Understanding WCAG SC 1.4.7: Low or No Background Audio (AAA)

Section 1: Introduction to Auditory Accessibility

The Foundational Importance of Clear Audio

In the modern digital landscape, audio has become a primary medium for information dissemination, entertainment, and interaction. From educational podcasts and video tutorials to corporate webinars and promotional content, spoken-word audio is ubiquitous. While significant attention has been rightfully paid to visual accessibility—ensuring that content is perceivable by those with visual impairments—the parallel domain of auditory accessibility is a critical, and often less scrutinized, component of a truly inclusive user experience. The clarity of an audio stream is not a production luxury; it is a fundamental prerequisite for effective communication. When background sounds compete with or overwhelm foreground speech, the core message can be obscured or lost entirely, creating significant barriers for a wide spectrum of users.

Introducing SC 1.4.7 as an Advanced Standard

Within the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), this challenge is addressed by Success Criterion (SC) 1.4.7: Low or No Background Audio. This criterion is a key component of Guideline 1.4, which is dedicated to making content "Distinguishable"—that is, making it easier for users to see and hear content by separating foreground from background. SC 1.4.7 is designated with a Level AAA conformance rating, the highest and most stringent level within WCAG. This classification positions it not as a baseline requirement for accessibility, but as an advanced standard for excellence. It represents a commitment to providing the highest quality of auditory experience, particularly for users with hearing-related disabilities, and is often considered an aspirational goal indicative of a mature and deeply ingrained accessibility practice.

The existence of a AAA-level criterion specifically for background audio reveals a crucial understanding within the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). It acknowledges that baseline standards, while essential, may be insufficient to remove barriers for users with more significant disabilities. The lower-level criteria, such as SC 1.4.2 Audio Control (Level A), mandate that users must be able to stop or control audio that plays automatically. This is a vital "non-interference" rule, primarily protecting screen reader users from having their assistive technology's speech output drowned out. However, meeting this requirement does not address the intrinsic quality of the audio itself. A user could have full control over a podcast (thereby satisfying SC 1.4.2) but still be unable to comprehend the speech due to a poorly mixed, overpowering musical score. SC 1.4.7 closes this gap by shifting the focus from user control over playback to the fundamental intelligibility and signal-to-noise ratio of the audio content, directly addressing the needs of individuals who are hard of hearing.

Section 2: Deconstructing Success Criterion 1.4.7

The Normative Requirements: A Line-by-Line Analysis

The official text of Success Criterion 1.4.7, as defined by the W3C, provides a precise framework for its application. Understanding its specific language is essential for correct implementation. The criterion states:

For prerecorded audio-only content that (1) contains primarily speech in the foreground, (2) is not an audio CAPTCHA or audio logo, and (3) is not vocalization intended to be primarily musical expression such as singing or rapping, at least one of the following is true:

• No Background: The audio does not contain background sounds.
• Turn Off: The background sounds can be turned off.
• 20 dB: The background sounds are at least 20 decibels lower than the foreground speech content, with the exception of occasional sounds that last for only one or two seconds.

A line-by-line analysis reveals the criterion's deliberate and focused scope:

• "For prerecorded audio-only content...": This phrase limits the scope to audio that is not live and is presented without synchronized video. This typically includes podcasts, audiobooks, and stand-alone narrations. Live audio streams have their own set of challenges and are covered by different criteria (e.g., SC 1.2.9).
• "...that contains primarily speech in the foreground...": This is the core qualifier. The criterion applies only when the main purpose of the audio is to convey information through spoken words. It intentionally excludes content where audio is primarily atmospheric or musical.
• "...is not an audio CAPTCHA or audio logo...": These are specific, functional exemptions. An audio CAPTCHA is a security test, and an audio logo is a form of branding. In both cases, the audio has a purpose other than conveying detailed information through speech.
• "...is not vocalization intended to be primarily musical expression...": This clarifies that singing and rapping are considered forms of music, not informational speech. In music, the voice acts as an instrument, and its relationship with other sounds is an artistic choice, not a matter of foreground-background separation for clarity.

The Core Intent: Separating Foreground from Background

The fundamental intent of SC 1.4.7 is to ensure that any non-speech sounds are sufficiently quiet so that a user with hearing loss can successfully distinguish the foreground speech from the background noise. This directly supports the overarching goal of Guideline 1.4: to make content "Distinguishable". Just as sufficient color contrast is needed for users with low vision to read text, a sufficient auditory contrast is needed for users who are hard of hearing to understand speech.

Understanding the AAA Conformance Level

The designation of SC 1.4.7 as a Level AAA criterion carries significant weight. Most accessibility legislation and corporate policies target Level AA conformance as the standard for being reasonably accessible. Level AAA criteria are considered more advanced, addressing barriers that may affect a smaller or more specific subset of users with disabilities, or providing an enhanced user experience that goes beyond the essential requirements. While achieving AAA conformance is not always mandatory, doing so demonstrates a profound commitment to inclusivity and can provide a superior and more robust experience for a wider range of users, including those with more severe disabilities.

The detailed and highly specific nature of the exemptions within SC 1.4.7—audio logos, CAPTCHAs, singing—reveals a deep pragmatism on the part of the WCAG working group. A blanket prohibition on background audio would be both impractical and detrimental to certain forms of digital content. An audio logo, for instance, is designed to be a holistic, recognizable soundmark; separating its components would destroy its branding function. Similarly, forcing a 20-decibel separation between a singer's voice and the accompanying orchestra would fundamentally alter the artistic integrity of the musical piece. The security function of an audio CAPTCHA might be compromised if its distorted sounds were made perfectly clear. This careful delineation shows that the goal of accessibility is not to enforce an identical experience for everyone but to provide equivalent access to information and functionality. The criterion is sharply focused on ensuring the accessibility of informational speech, while pragmatically stepping aside when the audio's primary purpose is branding, art, or security.

Section 3: The Human Element: Beneficiaries of SC 1.4.7

Primary Audience: Individuals with Hearing Loss

The principal beneficiaries of this success criterion are individuals who are hard of hearing. For this group, the ability to separate foreground speech from background noise is often significantly diminished. This challenge is frequently compounded by assistive technologies like hearing aids. While hearing aids are effective at amplifying sound, they typically amplify all sounds in the environment, including undesirable background noise. This can worsen the signal-to-noise ratio, making it even more difficult to isolate and understand spoken words. A podcast with a soft musical track that is easily ignored by a person with typical hearing can become an unintelligible wash of sound for a hearing aid user.

The specific requirement of a 20-decibel difference was not chosen arbitrarily. It is based on technical research into the performance of assistive listening systems (ALS) and the effects of interference on hearing aids. This scientific underpinning ensures that the standard provides a meaningful and measurable improvement for its target audience.

Secondary Audiences: The Expanding Circle of Benefit

Like many accessibility principles, the benefits of SC 1.4.7 extend far beyond its primary audience, demonstrating a powerful "curb-cut effect" that enhances the experience for a much broader user base.

• Auditory Processing Disorders: Some individuals have no hearing loss in the traditional sense but have difficulty with how their brain processes auditory information. For users with auditory processing disorders, competing sounds can be overwhelming, making it nearly impossible to filter out background noise and focus on speech. This can lead to confusion, frustration, and an inability to comprehend the content.
• Cognitive and Attention-Related Disabilities: For individuals with conditions such as Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) or other cognitive disabilities, extraneous background sounds can be highly distracting. Such sounds increase the cognitive load required to process information, making it difficult to maintain focus on the primary spoken content and retain the information being presented.
• Non-Native Speakers: People listening to content in a language that is not their native tongue often need to concentrate more intensely to parse unfamiliar accents, vocabulary, and sentence structures. Background audio adds an extra layer of auditory information to process, making comprehension more difficult and mentally taxing.
• Situational Impairments: This category encompasses virtually all users under certain conditions. Anyone attempting to listen to a podcast on a noisy subway, follow a tutorial in a bustling coffee shop, or watch a promotional video in an open-plan office faces a situational hearing impairment. In these common scenarios, the ambient noise of the environment competes with the audio content. Content that adheres to SC 1.4.7 by providing clear, distinct speech is far more likely to be understood and appreciated in these challenging listening environments.

Ultimately, adhering to SC 1.4.7 transcends its role as an accessibility guideline and becomes a fundamental tenet of high-quality content production. It is not merely a "disability feature" but a principle of universal design. The initial goal of helping a specific group with hearing loss results in a product that is better for a majority of users in a variety of contexts. This shift in perspective is critical: implementing this criterion is a strategic decision that enhances the overall effectiveness, professionalism, and reach of the content. By reducing the cognitive load for all listeners, it improves information retention and fosters a more positive and less frustrating user experience, which can directly translate into higher engagement, better brand perception, and greater message impact.

Section 4: Technical Pathways to Conformance

WCAG 1.4.7 provides three distinct pathways to achieve compliance. This flexibility allows content creators, designers, and developers to choose the most appropriate method based on the nature of their content, their production capabilities, and their design philosophy. It is not a rigid, one-size-fits-all rule but a clear goal that can be reached through different technical and strategic approaches.

4.1. The Purist Approach: No Background Audio

The most straightforward and often most accessible option is to produce spoken-word content with no background audio at all. A clean, clear voice recording is easy to follow and universally accessible. This approach is particularly well-suited for content where the primary, if not sole, objective is the unambiguous delivery of information. Examples include:

• Educational lectures and tutorials.
• Audiobooks and narrated articles.
• Government or corporate announcements.

Implementation: Success with this method relies on solid recording practices. It is crucial to record in a quiet environment to minimize ambient noise. Using a quality directional microphone will help isolate the speaker's voice. Simple acoustic treatments, such as recording in a room with soft furnishings like carpets and curtains, can significantly reduce echo and reverberation, resulting in a cleaner final product.

4.2. The User-Centric Approach: Providing Controls

This approach acknowledges that background audio can add aesthetic value, set a mood, or enhance the listening experience, but it places the ultimate control in the hands of the user. Compliance is achieved by providing a mechanism for the user to turn off the background sounds independently of the foreground speech, or by offering a separate, speech-only version of the content. It is essential that this control or alternative is clearly labeled and easy to locate.

Implementation (with code examples):

• Separate Audio Tracks with JavaScript Control: One robust method is to use two separate HTML5 <audio> elements: one for the foreground speech and one for the background music. A simple button can then be used to control the background track.

HTML Structure:

<audio id="speech-track" controls>
  <source src="speech.mp3" type="audio/mpeg">
  Your browser does not support the audio element.
</audio>

<audio id="background-track" autoplay loop>
  <source src="music.mp3" type\="audio/mpeg">
</audio>

<button onclick="toggleBackgroundMusic()">Turn Off Background Music</button>

JavaScript for Control:

function toggleBackgroundMusic() {
  var backgroundAudio = document.getElementById("background-track");  
  var button = event.target;  
  if (backgroundAudio.paused) {  
    backgroundAudio.play();  
    button.textContent = "Turn Off Background Music";  
  } else {  
    backgroundAudio.pause();  
    button.textContent = "Turn On Background Music";  
  }  
}

This script provides a toggle function that pauses or plays the background audio without affecting the main speech track. The volume property could also be manipulated (e.g., backgroundAudio.volume = 0;) for a muting effect.

• Providing a Speech-Only Alternative: A simpler, low-tech yet highly effective solution is to provide a direct link to an alternative version of the audio file that has been produced without any background sounds.

HTML Example:

<div class="podcast-player">
  <h3>Podcast Episode: The Future of AI</h3>
  <audio controls src="podcast-full-mix.mp3"></audio>
  <p><a href="podcast-speech-only.mp3">Listen to Speech-Only Version</a></p>
</div>

4.3. The Audio Engineering Approach: The 20 Decibel Differential

This option is the most technically nuanced and is typically employed in professional audio production environments where the background audio is considered an integral part of the experience, such as in a documentary-style podcast or a guided meditation app.

• Understanding the Decibel (dB) Scale: It is critical to understand that the decibel scale is logarithmic, which reflects how humans perceive sound intensity. A change of 10 dB is perceived by the human ear as a doubling (or halving) of loudness. Therefore, a 20 dB difference is a substantial separation. The background sound will be ten times less intense than a sound that is only 10 dB quieter, which results in it being perceived as approximately four times quieter than the foreground speech. This significant gap is what ensures clarity for users with hearing impairments.
• Audio Mixing Techniques:
  • Using a Digital Audio Workstation (DAW): Audio engineers use software like Audacity (free), GarageBand, or Adobe Audition to mix audio tracks. Inside the DAW, the speech and background tracks are placed on separate channels.
  • Measuring and Adjusting Levels: The engineer will use the software's built-in level meters (which often measure average loudness in RMS or LUFS) to establish a baseline for the speech track. The background music track is then lowered in volume until its average level is at least 20 dB below the speech track's average level.
  • Advanced Techniques: For even better clarity, an engineer might use a parametric equalizer (EQ) to carve out frequencies in the background track that overlap with the primary frequencies of the human voice (typically in the 1-4 kHz range). This can make the speech "pop" without having to lower the overall volume of the background track as drastically.
• The "Occasional Sounds" Exception: The criterion includes a specific exception for "occasional sounds that last for only one or two seconds". This is a practical allowance for brief, transient sound effects that are part of the narrative or user interface. For example, a short chime to indicate a new section in a tutorial or a sound effect of a door closing in an audio drama would be exempt from the 20 dB rule, provided they are brief and do not persistently obscure the speech.

Section 5: Defining the Boundaries: Scope and Exceptions

To effectively apply SC 1.4.7, it is essential to have a clear understanding of precisely which content it covers and which it exempts. Misinterpretation can lead to either unnecessary work or non-compliance. A simple decision-making process can help clarify its applicability:

1. Is the content prerecorded? (If live, SC 1.4.7 does not apply).
2. Is the content presented as audio-only? (If it is synchronized with video, other criteria apply).
3. Is the primary purpose of the audio to convey information through speech? (If it is primarily music or soundscape, SC 1.4.7 does not apply).

If the answer to all three questions is "yes," the content is within the scope of this success criterion.

Detailed Explanation of Exemptions

The exemptions listed in the criterion are narrow and specific, designed to prevent the rule from being misapplied in contexts where it would be counterproductive.

• Audio CAPTCHA: An audio CAPTCHA presents a user with a distorted sequence of letters or numbers that they must transcribe to prove they are human. The very nature of this tool relies on a degree of auditory challenge to defeat automated bots. Applying SC 1.4.7 to require perfect clarity could undermine its security function.
• Audio Logo: These are short, distinctive sound clips associated with a brand, often referred to as "soundmarks" or jingles (e.g., the Intel inside chime or the Netflix "ta-dum"). They are a form of branding, not informational speech, and are therefore exempt.
• Musical Expression (Singing or Rapping): This is the most significant artistic exemption. When a voice is used to sing or rap, it functions as a musical instrument within a larger composition. The balance between the vocal track and the instrumental backing is a deliberate artistic choice made by the musician and producer. Enforcing a 20 dB separation would fundamentally alter the music and destroy its intended aesthetic.
• Content Not Primarily Speech: This is an implicit exemption based on the criterion's core focus. An audio recording of a rainforest soundscape, a city street, or an orchestral performance is not "primarily speech" and would not be covered, even if it contains incidental, distant speech sounds. Similarly, some sources discuss an implicit exception for sounds that are essential to the content, such as a loud explosion during an action scene in an audio play. While the normative text does not explicitly state this, it aligns with the principle that the criterion applies when speech is the primary element. If an audio drama is mostly dialogue, the criterion applies to the background music under the dialogue; if a brief scene is pure action with sound effects, that specific segment would likely not be considered "primarily speech."

Section 6: Auditing and Verification Strategies

Verifying conformance with SC 1.4.7 requires a different approach than many other WCAG criteria. It moves beyond static code analysis and into the realm of content quality and subjective user experience, necessitating a blend of tools and human judgment.

The Limits of Automation

Automated accessibility testing tools, such as Axe, WAVE, or Accessibility Checker, play a vital role in identifying a wide range of programmatic accessibility issues. However, they are fundamentally incapable of verifying compliance with SC 1.4.7. These tools can parse HTML and detect the presence of an <audio> element, but they cannot listen to the audio stream, distinguish speech from music, measure decibel levels, or make a subjective judgment about clarity. Their role in this context is limited to flagging audio content for a human auditor to review manually.

The Primacy of Manual Testing

Given the limitations of automated tools, manual testing by a human listener is the only reliable method for auditing SC 1.4.7 conformance. This process requires careful listening and, in some cases, the use of specialized audio software.

A step-by-step manual testing process would include:

1. Identify In-Scope Content: Systematically locate all prerecorded, audio-only content on the website or application that is primarily speech.
2. Perform a Listening Test: Play the audio in a quiet environment, free from distractions. The primary question is: Can the speech be clearly and comfortably understood without straining? This subjective assessment is the first and most important check.
3. Verify User Controls: If background audio is present and potentially distracting, check for a user control mechanism. Is there a button or link to turn off the background audio? If so, test its functionality to ensure it only affects the background sounds and leaves the foreground speech intact.
4. Conduct Technical Analysis (If Necessary): If background audio is present and no user control is provided, a more objective technical analysis is required to verify the 20 dB differential.

Tools for the Task

While the initial check is subjective, verifying the 20 dB rule requires objective measurement.

• Audio Analysis Software: The most accurate method is to use a Digital Audio Workstation (DAW) or a dedicated audio editor (e.g., Audacity, Adobe Audition, Ocenaudio). An auditor can import the audio file into the software and use its analysis tools. The process involves:
  • Isolating a representative segment of the foreground speech and measuring its average loudness level. Common metrics include Root Mean Square (RMS) for volume or, more modernly, LUFS (Loudness Units Full Scale) for perceived loudness.
  • Isolating a segment of the background audio (ideally where speech is not present) and measuring its average loudness using the same metric.
  • Calculating the difference between the two measurements to confirm it is at least 20 dB.
• Sound Level Meters: Physical sound level meters are used for measuring ambient sound pressure levels in an environment and are not directly applicable to testing digital audio files. While some mobile apps can function as rudimentary sound level meters, they are not precise enough for this type of verification and measure acoustic output from a speaker rather than the digital signal itself. The proper tool for this task remains audio analysis software that operates directly on the digital file.

Testing for SC 1.4.7 represents a significant evolution in the practice of accessibility auditing. It requires a shift from a purely technical, code-based review to a more holistic evaluation that encompasses content quality. An auditor cannot simply run a scan and review the report; they must engage with the media as a user would. This necessitates that auditors either possess skills in audio analysis or collaborate closely with media production teams. For organizations aiming for the highest levels of accessibility, this means integrating content quality reviews into the accessibility workflow, transforming the audit process from a technical checkpoint into a comprehensive user experience assessment.

Section 7: SC 1.4.7 in Context: A Comparative Analysis

To fully grasp the role and importance of SC 1.4.7, it is essential to understand its relationship with other criteria within WCAG, particularly SC 1.4.2 Audio Control, and its place within the broader Guideline 1.4 Distinguishable.

SC 1.4.7 vs. SC 1.4.2 (Audio Control): A Deep Dive

A common point of confusion for developers and content creators is the distinction between SC 1.4.2 and SC 1.4.7. While both deal with audio, they address fundamentally different accessibility barriers, operate at different conformance levels, and serve different primary user groups. SC 1.4.2 is a baseline requirement concerned with preventing unexpected disruption, whereas SC 1.4.7 is an advanced requirement focused on ensuring content intelligibility. The following table provides a direct comparison to clarify their unique roles.

These two criteria are complementary. An audio file could potentially fail both. For example, a podcast that starts playing automatically on page load (failing 1.4.2) and also has an excessively loud background music track (failing 1.4.7) creates barriers for multiple user groups simultaneously. Conforming to SC 1.4.2 ensures the user is not surprised by audio and can stop it if needed, while conforming to SC 1.4.7 ensures that if the user chooses to listen, the content will be comprehensible.

Placement within Guideline 1.4 (Distinguishable)

SC 1.4.7 is logically placed within Guideline 1.4, which is dedicated to the principle of separating foreground from background. This guideline is not about providing information in alternative formats but about making the default presentation as perceivable as possible. SC 1.4.7 serves as the primary auditory component of this principle, acting as a direct parallel to the visual contrast requirements:

• SC 1.4.3 Contrast (Minimum) and SC 1.4.6 Contrast (Enhanced) require a sufficient luminance contrast ratio between text (foreground) and its background color to ensure readability for users with low vision and color vision deficiencies.
• SC 1.4.11 Non-text Contrast extends this principle to user interface components and graphical objects, ensuring they are distinguishable from their surroundings.

In this context, SC 1.4.7 is the auditory equivalent of these visual criteria. It mandates a sufficient "volume contrast" between speech (auditory foreground) and other sounds (auditory background) to ensure "hearability" for users with hearing impairments. Together, these success criteria form a cohesive set of requirements aimed at ensuring that the primary information on a page, whether visual or auditory, stands out clearly from its context.

Section 8: Beyond Compliance: The Universal Benefits of Audio Clarity

While the impetus for SC 1.4.7 is to remove barriers for users with disabilities, its implementation yields substantial benefits that enhance the experience for every listener. Embracing the principles of audio clarity is not just an act of compliance; it is a strategic investment in content quality that pays dividends in user engagement, brand perception, and overall effectiveness.

Enhancing User Experience for All

High-quality, clear audio creates a more pleasant and effective listening experience for the entire audience. When speech is easily distinguishable from any background elements, it reduces the cognitive load required to process the information. Listeners do not have to strain to understand what is being said, which leads to several positive outcomes:

• Improved Focus and Information Retention: Without the distraction of competing sounds, users can better focus on the message, leading to improved comprehension and retention of the content.
• Reduced Listening Fatigue: Poor quality audio can be mentally exhausting to listen to over time. Clear audio allows for longer, more comfortable engagement without causing frustration or fatigue.
• Broader Accessibility in Various Environments: As noted previously, clear audio benefits users in noisy environments, making content more versatile and accessible on the go.

Impact on Brand Perception and Professionalism

The technical quality of digital content is a direct reflection of the brand behind it. Consistently producing audio with poor clarity can create an impression of amateurism or a lack of attention to detail, which can damage credibility. Conversely, investing in high-quality audio production signals professionalism and a commitment to quality. This builds trust with the audience, reinforcing the brand as a reliable and authoritative source of information. In a crowded digital marketplace, superior audio quality can be a key differentiator that sets content apart from competitors.

Potential for Improved Engagement and SEO

The benefits of audio clarity can have a measurable impact on key performance indicators. When content is easier and more pleasant to consume, users are more likely to engage with it for longer periods. This can lead to:

• Better User Engagement Metrics: Higher-quality audio can contribute to lower bounce rates and longer session durations, as users are less likely to abandon content they find frustrating to listen to.
• Increased Sharing and Linking: Content that provides a superior user experience is more likely to be shared across social networks and linked to by other websites, expanding its reach and authority.
• Enhanced SEO: While search engines cannot directly analyze audio quality, they heavily weigh user engagement signals. Furthermore, a common best practice for audio accessibility is to provide a full text transcript. A transcript not only provides a crucial alternative for users who are deaf or deaf-blind but also makes the entire content of the audio file indexable by search engines, significantly boosting its SEO potential.

Section 9: Conclusion and Recommendations

Success Criterion 1.4.7: Low or No Background Audio stands as a testament to a mature and nuanced understanding of digital accessibility. As a Level AAA requirement, it pushes beyond baseline compliance to champion a truly superior and inclusive auditory experience. Its core principle—that speech must be clearly distinguishable from background noise—is rooted in the specific needs of users who are hard of hearing but radiates outward to benefit all listeners. Conformance can be achieved through one of three flexible pathways: eliminating background audio entirely, providing robust user controls to disable it, or applying professional audio engineering techniques to ensure a 20-decibel separation between speech and background sounds. Verification of this criterion relies on the irreplaceable role of human listening, marking a shift in accessibility auditing toward a more holistic evaluation of content quality.

By situating SC 1.4.7 within the broader context of universal design, it becomes clear that its implementation is not merely a technical task but a strategic imperative. Clear audio enhances comprehension, reduces cognitive load, strengthens brand perception, and improves user engagement for everyone.

Final Recommendations

To effectively integrate the principles of SC 1.4.7 into digital production workflows, the following actions are recommended for key professional roles:

• For Content Creators and Producers:
  • Prioritize Recording Quality: The foundation of clear audio is a clean recording. Invest in a quality microphone and record in a quiet, acoustically controlled environment to minimize ambient noise from the start.
  • Question the Necessity of Background Audio: Before adding a music track or soundscape, critically evaluate whether it adds genuine value or simply introduces potential distraction. For purely informational content, the most accessible choice is often no background audio at all.
• For UX/UI Designers:
  • Design for Control: If background audio is deemed necessary for aesthetic or branding purposes, design user controls that are prominent, intuitive, and clearly labeled. Ensure the control to mute or disable background audio is easy to find and operate without affecting the foreground speech.
  • Consider Alternative Versions: Work with content teams to provide easily accessible links to speech-only versions of audio content as a straightforward and effective accommodation.
• For Developers:
  • Implement Robust Controls: When tasked with building audio players, use HTML5 and JavaScript to create separate controls for different audio tracks (e.g., speech vs. music) to give users granular control over their listening experience.
  • Ensure Accessibility of Controls: All custom audio player controls must be fully accessible via keyboard and properly labeled for screen readers, adhering to other relevant WCAG criteria.
• For Accessibility Auditors and QA Testers:
  • Integrate Manual Listening Tests: Recognize that automated tools cannot validate this criterion. Incorporate dedicated manual listening tests into any audit workflow that aims for a high level of accessibility conformance.
  • Develop or Acquire Audio Analysis Skills: To objectively verify the 20 dB requirement, become proficient in using audio editing software to measure loudness levels or collaborate with team members who possess this expertise.
  • Champion Audio Clarity: Advocate within your organization for the understanding that audio quality is not just a production detail but a core component of an accessible and high-quality user experience.