Talk:Ringtone

@ 2409:4080:BD90:DAE3:34BB:697B:CFFD:9C3B (talk) 11:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Talk:Ringtone

Venil pickup call

@ 2409:4080:BD90:DAE3:34BB:697B:CFFD:9C3B (talk) 11:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Peaceray (talk) 15:18, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

inaudible

There was a story some years ago, about school kids using a ring tone at a high frequency that teachers couldn't hear, but they could hear. Can we include this? Gah4 (talk) 07:03, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

If you can find a good reliable source for it, maybe. But those frequencies are used for a lot of reasons; back in my highschool high-pitched noise was used to annoy other kids. I'm surprised I can't find an article on this general thing... ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:46, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Different ringtones for known callers

I have seen cases where people seem to have a ringtone for a specific person they know which is different from the normal ringtone, and that this can be done for any known caller (a different ringtone for each). I haven't found a good source yet but if there is one or more, it seems like a concept that should be in the article.

And I'm not certain of the terminology. It's not necessarily a ring. It can be any sound.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:02, 30 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

See Distinctive ring Lexlex (talk) 15:06, 31 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thank you. Sorry, what I am asking about is calls intended for the same person but coming from different callers. That article is about different rings intended for different people answering each call.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:13, 31 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yamaha's MA-FM soundchip series are most likely not the origin of polyphonic ringtones on mobile phones

Sorry for the long title, i literally could not find any confirmation of this. I have my reasons for doubting the claim though. There are multiple sony and sagem handsets that use a weird soundchip that only does sine waves, but it's definately polyphonic. It also has adsr but apparently only on sony (this might indicate that the soundchips are different, they sound pretty similar though). There might even be the possibility that there's some random phone from 1997 that has software mixed polyphonic ringtones playing through the beeper idk (maybe this could be the way those phones generate their ringtones?). I have done reaserch so if you find anything don't go saying stuff like "it's the second result on google" because i literally couldn't find anything useful during multiple hours of searching across 2 days. Also, there's some misinformation about the nokia 3510 being the first phone with polyphonic ringtones, which it definately isn't, it isn't even the first nokia phone with them. I believe the reason for this is the poor wording of that phones wikipedia page, which i will also probably change. ¬¬TLDR¬¬, I wanted to find the first phone with polyphonic ringtones, ended up here and discovered what i believe to be false information and poor wording of another article causing more misinformation. I love chiptune and chiptune-related things, how could you tell? -xh-xe-xg- (talk) 11:00, 16 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Apparently japanese wikipedia has some information about this, i don't speak japanese, please help, the translator is miserable. -xh-xe-xg- (talk) 11:58, 16 May 2026 (UTC)Reply
Couple of new things:
ITS WRITTEN "DEFINITELY" the autocorrect not only doesn't do its job but it even does the exact opposite holy hell pls remove the "definately" page from wiktionary pls pls pls pls
The early sagem and sony handsets i mentioned probably have different methods of sound generation with the sony being via hardware and the sagem being via software. Those sony handsets have earlier variants that use a standard beeper for sound, so those probably have new hardware inside. The sagem ones do not have direct predecessors i believe plus it sounds quite similar to early PCs with a low pass filter on the beeper and software multiplexing (like vyper on the mindset or beverly hills cop on ibm pc with proper emulation or real hardware). I conclude from this that the sagem phones just have basic square wave beeper hardware with clever software and a weird speaker and that the sony phones most likely have a real soundchip inside, maybe even an MA-1 but i doubt it. In both cases the end result is some sort of sine wave shenanigans.
Finally, i have added a couple of new ideas for searching for the first mobile phone with polyphony:
- A phone with a classic PSG inside like AY-3-8910 or SN76489 (clones included) or one of those ice cream truck melody ICs from mediatek et al.
- A phone with real audio hardware inside, but not MA-style, like an mp3 decoder and a dac that the CPU blasts via software like miniBAE but earlier and more limited
- A phone with multiple beepers, literally multiple hardware beepers, not software (this is much more of a thing than you probably realize)
I'm placing my bets on a phone from 1998 that only launched on a specific region, with that region being either japan or europe (maybe south korea or china but that's a stretch) 100% not anywhere in the americas.
IF IT TURNS OUT THAT THE FIRST EVER PHONE WITH POLYPHONY IS SOME OBSCURE RUSSIAN PHONE WITH A BUILT-IN FAMICLONE DENDY I'M GONNA LOSE WHAT'S LEFT OF MY MIND, IT'S GONNA BE WAY WAY WORSE IF IT'S AN ATARI 2600 CLONE, I HOPE IT´S NOT THE CASE PLEASE I'LL PRETTY MUCH HAVE A LIQUID BRAIN- -xh-xe-xg- (talk) 05:05, 17 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.