Feeds

Apple muffles PC noisemakers

Acoustic Annoyance Model

  • alert
  • submit to reddit

Build a business case: developing custom apps

A pair of Apple filings published Thursday by the US Patent and Trademark Office aim to lessen the annoyance provoked by your PC's various and sundry noise-making components by letting you take control of how it sounds.

The first filing focuses on determining a user's opinion of various annoying sounds, then ameliorating them - and not just by tamping down volume, but by smoothing out variations in pitch, tone, and the like. The second focuses on managing a PC's noisemakers.

Despite their different focuses, the two filings cover substantially the same material. Both describe how a PC's "acoustic noise" - as opposed to its "audio noise," meaning hum and crackle emanating from a PC's speaker - can be determined using a number of methods, which can be roughly divided into two broad techniques.

The first of these includes predetermining the sounds produced by a PC's noise-making components, which the filing defines as "a hard drive; an optical drive; a fan, blower, pump, or other cooling device; a capacitor; an inverter (such as a power and/or a video inverter); or a transformer (e.g., a power adapter)." Once the loudness, tone quality, and fluctuation of these components are defined, the resulting data is assembled into an acoustic noise profile for that PC.

The second method uses microphones and other sensors to monitor the system in real time, either adjusting the predetermined acoustic noise profile or creating one on the fly. The sensors determine not merely how loud a device is, but also the changes in pitch and tone quality as, for example, fans speed up or slow down.

The first filing introduces an interesting concept: an "acoustic annoyance model" (AAM) that varies according to the type of noise produced, a user's preferences, and the environment in which the PC is being used. The AAM, for example, can include not merely how loud a device is, but where and how it's being used.

If, for example, you're cranking up a vintage track from Extreme Noise Terror's Earslaughter, fan noise may not bother you. But if you're a teacher with a classroom full of laptop-using teens, you may want their machines set to provide nearly silent running.

An individual user's tolerance for "acoustic annoyance" can be determined by a PC-delivered set of both questions and tests to determine, for example, if they'd prefer quietude over performance - and in what circumstances and applications - and how well and what frequencies they can hear.

After all, why bother silencing a whiny power supply if the user's aging ears can no longer hear high-frequency sounds?

When acoustic annoyance exceeds a user's preferred parameters, the noise-management system kicks in and makes the PC more euphonious. The most obvious way of doing so would be, of course, to make fans spin more slowly. If doing so would cause the PC to heat up dangerously, the system would throttle performance.

But there may be situations in which simply turning a fan down wouldn't be the right strategy, especially in systems that contain more than one fan. Sometimes, multiple-fan systems can produce air-flow interference that results in audible "beats." In this case, it might be better to match fan speeds, even in cases in which traditional temperature sensors would have the two fans running at different speeds.

The system can also be used to prevent fans from varying in speed too often - a sustained but relatively loud noise can at times be less acoustically annoying than a fan that continually speeds up, slows down, speeds up, slows down, and so on.

In fact, that latter example is the core concept of this pair of patents. The object is to not allow a PC to maintain its own idea about how loud it should be, but for it to bow to the will of its user, depending upon how the PC is being used and in what environment.

For example, as the filing states: "A user may be more disturbed by a device that produces a quiet-but-tonal acoustic noise than by another device that produces a louder, but smooth-sounding, noise."

And shouldn't you be allowed to choose, and not your PC? ®

The essential guide to IT transformation

More from The Register

next story
Reg man looks through a Glass, darkly: Google's toy ploy or killer tech specs?
Tip: Put the shades on and you'll look less of a spanner
So, Apple won't sell cheap kit? Prepare the iOS garden wall WRECKING BALL
It can throw the low cost race if it looks to the cloud
Apple promises to lift Curse of the Drained iPhone 5 Battery
Have you tried turning it off and...? Never mind, here's a replacement
Now that's FIRE WIRE: HP recalls 6 MILLION burn-risk laptop cables
Right in the middle of Burning Mains Man week
One step closer to ROBOT BUTLERS: Dyson flashes vid of VACUUM SUCKER bot
Latest cleaner available for world+dog in September
Apple's iWatch? They cannae do it ... they don't have the POWER
Analyst predicts fanbois will have to wait until next year
HUGE iPAD? Maybe. HUGE ADVERTS? That's for SURE
Noo! Hand not big enough! Don't look at meee!
Samsung Gear S: Quick, LAUNCH IT – before Apple straps on iWatch
Full specs for wrist-mounted device here ... but who'll buy it?
AMD unveils 'single purpose' graphics card for PC gamers and NO ONE else
Chip maker claims the Radeon R9 285 is 'best in its class'
prev story

Whitepapers

Top 10 endpoint backup mistakes
Avoid the ten endpoint backup mistakes to ensure that your critical corporate data is protected and end user productivity is improved.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Backing up distributed data
Eliminating the redundant use of bandwidth and storage capacity and application consolidation in the modern data center.
The essential guide to IT transformation
ServiceNow discusses three IT transformations that can help CIOs automate IT services to transform IT and the enterprise
Next gen security for virtualised datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.