You’re relaxing in your living room, watching your favorite show, when suddenly the ad break starts and… the volume shoots up! The sound crashes in — loud, jarring, uncomfortable. Sound familiar?
In California, several streaming platforms have recently been warned and even fined for this kind of practice, bringing the issue back into the spotlight. It all comes down to the new California law SB 576, signed in October 2025 by Governor Gavin Newsom, which extends to streaming services the same volume rules that have applied to traditional TV for over a decade. The goal: to make sure ads don’t play louder than the main content and to preserve a smooth, viewer-friendly experience.
The problem of excessive volume isn’t new. Back in 2010, the United States passed the Commercial Advertisement Loudness Mitigation Act (CALM Act), requiring TV broadcasters to keep the same audio level between programs and commercials. For years, that law helped ensure a more consistent viewing experience.
However, as audiences shifted to OTT and CTV environments, the legal framework became outdated. Streaming services, not being covered by the CALM Act, fell outside its scope.
That’s where SB 576 comes in — the first state-level regulation to update and extend the principles of the CALM Act to the digital ecosystem. The California legislation requires streaming providers to measure and normalize ad volume according to federal technical standards (such as ITU-R BS.1770) and imposes potential penalties for non-compliance.
While it’s currently a state initiative, it sets an important precedent. If other states or countries follow suit, we could be witnessing the start of a new wave of regulation focused on the streaming user experience.
The affected platforms have been quick to respond: they claim that controlling volume levels isn’t always up to them — and, to a large extent, they’re right.
Unlike traditional broadcasting, where the network controls the entire transmission, the streaming ad ecosystem involves multiple players: DSPs, SSPs, ad servers, exchanges... The ads a viewer sees may come from different sources, formats, and technical quality levels.
This means a single ad break can include spots with varying audio mixes and compression levels — even processed under different loudness standards (LUFS). When those ads are dynamically inserted over the main content, the final result depends on the integration point, encoding process, and output verification.
In other words, while the streaming platform is ultimately the one delivering the content to the user, it doesn’t always have full control over the loudness of each individual ad.
The technological fragmentation of today’s advertising ecosystem is the main obstacle. Every stage — from the creation of an ad to its insertion into the stream — can alter the audio level. In theory, there are tools and standards designed to ensure consistency, such as audio normalization algorithms or ITU-R BS.1770–based measurements, but adoption remains uneven.
In addition, dynamic ad insertion solutions tend to prioritize personalization and targeting rather than audio quality control. The stitching between content and ads usually focuses on maintaining visual continuity and avoiding abrupt transitions, while audio consistency often takes a back seat. Although we’ve already mentioned some of them, the main causes of the imbalance between content and ad audio levels include:
The result is not only an unpleasant experience for the viewer but also a reputational risk for both brands and platforms. The perception of “loud ads” can easily come across as intrusive and erode viewer trust.
From a technical standpoint, yes — the problem can be corrected, though it requires coordination and commitment across the entire chain.
Initiatives like those promoted by Eyevinn Technology around Audio QC (Quality Control) are pointing in the right direction: systems capable of analyzing the volume of each asset before insertion and automatically applying normalization based on loudness standards. These processes can be integrated into encoding or ad-stitching pipelines, ensuring that adjustments are made before playback and don’t depend on the ad’s source.
Another option is to include loudness metadata with each ad creative, allowing players or servers to automatically adjust volume levels in real time according to the main content’s parameters.
All of these initiatives share the same premise: ensuring that all audio tracks use consistent parameters and formats.
For instance:
AAC LC / 48 kHz / stereo / same bitrate
and then verifying that the encoder/packager doesn’t re-encode with different settings, preserving uniformity throughout. The Quality Control module mentioned earlier could take responsibility for this verification process.
Ultimately, the challenge isn’t technological but one of ecosystem governance: who takes responsibility, who measures compliance, and who ensures that control is maintained at every stage of the chain.
SB 576 marks a turning point — not just because of the potential penalties, but because it highlights something often taken for granted: the audio experience is also part of the user experience.
Ensuring a smooth transition between content and advertising isn’t merely an aesthetic or technical matter. It’s essential to maintaining user trust, protecting brand reputation, and staying ahead of future regulatory demands. In an ecosystem where technology allows us to measure, adjust, and personalize almost everything, perhaps it’s time for advertising to stop shouting in order to be heard.
At tvads we has a professional team able to advise you on this field and and guide you in any area of your streaming advertising business, advising you or even operating it on your behalf if necessary
All author posts