Channel Announcements via WAV Files for XTS 5000

ASTROMODAT · Post by **ASTROMODAT** » Sun Oct 10, 2004 10:50 pm

Has anyone tried the new digital voice announcement feature for channel assignments on the XTS 5000? I'm curious whether you can record custom WAV files for these announcements.

Channel Announcement feature allows voice/audio files to be assigned to
the radio’s channels/modes. The voice recording will then play when the
radio-user changes the radio to a channel with an assigned voice file.
A “Channel Announcement” button-press can also be programmed allowing
the radio-user to hear the radio’s current-channel voice recording
whenever needed. This feature is available to digital XTS 5000 radios only.

Thanks for any help or feedback on this.

Larry

RocketNJ · Post by **RocketNJ** » Mon Oct 11, 2004 3:46 am

Yes, you can record the wav files then compress them to mvf format and load them in the radio. Works well. Firefighters love it since they can have the radio under their turnout coat and not have to look at the radio to see what channel they are on.

If you go into the CPS help there is instructions on the specific parameters to record the wav files at (bit rate, mono, etc)

George

ASTROMODAT · Post by **ASTROMODAT** » Mon Oct 11, 2004 9:45 am

OK, and thanks for the help on this, George.

BTW, I'm confused as to why in the heck Motorola chose to use the .MVF extension. I have never used such a file extension type, but as I understand it this is some sort of a bizarre movie stop frame file, and/or something invented by "auto-flix," or some such company. Do you know what is behind this? Seems like they would have been better off with any number of standard Windoz compatible compression techniques, such as MP3, or a regular PCM compression. I know that you can only run the CPS with this feature in connection with an XTS 5000 via a Windows 2000 PC. Just curious...

Larry

RocketNJ · Post by **RocketNJ** » Mon Oct 11, 2004 10:10 am

Not sure but it does compress the wav file down quite a bit.

George

apco25 · Post by **apco25** » Mon Oct 11, 2004 3:44 pm

why would Motorola use an accepted open standard when a proprietary one will work????

ASTROMODAT · Post by **ASTROMODAT** » Mon Oct 11, 2004 4:00 pm

I don't necessarily have any issue with choosing a proprietary standard, but at least there should be some "rhyme or reason" for it. The .MFV standard is one that is available, but I just don't see why they would use such a weird standard such as "movie stop frame file." I was just curious if someone knew what the background is on it. I'm sure they had their reasons (then again, maybe I'm giving them too much credit!). Probably some EE buried deep in the bowels of Motorola got assigned the task of coming up with a suitable compression algorythm for this task, and the guy happened to be familiar with .MFV because he had worked with this format on his last job (just before he got canned for continually reading "MAD" magazine on-the-job).

Larry

d119 · Post by **d119** » Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:06 am

Perhaps you have the extension type that you apparently googled under confused.

I'll bet you that Motorola just uses that extension to mean something to the effect of ".MVF = Motorola Voice File" or something like that.

I'm sure it has nothing to do with a movie stop frame... Another company might be using the same file extension with a different software package.

http://www.filext.com lists .MVF as the following:

Extension: MVF
Program and/or Extension Function Company
AutoCAD / AutoFlix Stop Frame File Autodesk

Obviously AutoCAD and AutoDesk have nothing to do with audio. No offense Larry, but I think ya got confused .

They aren't using the AutoCAD .MVF format, just a specific WAVE or PCM encoding method with an extension of .MVF, which again, probably stands for Motorola Voice File or Motorola Voice Format or something Motorola.

I could rename my radio's codeplug to be "codeplug.mvf", it'd still open in RSS, but that doesn't make it an AutoCAD .MVF file.

ASTROMODAT · Post by **ASTROMODAT** » Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:12 am

It seemed bizarre that they would use the .MVF listed. Then again, why wouyld they invent their own custom file extension type if they are using standard compression techniques? It still makes no sense at all.

larry

d119 · Post by **d119** » Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:16 am

Then again, why wouyld they invent their own custom file extension type if they are using standard compression techniques?

Because they can. Perhaps its to prevent the customer from confusing their radio voice files with other .WAV or audio files they may have on the computer. Who knows.

It still makes no sense at all.

It's Motorola. It's not supposed to make sense, in the interest of proprietarity and intellectual property.

Post by **xmo** » Tue Oct 12, 2004 1:43 pm

d119: "...I'll bet you that Motorola just uses that extension to mean something to the effect of ".MVF = Motorola Voice File" or something like that. .."
___________________________________________________________

That is exactly correct. If you look it up in the CPS help unde the Voice Compression Window topic it says that the audio "must be input as .wav files and output as .mvf [Motorola Voice File] files."

ASTROMODAT · Post by **ASTROMODAT** » Tue Oct 12, 2004 1:59 pm

If I understand you correctly, xmo, it sounds (no pun intended) like Motorola is using classic PCM WAV files for the compression, and the .MVF is strictly a naming convention (not a proprietary Motorola compression technique, etc.) to help prevent any confusion as to the .WAV files on one's Windoz PC. That actually makes good sense. Should have known that Mother M is rarely errant in her ways.

BTW, xmo, does the Help file say how big any individual .WAV file can be, and what the minimum compression must be (e.g., can you use a 16 bit word size, and can you use a sample rate of 22 kHz?). I’m not at one of our PCs right now with the XTL5000 CPS, and I won’t be able to get to it for several days, or I’d look it up myself.

Larry

Post by **xmo** » Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:45 pm

It's not just a naming convention - the CPS compresses the .wav files into smaller .mvf files. The CPS help file does explain what the user needs to know about the .wav file sizes & types [mono] and the file size that results from the compression.

mike m · Post by **mike m** » Thu Oct 14, 2004 2:02 pm

Curious, but where in the CPS does this option come up, is it in the zone assignment page ? I'm using R04.01.00 with some FPP radios and I cannot find this feature for any of my radios.

Mike

RocketNJ · Post by **RocketNJ** » Thu Oct 14, 2004 5:08 pm

U need the Fireground option.

George

Ray D O · Post by **Ray D O** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 12:10 pm

We are about to receive some 5000's and I am very interested in this function as our officers wear their radios in holsters and it would be handy for audio indication as most do talkgroup changing by touch/feel. My question is-when you do change "channels" how does the radio handle priority? i.e. if a call is being received does it put the channel annunciation mixed with that audio, by itself then rcv audio, how exactly? Thanks for any info.

ASTROMODAT · Post by **ASTROMODAT** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 1:26 pm

In other words, if there is a radio call saying "Officer Down," what happens if you had just dialed up that channel and the WAV file announcement is playing? Sounds like you would be SOL, unless there is some way to set the announcement to be secondary (e.g. wait) until the TX is complete.

No wonder why CPS/RSS gets so ridiculously complicated. Knowing Motorola, this is probably a progamming option, with a bunch of decision trees around how one wants to handle these priorites. Probably such a situation might actually happen once in a hundred years (if that), yet every single radio with WAV announcements will have to be burdened with all of this software. Oh, well...

Larry

RocketNJ · Post by **RocketNJ** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:22 pm

Yes, you can set the channel announce as secondary to voice traffic on the channel.

I believe you need to order the Fireground option Q445AB and it goes for $250 list per radio. That adds the channel announce as well as fireground accountability features for use with the Motorola fireground software.

George

ASTROMODAT · Post by **ASTROMODAT** » Fri Oct 15, 2004 6:57 pm

$250 per radio for some simple software option, times how many ten's of thousands of radios? Adds up to a substantial sum of $'s. Now it makes sense what Bob Galvin said in a speech about 10 years ago when he was the keynote speaker at "The Winds of Change." He said that within a decade or so, more than one-half of Motorola's profits would come from software. I think they are probably close to this goal (especially if you measure total profits, as opposed to total revenues). No wonder why that FLASHport stuff is so priecy! Galvin's got to eat, too!

Larry

ASTROMODAT · Post by **ASTROMODAT** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:13 am

FYI. The Fireground Incident Management Software, T6977, goes for $3,500. The program and the releated manuals all fit on a single CD. (Wow, I wonder how often that one has been burned!)

The Fireground Accountability software ($250 per subscriber radio) can also be loaded into an ASTRO Spectra mobile, as long as it has 1) RS232 Packet Data Interface and 2) RCP (Enhanced Radio Control Protocol). Interestingly enough, it is NOT avalable on the XTL5000! Go figure...

Larry

RocketNJ · Post by **RocketNJ** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 1:40 pm

The Astro Spectra is used an an RF modem for the Incident Management software. The software requires you go online to get a unlock key.

George

ASTROMODAT · Post by **ASTROMODAT** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 7:36 pm

I assume you could load the Fireground Accountability software in the ASTRO Spectra and heve the WAV announcement feature?

Larry

RocketNJ · Post by **RocketNJ** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 8:13 pm

Nope, the Astro Spectra only has a 1 meg vocon. The XTS5000 has 8 meg, so it can hold the voice files. The Astro Spectra is ONLY used as an RF modem for the command post Fireground Accountability software). It is simply a way for the XTS to send status updates,etc to the software.

RocketNJ · Post by **RocketNJ** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 8:17 pm

Here's a link to the Fireground system

http://www.motorola.com/cgiss/fireground.shtml

Our fire department had a demo of it. It is pretty slick.

George

ASTROMODAT · Post by **ASTROMODAT** » Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:33 pm

OK, got it. Makes sense now. Thanks, George.

Larry

Post by **xmo** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 12:49 pm

Latest update - channel announcement - I tried it - it works great!

You DO NOT need the fireground option on the XTS5000.

Maybe that was the original intent, but now it comes standard with the Q806 digital feature. The radio firmware and host must be R04.50.00 or newer.

RocketNJ · Post by **RocketNJ** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 2:19 pm

xmo wrote:Latest update - channel announcement - I tried it - it works great!

You DO NOT need the fireground option on the XTS5000.

Maybe that was the original intent, but now it comes standard with the Q806 digital feature. The radio firmware and host must be R04.50.00 or newer.

That's good to know. We have some that we ordered with the Fireground option. What is the price for just the voice announce enhancement?

George

Post by **xmo** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 3:14 pm

"...What is the price for just the voice announce enhancement?..."
_______________________________________________________

That's the great thing - there is no price for this feature - it's standard with Q806 digital.

If you already have radios that shipped with firmware / host older than the required R04.50.00, you would need a refresh at about $75.00 per radio.

ASTROMODAT · Post by **ASTROMODAT** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 3:24 pm

xmo is correct, per below:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Options
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Operation Mode Description Nomenclature APC Price
ENH: SOFTWARE ANALOG OPERATION Q241 721 $0.00
MUST order Q241 or Q806. Q241 does not support encryption.
ADD: SOFTWARE ASTRO DIGITAL CAI OPERATION Q806 721 $515.00
INCLUDES the Channel Announcement Feature
ADD: SOFTWARE ASTRO DIGITAL CAI Q806 320 $515.00
INCLUDES the Channel Announcement Feature

RocketNJ · Post by **RocketNJ** » Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:55 pm

xmo wrote:"...What is the price for just the voice announce enhancement?..."
_______________________________________________________

That's the great thing - there is no price for this feature - it's standard with Q806 digital.

If you already have radios that shipped with firmware / host older than the required R04.50.00, you would need a refresh at about $75.00 per radio.

Cool! Good to know.

Ray D O · Post by **Ray D O** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 1:05 pm

Just programmed a 5000 with Ch. Ann. and letting officers evaluate it. They like the feature but want to be able to turn it off and on. I haven't discovered if this is possible but this is my first time touching a 5000. It would be nice if the tone mute function would kill it but doesn't appear to. Is there a parameter to allow user selection of the channel announcement function that I may have missed?

Thanks for any input.

Post by **Wowbagger** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 2:59 pm

Interesting - I wonder if they are using the IMBE vocoder to compress the files - that would certainly reduce the size of the files.

ASTROMODAT · Post by **ASTROMODAT** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 3:16 pm

Interesting thought. If they are doing this, I would think they would have to read the compressed voice file(s) from the CPS, and then as it is loaded into the XTS 5k, it would go through the IMBE vocoder, get further compressed, and then written to the XTS 5k's memory.

The only reason I can see why this might be a problem is the IMBE vocoder itself. Its codebook is optimized for directly input, non-compressed human analog voice. In your scenario, the IMBE vocoder would be trying to read (and then subsequently encode, for a second time) a recovered voice file from the CPS's compressed digital voice file. This amounts to double vocoding, except even worse, since the compressed voice files in the CPS are worse quality than an original generation IMBE vocoded file.

Given what back-to-back DIU's sound like, I don't like the idea of double vocoding with IMBE, and this scenario would be even worse, since the origianally encoded voice files in the CPS are likely worse quality than encoded IMBE files.

It would probably “work” and it would have the advantage of even smaller voice file sizes, but I would think the audio voice quality would be awful (e.g., like Motorola's CVSD on their old Systems90 20 second Voice Recording System, or like DVP). Ugh!!!!!

larry

RocketNJ · Post by **RocketNJ** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 4:08 pm

There is no way to have a user turn the channel announce feature on and off. Maybe use a different duplicate zone for that?

George

Ray D O wrote:Just programmed a 5000 with Ch. Ann. and letting officers evaluate it. They like the feature but want to be able to turn it off and on. I haven't discovered if this is possible but this is my first time touching a 5000. It would be nice if the tone mute function would kill it but doesn't appear to. Is there a parameter to allow user selection of the channel announcement function that I may have missed?

Thanks for any input.

ASTROMODAT · Post by **ASTROMODAT** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 6:41 pm

Probably because Motorola never figured a Firefighter would need to selectively turn the voice announcement ON/OFF. For a LEO, I can sure see why he would want the ability to Mute the voice announcement (e.g., when he's responding to a silent 211)!

larry

radioactive69 · Post by **radioactive69** » Sat Apr 09, 2005 10:43 am

Just got done loading in some voice files and found that if you have programed "mute" into your menu (XTS5000 III) , the mute not only mutes the button beeps but also the voice playback.

So, you can stop it from playing.
I found that if you record the files in high 44khz - 16bit mono then down convert to what moto likes the audio is louder then what I had done before which was record in 8Khz - 8 bit mono.

Doug.

ASTROMODAT · Post by **ASTROMODAT** » Sat Apr 09, 2005 10:54 am

They need to have an option that supports MP3 files. Different rap tune for each channel.

CTAMontrose · Post by **CTAMontrose** » Sat Apr 09, 2005 11:57 am

they could have special Boost Mobile XTS5000s too!

ASTROMODAT · Post by **ASTROMODAT** » Sat Apr 09, 2005 4:53 pm

This ring tone stuff is getting to be a big business! Verizon has recently launched a new service nationwide where their MTSO's send back a custom programmed MP3 file to the landline and/or mobile CALLLING party (based on the CID, and it can be programmed to play back a different MP3 file for the same calling party , based on time of day). This is in lieu of the old Bell Labs ring tones that the calling party has heard for the past 100 years or so. This way, when I call my son, it plays Miami Vice back to me over the landline (or when I'm calling from my Mobile, which he has set to play a different MP3!). If each of his sisters call him, they hear a different MP3 file coming back to them from Verizon's MTSO. It's really sweet! I guess they finally figured out that if folks expect custom MP3 files to play out for incoming calls on their cell phones (as has been the case for the past 5+ years on cell phones), then why not have the MTSO send back custom MP3's to the calling party, too?

larry

CTAMontrose · Post by **CTAMontrose** » Sat Apr 09, 2005 4:57 pm

yeah i was reading that! amazing what they can do these days

mr.syntrx · Post by **mr.syntrx** » Sat Apr 09, 2005 5:25 pm

ASTROMODAT wrote:They need to have an option that supports MP3 files. Different rap tune for each channel.

Or you could play the CHiPS or COPS theme for the police channel, the Emergency! theme for the fire channel..

ASTROMODAT · Post by **ASTROMODAT** » Sat Apr 09, 2005 5:33 pm

No wonder why that XTS-5000 costs $5,800!

mr.syntrx · Post by **mr.syntrx** » Sat Apr 09, 2005 6:28 pm

It's a pity they can't make ASTRO gear with the same economies of scale as they make cellphones. It would all be dirt cheap, if they did.

ASTROMODAT · Post by **ASTROMODAT** » Sat Apr 09, 2005 8:14 pm

But economies of scale is the exact point. I visited a Motorola manufacturing plant that had 4 lines, each one cranking out StarTACs. Each line was making 4,000 phones per day, with a quality of 6 sigma (2 to 3 defects per one million phones, and a defect included things as seemingly innocuous as an escutcheon minimally out of alignment!). That was 16,000 cell phones manufactured each day, 365 days per year. That's 1 of Motorola's many cell phone plants, not to mention the numerous other cell phone manufacturing vendors, such as Kyocera, Smasung, LG, Nokia, etc. Think of how many 100's of millions of cell phones are manufactured and sold every year, and the fact that 8 year old kids are getting their folks to buy them cell phones, which they fully expect to turn over for a new model cell phone every 18 months, or less.

The point is that all of the subscriber sets on all of the P25 systems in the US don't amount to a tiny pimple compared to cell phone quantities, so the economies of scale just ain't there! It's too bad! No chance this will change, either, because even as P25 takes off, it will still be nothing compared to cell phone quantities.

mr.syntrx · Post by **mr.syntrx** » Sat Apr 09, 2005 10:00 pm

Yep.

TETRA subscriber equipment is far cheaper than P25 gear. TETRA gear happens to have a fair bit in common with cellphones electronically, so they come ahead.

RocketNJ · Post by **RocketNJ** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:00 am

You need to remember though the cost of a cellphone to a new subscriber is subsidized by the carrier since the subscriber is locked into a long term contract.

Try and get a $49 phone without a contract. Won't happen.

George

mr.syntrx · Post by **mr.syntrx** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:03 am

You can get a $300 phone without a contract.

ASTROMODAT · Post by **ASTROMODAT** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 9:20 am

And, don't forget that $300 phone will drop to less than $100 less than 6 months later as it becomes yesterday's technology. Anyway you cut it, even without a contract, cell phones are really cheap, and getting cheaper every day.

This is a big part of the reason why Ham radio has been rapidly dying off, not to mention the new cheap airtime plans. Autopatch has long since been dead, and this was a major driver for Ham radio use, as well as bringing the new kids into the hobby. Too bad it had to happen, but I guess all good things must come to an end, especially with the technology monster out there that even Communism couldn't beat back.

Post by **batdude** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 9:43 am

this is one of the reasons that i was kinda upset at how P25 was brought into the world.

for the first time, the hams were NOT on the cutting edge. FM repeaters were a ham invention (starting with AM)....

and it's also the reason why i have tried my best to get digital machines on the air.

with the astro desktop DIU's i just bought off of ebay, I'm hoping to add to the functionality of what we already have - namely - linking a few of my sites together in mixed mode

doug

Ray D O · Post by **Ray D O** » Thu May 05, 2005 12:17 pm

I did some more checking on trying to kill channel announcements after reading tone mute menu function will silence them. It doesn't-once again could it be another parameter I am missing? I have received signal priority set for channel announcements. Thanks in advance for any advice. Our firefighters like what they have seen on sample radio-will help in smoke and darkness but LEO's want to be able to silence it for covert situations-very understandable....

Channel Announcements via WAV Files for XTS 5000

Channel Announcements via WAV Files for XTS 5000

Channel annunciation priority?

Can you kill channel announcement function as radio user

MVF files

Re: Can you kill channel announcement function as radio user

..

Channel Ann. will not turn off