Is it time to re-introduce sound to the web?
So why can’t web pages have sound effects?
It was probably one of the first things you did when you first started playing with HTML, but background music, and funny sound effects when you clicked buttons, went the way of the spacer gif—web design matured, and web standards took over.
But—now that “the web is the desktop”, and online applications become increasingly harder to tell apart from their OS-bound counterparts—can anyone remind me again just what is the compelling reason for not using sound effects on the web?
Desktop apps have always used sound as part of their UI. Sounds communicate change, error, or demand attention. As I type, Twitterific whistles at me; Word complains if I try to jump past the end of the current line; and Adium alerts me to the comings and going of my online friends. And yet, on the web, where we dissect and discuss every tiny nuance of design’s ability for communication, sound is all but ignored. (The only exception I can think of is 37signals’ Campfire, which gently ‘bongs’ at you when there is an updated message to read.)
“It’s an accessibility thing!” is a tempting argument, and certainly, allowing people to control embedded media would be an important concession. But there is no outcry over the inherent inaccessibility (or in-anything-else-ness) of sound effects in desktop applications, so it seems a rather weak argument.
A better one might be that sound effects can be large files, and thus slow down a web page—but if effects are part of the UI, and likely to be triggered by click or mouseover events, then the .wav files can be post-loaded in the same way as any other media to be revealed through user action.
It seems to me that there is no reason at all not to use appropriate sound effects as part of a web application—and, in fact, it might be a benefit to users who are used to audible as well as visual feedback.
Filed under: Internet, Musings.
Bookmark this article with del.icio.us
Previously: Internet semi-famous
Next: Odd jQuery gotcha: IE and .html()
Comments
- Tiff Fehr
- 683 days ago
I think the tactility and real-world physics of design in Apple products is an concept that could work with sound enhancements as well. Like Scott’s mention of Campfire, their ‘bong’ effect is a subtle enhancement to an interaction that creates a bit more engagement as a human. And in the age of tabbed browsing, a passive interaction reminder on a non-focused tab could be essential. One example of a website with action-oriented sound is I’mInLikeWithYou. The site originally featured subtle sounds running in the background of their app, signaling the activity of users. And when I first started playing with the site, it was engaging enough to win my attention compared to all the other tabs I had open.
- #2
- SchizoDuckie
- 683 days ago
It will be time to re-introduce sound to the web when people stop playing MP3’s on their computer, which wil be around… never. Nothing is more annoying than some kind of whacky sound playing through your favorite music that’s on level 10.
- #4
- Bill Creswell
- 683 days ago
I would certainly want a clear option to turn sound off.
Sound on websites is usually intrusive to me, and the work environment around me.
- #5
- eric
- 683 days ago
As a musician turned audio engineer and amatuer web developer, I have a rather interesting take on this.
The goal of sound in UI design should ultimately be to tell the user what has happened without them ever having to look at the screen. For example, the ‘you have new mail’ sound present in whatever mail application you use is so ingrained into your brain that you know what it is telling you without having to look. This creates an interesting predicament for the web:
For sites where users are online quite a lot (Gmail, Campfire, Facebook, etc), custom sound effects seem perfectly reasonable, because it is permissible to assume the users will be on your site often enough to learn the sound effects. However, for sites that are more casual in nature (blogs, informational sites, etc.), it seems that what we need is a way to tie into the OS sound resources and say ‘give me a sound that the user knows as an error sound’, without knowing or caring (or having to transmit) what sound file will actually play.
I also echo Bill’s comment though, that there needs to be a preference option to turn the sounds off. This likely falls to the webdeveloper now, and as sound is increasingly reintroduced, could morph its way into browser preferences.
- #6
- Matthew Pennell
- 683 days ago
Thanks for the thoughtful comments, Eric.
I don’t think it’s entirely accurate to describe UI sound effects as solely relating to off-screen activity, though; Internet Explorer and Word, for example, both beep and chirp at you while you’re using them (usually to communicate “you can’t do that”).
- #7
- Matt Beck
- 682 days ago
A while back I noticed the little ‘bong’ noice that google chat windows make when a new message comes in and they don’t have focus and had a similar thought.
I think that the problem with sound on the web is that it’s mostly all the wrong sounds in the wrong places.
Embedded audio/video advertisements drive me up the wall.
A subtle beep or click tied to an onsubmit event might actually be good, but people tend to overdo it.
I think we’ve sort of thrown out the baby with the bathwater when it comes to sound. Sure no one wants to listen to the crappy MIDI rendition of the Chariots of Fire theme you’ve blasted them with as background music, but treating web apps like desktop apps when integrating sound (and I’d put animations in the same boat) is probably a good thing.
- #8
- Tiff Fehr
- 682 days ago
It’s funny how the separate comment threads (one here and one on DW) have headed in different directions. The DW discussion seems to be firmly against sound. But the more I think about it, I think easy opt-out sound effects could augment a design to help those with some of the more subtle accessibility issues with the web—bad eyesight, color blindness, decreased coordination, etc. Maybe it should be at the browser level, but until then, I can see advantages to a slight “tick” noise on rollover of an active link, or a “bong” onsubmit, or a slight whirr as a new page is loading. Something to give more feedback than just visible activity. Some standards could easily emerge out of it.
- #9
- Olly
- 682 days ago
There are instances where I can see it being useful. e.g. Twitter has a 140 character limit on posts. Making the site emit a little “meep!” when you hit that could be a good example.
In that context, it’s not an accessibility issue either; for some users it could make the app more accessible. There’s already a visual warning that you’ve hit the limit; this could be another subtle enhancement.
Auto-playing loud background music can sod right off though!
- #10
- Stephane Deschamps
- 674 days ago
I would venture that maybe people don’t like sound of the web because of the abuse it underwent, as is noted in several comments.
It is time indeed, but if we as responsible web people try to do it sparingly, I bet a marketer somewhere will go up the wall and require sound at every click, every show/hide, every menu and accordion.
And we’ll be where marquee and blink are. (which is sad, because in their own way they were not such stupid ideas in the first place, troll aside).
Can of worms? :)
But yeah, it’s true that I’ve been pleasantly surprised by the new chat message sound in Gmail.
It’s food for thought, thanks for sharing, Matt.
- #11
Provided sound is used sparingly and unobtrusively, then it can be useful and also add another dimension to applications on the web. Campfire is one of the few that does use sound, and thankfully uses it well. Sound on the web has typically been more associated with Flash apps and bad preloaders than as something that enhances functionality. In a web-standards world, it’s harder to implement too, but not impossible. As an experiement and for fun, I used the new Sound object in Scriptaculous on my own site for one small function. Why? Because I could. Does it enhance the experience where it is used? Maybe. But it’s not essential and if it breaks or doesn’t work because a user doesn’t have Flash/QuickTime, it’s not a big deal.