Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!decwrl!hayes.fai.alaska.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: ror@grassys.bc.ca (Richard O'Rourke)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Music On Hold (was Data vs Voice)
Message-ID: <12958@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 2 Oct 90 02:31:35 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: Grass Root Systems, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Lines: 30
Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 706, Message 9 of 13


In article <12856@accuvax.nwu.edu>, macy@fmsystm.uucp (Macy Hallock)
writes:

> In article <12745@accuvax.nwu.edu>:

[Discussion of bandwidth vs. channel use in progress...]

> Muzak and other music services do charge for the use of their
> material.  (Although I suspect a lot of it gets hooked up by
> installers without regard to contractual obligations....)  Last I
> heard, Muzak charged around $5/mo per trunk in this area.

Going off on a tangent:

Music on hold disturbs me in any case.  What is more disturbing
though, is that it is often played at a level that can be
misinterpreted as background noise.  This can cause problems in calls
routed through some types of equipment, such as fast packet gear.

If companies are going to force stuff into your ear while your on
hold, it might as well be an advertisement.  That will give them the
incentive to turn it up, and me the incentive to hang up and call back
when they have the time to service me.  Possibly saving bandwidth in
the meantime, if going over packet gear.


Richard O'Rourke: (604)438-8249      | Grass Root Systems: 436-1995
UUCP: uunet!van-bc!mplex!grassys!ror | Smart UUCP: ror@grassys.bc.ca
ror@grassys.wimsey.bc.ca             |