Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Entertainment/2015 March 4

= March 4 =

Commercials and TV shows without dialog
I've seen TV commercials, first with dialog, then, when repeated later, without the dialog. Their mouths are still moving, and the ambient sounds and music are still playing, just the dialog is muted. I've also seen this is TV shows. I have to conclude:

1) That the commercials and shows are delivered to the network or station with the dialog on a separate audio track.

2) That sometimes the station fails to play that track.

My question then, is why those are delivered on a separate audio track. There's an obvious risk to doing so, without any apparent benefit. Do they need to change to relative volume of the dialog track, say to comply with local laws or to "tone it down" at night ? Or do they broadcast those tracks separately ? I notice my digital TV stations have SAP available, but I thought that was for other languages, not to allow turning the dialog on and off. (I can imagine if you didn't speak English, and didn't have an audio track available for whatever language you do speak, you might want to turn the English dialog off, and yet leave the ambient sounds on, especially if it had nice music.) StuRat (talk) 17:04, 4 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Perhaps this has something to do with/a malfunction of the Second audio program format on NTSC television broadcasts? -- Jayron 32 17:47, 4 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Many commercials and programs are distributed to stations with Dolby 5.1 surround sound. The normal configuration is to have dialog present only on channel 3 (center) while stereo music and effects are present on channels 1 and 2 (left and right).  If you are listening on a TV receiver capable of only two-channel stereo audio, your tuner should be able to downmix the 5.1 signal to two-channel stereo and the dialog should be heard in the center of this mix.  A bad setting at the station, in your receiver or "home theater" equipment, or in the cable or satellite provider's equipment may cause you to only hear channels 1 and 2, which will not have any dialog on them. --Thomprod (talk) 19:11, 4 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks ! That explains it.  So they actually broadcast 5.1 ?  Since every TV I'd had or seen only has 2 channels for audio, I assumed they only broadcasted stereo. StuRat (talk) 07:44, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

NFL Salary Cap Hit for an Individual Player versus Total Contract Value
Hello. I read the section on Wikipedia about the NFL salary cap, and I have been viewing player contracts on sportstrac.com and overthecap.com. When I add up the cap hits for each individual year on an NFL player's contract, the sum usually does not equal the total value of the contract. Why is that? Thanks! 66.0.6.145 (talk) 21:29, 4 March 2015 (UTC)Jarrod
 * It has a lot to do with how signing bonuses and performance bonuses are calculated in "cap hit". When a player gets a signing bonus, he is paid that money up front when he gets the contract, but for the purposes of the salary cap, the "cap hit" is bonus is prorated for the life of the contract.  Thus, if a player gets a 5 year contract for $5 million dollars with a $5 million dollar signing bonus, assuming it is evenly distributed, he gets paid $10 million in the first year and 5 each year after that, but for the purpose of the salary cap, he counts $6 million per year.  However, if he is ever "cut" from a team, the balance of the paid bonus counts against that years cap.  So, for example, if that same player were cut in year 2 of the contract, the team would then have to apply the $3 million dollars of the bonus, which had been paid, but was not counting against the cap, to the next year's cap.  Also, there are considerations for when a player restructures their contract, a team may still be counting multiple signing bonuses in the same year, one for an older contract and one for a restructured deal.  This may be the source of your discrepancy: A player may only be showing the current value of their current contract on your website, but the team may still be taking "cap hits" for old contracts or the like.  Plus, IIRC, performance bonuses count against the next years salary cap, but are not figured into the "value" of the contract for future years, since this isn't guaranteed money.  Put all that together, and there's several ways the two numbers don't add it.  -- Jayron 32 23:52, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! The part about the source of the discrepancy was very helpful. I now understand how restructured or new contracts can create the discrepancy. Regarding the non-guaranteed money though, the math seems to indicate that these amounts are included in the total contract value as well (and wouldn’t be the source of the discrepancy) unless there is a particular type of bonus that is not counted in the total contract value. More likely, I think the revelation that you provided about the performance bonuses counting against the next year’s cap may account for the discrepancy as well. I would need to drop down one year on those columns before I begin adding. Thanks!66.0.6.145 (talk) 15:33, 5 March 2015 (UTC)Jarrod
 * Yes, but if the performance bonus is included in the value of the contract, and then not earned, it would show a discrepancy, wouldn't it? You can't have it both ways.  If it is counted, and then not earned, there's a discrepancy.  If it is NOT counted, but then later earned, there's also a discrepancy.  Regardless of whether it is counted or not, the existence of conditional pay will always generate a discrepancy between actual money payed and contract value and salary cap calculations, wouldn't it?  -- Jayron 32 16:44, 5 March 2015 (UTC)