1.4 Distinguishable - Missing Good sound quality for audio

[LaZay]

For audio only, and/or some video audio tracks eventually, we are still missing aWCAG A level criterion to control sound quality, which means;

• sufficent max volume,
• clearly distinguishable voices/other sounds.

So far, we only have a WCAG AAA level criterion 1.4.7 Low or no background audio to control sound quality. Audio background is not the main problem we have to solve so far. You do not imagine the poor quality of audio we are receiveing today. This is huge problem for audio only... :-( It is less concering in video audio tracks, though it higly depends a lot on the video type (professional vs amateur).

We need the WCAG to help us solve this audio quality problem.

Thanks!

[mbgower]

Draft Working Group Response

While poor quality of time-based media is definitely a problem, it is not an accessibility issue, per se. Any user able to perceive that form of content will similarly have difficulty understanding it.

A number of WCAG requirement may help alleviate this issue -- captions will compensate for poor audio, audio descriptions can compensate for poor video -- but WCAG does not specify many qualitative restrictions on source content, instead focusing on a user's ability to use an alternative or use mechanisms to augment the original.

Even if there was a desire to address such poor quality time-based media, there are practical challenges defining a measurable threshold that would not lead to the unwarranted failure of content. For example, what if there happened to be quiet passages? What if a recording was made in a necessarily noisy environment?

[patrickhlauke]

I'd add that as this is asking about a new/additional requirement, it's out of scope for WCAG 2.x and should be punted to/discussed in WCAG3

[ljoakley]

Done