Forum Discussion
Allow muting a person only for me
Sometimes I am in a meeting where one of the persons in the meeting is actually near me in the world outside the screen. In this case the sound is a bit maddening since there is a small delay between the sound from the person and the sound through the teams interface. In these cases, I would like to mute the person only for me since I am sitting near and can hear the person fine without headphones. Right now I need to takeoff headphones when the person is talking and putting it back as the person finishes talking.
146 Replies
- Think that you should think about this in the reverse. Rather than muting get a feature that is "do not play back sound from this participant" against your user so it is the receiving end of the stream rather than the sending side being muted
nick2165Exactly. However all members of a Teams chat get the same audio mixed at the server and streamed to everyone. We don't get individual audio streams from each participant so the basic stuff like muting a specific user so it is muted for everyone is possible, but any further customisation is not.
In order to mute specific users just for you, Teams would have to mix an audio stream specifically for you. Nice and easy: not a bandwidth problem, but Teams doesn't work like that.
Obviously, what we'd like Teams to do is to work 'like that'.That doesn't make sense to me. If every member of a Teams chat received the same audio, I would hear my own echo. I don't.
- Yeah, that is what we are all talking about, only muting the user to yourself, not muting it at the sender end, that wouldnt make sense.
We also need this feature.
- Microsoft is pushing new work in their own offices, so there is NO WAY they don't have the same request themselves...
er008
This really needs to be fixed!
It's a no brainer of a function.
Also adjusting volume of individual participants so it's possible to hear everyone well regardless of their input volume.
If it can't be done because all audio is combined into one stream that just means that there's more work to do to make it right, not that it shouldn't be done.
If it's done to keep bandwidth usage low make it a toggle option.2 years later Microsoft still has no update or solution for this, so disappointing to see that such a simple yet highly useful and requested feature still hasn't been added..... er008
- The capacity to manage all single audio participent is really needed ! Urgently
er008 Four years after the pandemic, it's puzzling that a feature widely available in "Discord" and other meeting style software hasn't been implemented in MS Teams, despite this being one of the most widely used "meeting" platforms. Discord offers the ability to adjust audio settings individually for different users, allowing for personalized volume control. Eg, if a participant in a call has overly sensitive microphone settings, you can specifically lower their volume for yourself. This customization enhances the user experience, yet it remains missing from in MS Teams. This can't be difficult to implement.
Issue
It appears that audio stream sent to the Teams client is mixed in the cloud and sent to individual users as a single merged stream.
Benefits
- This reduces the amount of network traffic sent to individual users.
- This typically creates a low-effort solution that covers most use cases.
Disadvantages
- As listed here, sitting next to someone who is also on the call, you must deal with echo.
- There is another issue not mentioned - you cannot change the volume for individual users - there is one person on many of my calls who constantly shouts. I cannot reduce her volume.
Conclusion
Contrary to some of the suggestions here, many products ARE implementing this feature.
Microsoft should send individual voice streams to the client and give customers the option to mute or change the volume on individual users.
Tony_Platts This should be submitted to the Teams feedback portal and everyone here on this thread should vote for it. ;^) Microsoft looks there rather than here in the community threads for what they are going to implement next.
- Just gave it my like, for whatever that's worth....
- I also wish this feature
- Just implement this.
We have a ducking Teamspeak (sic!) server running on premise to hold voice meetings because it is unbearable for the people sitting in one office.
Teamspeak figured out the tech in 2002, I guess you can, too.
I am actually curious, are you mixing the sound in the cloud and just sending the mixed stream to everyone or why is this so hard to implement? It's been years ffs.- "are you mixing the sound in the cloud and just sending the mixed stream to everyone[?]"
Yes, reportedly this is exactly what's happening. All audio streams get mixed together into one which is distributed to every participant. Presumably this helps conserve bandwidth or improves reliability, but at the cost of usability in cases like this.AdamZovits ok, then wouldn't a compromise be cool?
<= 10 people per call: mixing client side;
>10: mixing server side;
Maybe there's even a sweet spot where the removal of extra calculation server side is worth adding the bandwidth.
Also, Microsoft could make the mixing client side optional - with its opt-in buried in some sub menu - then only people annoyed by it will use it and it'll hopefully barely scratch the performance...
- I only signed up to promote this proposal, like so many others.
I travel a lot and see many different companies. Hardly any company has the possibilities to offer enough employees a private room or cabin. This is a problem that cannot be solved in the "real world". It needs a software solution.
It's werid that the only good solution is using other software.
