VIOFO A119 V3

forking the firmware to two versions becomes a headache for any ongoing updates as they then need to maintain two different versions for all future changes
Perhaps I'm looking at it too simplistically? Develop the one firmware update, release one version "as is" with the standard gain- then "cut and paste" the previously worked out extra mic gain into it and that's your second firmrware. It doesn't sound like a lot of extra work to me.
 
If it's a hardware issue, no single FW can make every cam optimum, and with this much difference probably not at all. The only single-point fix I can see is user-adjustable mic gain and that might not be possible without losing something else in the process making even more people unhappy. Having a high-gain and a low-gain FW would mean twice as much testing and likely more bugs to deal with for each FW update.

In no dashcam does everything work perfectly; at least all these do record audio. I wouldn't expect much if anything different except maybe in newer cams.

Phil
 
Mine is fine (as far as I can remember). Out of curiositty, could a mic gain option be written with just 3 values? Such as +1, 0, -1.
 
Mine is fine (as far as I can remember). Out of curiositty, could a mic gain option be written with just 3 values? Such as +1, 0, -1.
nothing's impossible, the impossible just takes longer and costs more ;)

seriously though, to add something as a user selectable menu option which is not already an option in the SDK is a lot of work
 
Mine is fine (as far as I can remember). Out of curiositty, could a mic gain option be written with just 3 values? Such as +1, 0, -1.
Low, Medium, High might be easier to understand.

But there is a problem that it is using an automatic volume control, so the effect of changing mic gain will be canceled out by an automatic adjustment to volume. So what is it you want your setting to actually do?
 
to add something as a user selectable menu option which is not already an option in the SDK is a lot of work
I thought that this was the case here, thanks for confirming it :cool: The same situation would likely apply to implementing AGC, which I've never found to work very well with anything so even if AGC were in the SDK I wouldn't expect much of it.

Hearing and volume are totally objective and no two people will find one volume level 'perfect'- at best you can only get one which most folks find tolerable or usable. Someone will always be unhappy with that level; there's no avoiding it :rolleyes:

Phil
 
Okay, I have a new firmware to try out with the gain reduced slightly from the previously supplied. (I requested something at about a level of 2/3 between the two.)

I'll test it out again over the next couple of days.
 
It appears they've upped the gain a little too far. It picks up the car audio system and voices really well, but I could detect distortion in my voice and some of the audio had loud vibrating type noises?

I've worked out what that noise most likely was- the CPL filter vibrating on the camera's lens. I think it's the CPL I was using on a Mobius and it's perhaps "stretched" a bit. The latest revised firmware was also picking it up at a lower, clearer level and it was noticeable over patched roads, cobblestones (etc.) in the vehicle with the firmer suspension. Some fleece tape should have that sorted- it's my new favourite "go to" for fixing car vibrations.
Okay, I have a new firmware to try out with the gain reduced slightly from the previously supplied. (I requested something at about a level of 2/3 between the two.)

I'll test it out again over the next couple of days.
Initial testing looks very good. It's probably more like 1/3 of the way between the stock firmware mic level and the initial boosted firmware. I can clearly hear myself talking, the indicators can be heard. Really cranking the audio system up is recorded clearly with no distortion.

I'll keep testing and try it out again in the "sportier" vehicle to check if the noise definitely was the CPL filter vibrating.
 
Have you applied the thin supplied foam between camera and mount as that causes vibration noise like you mention if not fitted.
 
Most of the people don't care about audio, they are happy with a good video. Some of them are keeping the audio turned off because what are they speaking in the car someday can be against them. I know a case when a dashcam was stolen from a car just for the audio recordings. Other people expect studio quality audio for their dashcam audio.
 
I agree, you can't expect cinema quality video or sound from a tiny dashcam.

Comparing my current V3 to my first dashcam they have come a long way and I have zero complaints with my V3.
 
Comparing my current V3 to my first dashcam they have come a long way and I have zero complaints with my V3.
I can second that. Especially after upgrading with modified firmware that enabled 4K resolution, H.265 codec, and 21:9 aspect ration. And big thanks for this to our Ukrainian friend.
 
As I've mentioned previously, both of the V3s I've had in my vehicle for over a year have recorded at unusually low volume levels to the point where the captured sound was almost useless. I found this situation has been tolerable for me because I have other cameras in my vehicle if I ever really needed decent quality audio such as to capture the sound of my turn signals or something else. For example, I occasionally call out the license plate numbers of a vehicle in traffic if I encounter a situation where I want to be certain that I document the number even if the video doesn't capture it.

More recently, after the v 2.0 firmware update, I noticed that the audio was now much louder and this was a welcome improvement except that the audio still seemed a bit muffled and tubby sounding. I knew it could be better but still, I felt OK with the performance I was getting even if it wasn't optimal. Most of the time, in most circumstances I don't find the quality of the audio to be all that important.

That brings me to something that happened just the other day. I encountered an interesting situation that I thought I might like to post video of here on the forum. While driving, I briefly described what I was seeing so that viewers would have a better understanding of what they were looking at.

It so happens that I have two front facing cameras in my vehicle, the V3 and an original (at least six year old) Mobius with a telephoto lens on it. I intended to post simultaneous video from both cameras.

When I got home and reviewed the video from both cameras I was astonished by the comparison! The audio of my voice describing the event on the Mobius was absolutely crystal clear, realistic and nuanced. I could hear every last detail of my voice and my surroundings. I could easily use the adjective "superb" to describe the high quality of the recording due to the clarity and ambience.

The audio from the A119 V3 was far different. It was terrible actually. It was muffled to such a degree that even after repeated listening I couldn't make out many of the words I myself had spoken. If this was audio I really needed for some mission critical documentation, it would have been useless!

If some dash cam users don't care about the quality of the audio from their cameras, that's fine. If a user wants to turn off the audio, that's fine too, of course. But I believe there should be a minimum standard of performance where a camera should provide a decent level of audibility and clarity in a recording. Dash cams are there to document our surroundings after all.

I've been using dash cams now for ten years, have had experience with dozens of cameras and with few exceptions, I've come to expect that a dash cam will capture sound clearly enough to hear what happens in and around the cabin of my vehicle. There is no reason for it to be otherwise. Anything else is unacceptable!

All in all I really like the V3s. Nevertheless, it is discouraging that there have been several significant issues, such as audio quality, banded low light video and HDR double exposures that have remained more or less unresolved for a long time now and that Viofo seems reluctant to even discuss or address publicly.
 
Last edited:
I have zero complaints with my V3.
You keep mentioning over and over throughout this thread that you haven't had any problems with your camera. Meanwhile, many other owners have reported issues such as low light banding, audio/microphone problems, HDR double exposures and a few other things. If true, then it sounds as if there are issues with some production runs of this camera and not others.
 
Eyes of the beholder i guess, or if the series are bad maybe he got lucky.
 
Dash cams are there to document our surroundings after all.
Exactly. We can't expect greatness, but there should be at least adequate. And if you can't make out your own words that is inadequate by anyone's standards.

Sure hope this gets sorted out...

Phil
 
Have you applied the thin supplied foam between camera and mount as that causes vibration noise like you mention if not fitted.
I haven't but will double check if there's any play in the mount. I've got them attached with dual lock and so rarely slide it out the mount, so it shouldn't be worn and have play in it.

Most of the people don't care about audio, they are happy with a good video. Some of them are keeping the audio turned off because what are they speaking in the car someday can be against them. I know a case when a dashcam was stolen from a car just for the audio recordings. Other people expect studio quality audio for their dashcam audio.

I agree, you can't expect cinema quality video or sound from a tiny dashcam.

Comparing my current V3 to my first dashcam they have come a long way and I have zero complaints with my V3.

Here we go again. You don't like audio being recorded- fine, move on and don't bother replying. You're just clogging the thread with useless personal opinions. If a camera is sold with an audio capability then it should be usable. Requesting audible volume so voices can be heard and thing like the indicators operating or car horns isn't requesting "studio quality audio".
 
Last edited:
Back
Top