Allison

I've only ever seen single earpiece mobile phones, surely all these
shouters
are not deaf in their other ear.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidetone


...... Phil

 

[N_Cook]

People are used to hearing themselves in the earpiece when talking. In
telco terminology, it's called "sidetone".
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidetone>
The problem is that there's about a 250 msec audio delay inherent in
digital cellular phone encoding that will drive the user nuts if
there's even the slightest leakage between the sidetone and the
microphone or through the system. Analog cellular did not have the
delay. At best, there will be an echo. More typically, there is
massive confusion when the user hears themselves somewhat delayed. In
addition, the level of side tone necessary to convince the typical
user that they're getting through, is insufficient to prevent leakage
back into the microphone, especially with a BlueGoof headset. If the
handset manufacturer or cellular vendor added sidetone, you would
instead be complaining about either feedback squeal if injected
locally in the handset or echo if injected at the switch.

Another contributory phenomenon is cellular garble causes people to
think they're not getting through, so people normally talk louder to
compensate. The more garble, the more louder they yell.

One interesting observation is that few people yell into a half-duplex
phone, or phone that requires a PTT (push to talk) to be heard. That's
because there's no expectation of ever hearing oneself in the
earpiece.

I've had a cell/mobile phone of sorts since before IMTS, so I'm quite
familiar with the problem. I've taught myself not to yell and have
convinced a few others to make the attempt. It does take some
practice, but is easy enough. The problem is convincing other people
that it's a problem. I have a digital sound level meter and sometimes
drag it into a restaurant for some entertainment. Most people are
rather surprised when I mention that they're yelling anywhere from 3
to 6dB louder into the phone than their normal conversation (while
talking to me). Although I expected considerable resistance from my
waving sound level meters at people, most are generally curious and
interested in the effect.

Also, for truly irritating cell phones, the Nextel IDEN phones with
the *VERY* loud speaker, is the worst. While suitable for noisy
construction sites, having one of those go off in a restaurant is the
epitome of obnoxious behavior.

There are some really interesting comments and observations in this
article (4 pages):
<http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/22/technology/circuits/22YELL.html?pagewante
d=1>

More. (NPR audio 5 min):
<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4229967>

--
Jeff Liebermann [email protected]
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

That 1/4 sec or so delay was used for a device to "cure" people with
stutter, it seems to do the opposite for people without a stutter.

 

[F Murtz]

Or is it just a UK pervertion. Anyone would think the technology consists of
baked bean cans separated by a long piece of string.

Depends how far away the other person is, if they are on the other side
of the world you have to shout louder.

 

[Phil Allison]

"F Murtz"

Depends how far away the other person is, if they are on the other side of
the world you have to shout louder.

** If they speak a different language - shouting simple English phrases at
them always gets across.

Amazing that.


...... Phil

 

[DaveC]

Or is it just a UK pervertion. Anyone would think the technology consists of

baked bean cans separated by a long piece of string.

Either their cell phone ear piece is so crappy or they don't know how to
increase the volume, either way the received voice is so low that the speaker
unconsciously feels impelled to yell because they think the other person also
can't hear them well.

It does no good to ask these people to speak quietly: they think that this
will cause their friend to not hear them.

Dave

 

[DaveC]

People are used to hearing themselves in the earpiece when talking. In

telco terminology, it's called "sidetone".

The problem is that there's about a 250 msec audio delay inherent in
digital cellular phone encoding that will drive the user nuts if
there's even the slightest leakage between the sidetone and the
microphone or through the system. Analog cellular did not have the
delay. At best, there will be an echo.

[Jeff L.]

Wouldn't it be simple to amplify the speaker's voice, locally, and mix that
into the receiver circuit for immediate sidetone? No echo, no delay, no
yelling.

Yes, battery life would suffer a bit, but everyone would benefit.

One of those things that phone manufacturers would resist, and only
legislation would make happen.

 

[Phil Allison]

"DaveC"

Wouldn't it be simple to amplify the speaker's voice, locally, and mix
that
into the receiver circuit for immediate sidetone?

** You ACTUALLY deleted the answer to your question.

" In addition, the level of side tone necessary to convince the typical
user that they're getting through, is insufficient to prevent leakage
back into the microphone, especially with a BlueGoof headset. If the
handset manufacturer or cellular vendor added sidetone, you would
instead be complaining about either feedback squeal if injected
locally in the handset or echo if injected at the switch. "

This was immediately after the stuff you quoted.

Wot a moron.


..... Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

"Jeff Liebermann"

However, there is a way to make local sidetone sorta work. A slight
frequency shift (Bode shift) between the microphone audio and the
sidetone audio will prevent feedback. This is what's done on POTS
phones and some VoIP system. You can't hear a 5-10Hz frequency shift,
but it will prevent feedback.

** No way does a 5-10 Hz frequency shift *prevent* acoustic feedback !!

That is a very dopey myth.

The effect of a few Hz shift is to modify the familiar, single frequency
howl into a warbling tone.

The exception is where there is a lot of reverberation in the path from
speaker to mic, causing acoustic gain at multiple specific frequencies. Then
a few Hz shift can produce a useful increase in the threshold before any
disturbance (like ringing) occurs.


...... Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

"Jeff Liebermann"
"Phil Allison"

<http://www.rane.com/note158.html>
Frequency shifting has been used in public address systems to
help control feedback since the 1960's.

** Has nothing to do with your false assertion.

Plus I specifically MENTIONED that use in my post.

Maybe.

** No maybes about it - it IS what happens, asshole

I have designed a high quality shifter for PA system use - details were
published in Electronics Australia magazine in August of 1997. The maximum
benefit is only 6 to 8 dB in the gain before feedback threshold when the PA
is used in a very reverberant room, like a church.

No benefit exist where *direct path* feedback is the culprit.

However, for voice quality (PA and cellular), 5-10Hz
works quite well.

** There NO similarity between the two apps.

Never noticed how PA systems are often in large buildings with long
reverberation times ???

Yep. That's the same thing that I just mumbled.

** No asshole.

YOUR words came along in parody of MINE !!

My point is that it can be done with voice and cellular.

** Frequency shifting is of help with VOICE in a PA system - ie where the
" PUBLIC " are being " ADDRESSED" by a speaker. Hence the term.

No way does a 5-10 Hz frequency shift *prevent* acoustic feedback in
general.

Certainly not when the mic and loudspeaker are only inches apart.


...... Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

"Jeff Liebermann"
"Phil Allison"

( snip this congenital IDIOT'S idea of bullshitting his way out )

I beg to differ.

** Beg all you like.

Only demonstrates your pig ignorance.

I don't do commercial audio, so the answer is no,

** How fucking asinine !!!!!!!

Wot a fuckwit jerk off.

I didn't read your concluding paragraph until after I scribbled mine.

** Pays to read the whole of a post before jerking off in print.

It was only EIGHT lines long !!!

Big strain for you tiny brain was it ??

Well, I'll admit that I haven't built a DSP audio processor with a 5Hz
shift suitable for testing on a cell phone. I might be totally wrong,

** YOU ARE TOTALLY WRONG !!!

but you haven't bothered to supply a reason why I'm wrong about it
working in a cell phone.

** Been posted over and over.

If you throw in room acoustics, you're right.

** The DIRECT OPPOSITE is the case.

Shifters reduce feedback in REVERBERANT rooms.

The more REVERBERANT the room, the better they work.

Actually, it works better when there's a direct path.

** Yaaawnnnnnnn........

You are nothing but a PATHETIC LAIR & DAMN TROLL

FOAD.



...... Phil

 

[Smitty Two]

Or is it just a UK pervertion. Anyone would think the technology consists of
baked bean cans separated by a long piece of string.

One thing I didn't see anyone else mention is that we tend to use cell
phones in noisy environments. When I'm driving I hear a fair amount of
road and wind noise, and when I'm out in a public place there is
traffic, music, other people talking, whatever. So, it makes it hard for
me to hear the person to whom I'm talking on the cell phone. That makes
me want to talk louder, which of course is illogical because my party
isn't hearing my background din.