Geekiest PE feature request...ever

[Tim Krajcar]

I moved awhile back to 100% in-the-box work, so my only keys at this point are a M-Audio Axiom, which I'm very fond of. I just can't justify the expense-to-utilization ratio of hardware synths.

Of course, I probably spend close to the same on plugins, but they do take up less space in the garage

[brianshell]

I read this thread a few weeks ago.. thought it was an awesome idea... but have an idea for extending this even further...

Every time I show my setup to somebody they ALWAYS have the same comment when I change frequencies.. "HEY! That's the SAME GUY you were just talking to!"... We all get it... but it definitely impacts the feel somewhat.

What if the voice-pitch of the controller changed depending on what frequency I was on? If you're going to go to the trouble of making the voice sound like it's coming over a radio, adding a few extra lines of code to make the voice sound like it's coming from a different person might be fun...

File this in the "geeky request" bucket. =)

[Keith Smith]

Ok, let's add it to the list.....oh look. It's already there.

As usual, the devil is in the details. The problem here is that the transmission each controller makes goes out on many frequencies (assuming they're working many frequencies). So, the people listening in are going to hear the voice changing (kinda sorta through this voice morphong technology) over and over in a short period of time, even though THEY haven't changed frequencies.

This solution causes more problems than it solves.

The REAL solution is to have more controllers, and for us to utilize "change to my frequency..." rather than contact within the TRACON and within the center sectors, rather than "contact." The former sets the expectation that you're going to be speaking to the same guy.

I'll also be honest, people need to grasp that it would take HUNDREDS of controllers to work all the positions that make up the 40 towered airports, all the TRACON positions and all the low/high enroute positions. It's completely unreasonable to think that $19.95/mth is going to fund a venture that has hundreds of controllers online 15x7. Something has to give. From a training perspective, it doesn't matter whether the voice changes or not. This is an area where we need to set expectations, not cover it up with a technology solution that's riddled with holes.

[brianshell]

Ok, let's add it to the list.....oh look. It's already there.

As usual, the devil is in the details. The problem here is that the transmission each controller makes goes out on many frequencies (assuming they're working many frequencies). So, the people listening in are going to hear the voice changing (kinda sorta through this voice morphong technology) over and over in a short period of time, even though THEY haven't changed frequencies.

Unless the voice-change was occurring on the CLIENT-side rather than the SERVER side.

I'll also be honest, people need to grasp that it would take HUNDREDS of controllers to work all the positions that make up the 40 towered airports, all the TRACON positions and all the low/high enroute positions. It's completely unreasonable to think that $19.95/mth is going to fund a venture that has hundreds of controllers online 15x7. Something has to give. From a training perspective, it doesn't matter whether the voice changes or not. This is an area where we need to set expectations, not cover it up with a technology solution that's riddled with holes.

Easy there... we're just trying to come up with ways to make it FEEL like you have hundreds of controllers, without compromising the rest of the experience. If this idea won't work, throw it aside.. No harm no foul. =)

I continue to believe that one or two ingenious technology changes (whatever they may be.. as yet undiscovered) might someday help... =)

[Keith Smith]

It doesn't matter where the manipulation occurs...there's no way of knowing which pilot is being addressed in a given transmission. So, there's no way to know which transmissions should be modified.

We have a vision for the network, and it does involve more concurrent controllers than we have right now.

[brianshell]

It doesn't matter where the manipulation occurs...there's no way of knowing which pilot is being addressed in a given transmission. So, there's no way to know which transmissions should be modified.

Maybe I didn't explain this very well.... This would be implemented 100% on the client-side... the server software, the controllers, etc. would have no idea this was happening. I envision.. say... 8 different "voice profiles".. let's call them "Deep Voice Male #1", "Deep Voice Male #2", "Average Voice Male #1", etc...

The client knows that if I'm tuned to:

118.anything... I should hear Deep Male Voice #1
119.anything... Deep Male Voice #2
120.anything... Standard Male Voice #1
121.anything... Standard Male Voice #2
122.anything... High Female Voice #1
123.anything... High Female Voice #2

etc.

Is it perfect? No.. but would provide some variety in the voices each time I change frequencies.

(Note that there might be more effective ways to "spread out" which voice you hear on which frequencies).

[Keith Smith]

Fair enough. Now you just need to distinguish between a controller and a pilot transmission (on the client side), which we don't currently do.

That, and:

...without compromising the rest of the experience...

If you can find a voice manipulation library which will do that reliably so that 99% of people are fooled into thinking that's their real voice, and if we can distinguish between pilot and controller voices (so the manipulation can be toggled) then it's not a horrible idea. Is it worth all that effort? I don't think so.

[Keith Smith]

2 more issues:
1) I know for a fact that many pilots enjoy being able to recognize the voice of controllers (both in real world and here on PE)
2) we have a female controller here, and may have more in the future. The voice library would need to be able to convincingly morph anyone's voice. I haven't looked into it, but that seems a tall order.

I maintain this is the wrong solution to an issue that is better solved by setting expectations. Trying to fake the presence of more controllers is a potentially slippery slope in terms of credibility and integrity.

[brianshell]

2 more issues:
1) I know for a fact that many pilots enjoy being able to recognize the voice of controllers (both in real world and here on PE)
2) we have a female controller here, and may have more in the future. The voice library would need to be able to convincingly morph anyone's voice. I haven't looked into it, but that seems a tall order.

The technology to do this is quite good.. has come a long way in the last 2 to 3 years. That said, it seems like the first problem is easily solved by giving this feature an on/off switch on the client.

I maintain this is the wrong solution to an issue that is better solved by setting expectations. Trying to fake the presence of more controllers is a potentially slippery slope in terms of credibility and integrity.

Fair enough!! =)

Hope you don't mind if I continue to throw out more nutty ideas.

[Keith Smith]

If you're putting this level of energy into spreading the word about PE then I can't complain