Aren’t there FCC rules about the audio-level ratio between program material and commercials? I’m guessing those rules apply only to over-the-air broadcasts and perhaps cable or internet channels are exempt.

It does seem that the truest indicator that the content has switched from program material to commercials is the vast increase in audio level. Would someone like to make and market a pass-through loudness detector? Inserted between source and pre/pro or receiver, it monitors the audio level of the incoming signal. The user sets threshold levels (several presets). Once the threshold is exceeded, the output volume is cut by as much as the user wishes, usually either mute or cut by a significant amount, like -20db or -30db (coordinated with aforementioned presets). This is not meant to ‘level out’ the audio level, it is meant to eliminate or move commercials’ audio into the background.

If such a thing were in widespread use, broadcasters who ‘behaved themselves’ and kept commercials’ audio on par with program material would be ‘rewarded’ by passing commercials’ audio through without reduction by the consumer. Broadcasters that ‘goose’ commercials’ audio would learn that consumers were no longer listening during the commercials and perhaps find their sponsors asking that the audio for their commercials be kept in line with the program material - finally getting the broadcasters’ attention where their bread is buttered.

After all, I don’t just want to level the volume to eliminate the annoying blast as the commercials begin, I want to eliminate the commercials’ audio altogether.

It isn't as easy as that. Perceived loudness is a product of the power content of the waveform, and this can have little to do with amplitude. The most obvious example of this is with rock CDs which utilize "brick-wall" limiting which raises the total audio level to near maximum without exceeding full scale digital at any point. Music processed in this manner sounds extremely "loud" compared to a non-processed version which might have the same peaks occurring at full scale digital, but with the lower levels elsewhere preserved.

A mere level detector as you propose would not be able to differentiate between the two, because the levels are basically the same in both instances.

The problem arises because almost all broadcast (and cable) content is highly compressed, and the difference in the amount of compression (and brick-wall limiting) between normal program material and commercials is often difficult to differentiate with electronic means, yet the difference between the two can be readily detected by the ear.

I designed a box awhile back which attempted to perform this differentiation through integral analysis of the audio. It worked to a degree, but the problem was that once a channel was changed, the thresholds between program and commercials was invariably different, and the box had to be recalibrated.

Dolby Volume uses more sophisticated analysis, along with metadata.

I find myself constantly adjusting the volume of my system when watching movies with my wife. The volume is set at a certain level to hear dialogue. But when a loud scene (ocean waves, car chase, etc.) is introduced, I get that "look" from my wife that says "turn it down!" I believe Dolby Volume would be of great use to me given my wife's sensitivity to louder sounds. I would love to see it in the 997, and the mute button certainly wouldn't do the trick for me!

While I am familiar with some means of compression/expansion, having used such technology in production and broadcasting myself, and while I don’t have analysis electronics monitoring the output of my ‘cable/sat box’ …

By ‘level’, I didn’t mean to point toward amplitude only, but level of ‘energy’ in the waveform, which does increase as compression is pushed toward a ‘brick wall’. I didn’t intend to mislead.

I appreciate Altec’s effort of experimenting with a ‘box’ of his own.

In listening to the ‘major networks’, my subjective listening would seem to indicate that the audio levels follow the ‘increase via compression not amplitude’ description give by Altec. However, in listening to some cable channels, I sense such a huge jump in audio that, as a person familiar with compression, I cannot attribute the jump to compression alone, but judge that amplitude has also risen by an egregious degree.

It is broadcasters in this latter group that would easily exceed a threshold and have their commercials’ audio cut or cut back by a ‘monitor box’. But, as Altec points out, broadcasters are not very consistent, a single threshold would not do for all. And, even within the same program, one can see commercials inserted at least at four levels: the production level, the network/national level, the local broadcast level, and the cable/satellite provider level. This means that, within one group of commercials, one might see both commercials that limit themselves to reasonable audio and those that do not. I would tolerate those that merely use compression and make subsequent decisions with my remote’s mute button ... and I do appreciate the idea of Dolby Volume and similar options.

At this time, Dolby volume works only with a few limited DSP chips. The CS49700 is one of them. Not sure if the 997's DSP has Dolby Volume support.

According to the article linked to below, HK's new 7550HD receiver has Dolby Volume and also uses "the latest-generation Texas Instruments Aureus DA710 audio digital-signal processor in a dual-DSP implementation". Not sure these are the same dual TI chips that the 997 will have, but it seems like a fair guess. If so, it seems the TI chips are capable of implementing Dolby Volume. Of course, there could be other issues in implementing it in the 997 (e.g., how much processing power the Trinnov Optimizer eats up).

I also noticed that the HK while using TI audio DSP's (like the 997) rather than the Cirrus CS497xx (like the Emotiva UMC-1) will use the same video processer (Genesis Torino) as the UMC-1 rather than the Silicon Optix Reon that the 997 will employ. I know, I know ... one's audio & the other is video so they have nothing to do with one another, but interesting to see the different manufacturer's parts choices. It appears both the 997 and UMC-1 are getting top shelf components. Note that the HK receiver is listing at $2,799.

http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/receivers/harman-kardon-avr-7550hd

I'm going to be curious to hear how the Torino performs - Genesis has been relying on the Faroudja chipset for a long time now, and frankly it isn't as capable as parts like the Reon (as is to be expected considering the age of the design). Torino is their chance to get back into the race.

Dolby Volume or the like is pretty critical to me. I sure hope they have it otherwise I'll probably lean towards the Integra.

Onkyo must have heard you. I have the 9.9 and each video input can be scaled individually and the global output can be left as "through" so that it will send through whatever the input is scaled to.

This was a huge gripe regarding the 905/885/9.8. I'd love to see them offer it as a firmware update for those products, as it would make the video processing much more usable, even if only to offer the ability to toggle between "processed" and "pass-through" with a global set of processed settings (something that could presumably be done without hardware revisions, whereas the per-input controls may require extra memory). Onkyo's firmware support has been pretty rough, though, so I'm not going to hold my breath.