|
|
Post by MoreToJack on Jun 10, 2022 23:46:37 GMT
The intonation of 61016 and the revised script were new requirements. I'm anticipating that other operators will be told to do the same in time. The reality though, of course, is that that ship has sailed. If the intonation is being changed to make the public notice something already in their subconscious, they will only want to *not* do that. Again, something established through many years of LT research. |
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Jun 11, 2022 7:26:57 GMT
I suspect that the idea is to to make it easy for people who DON'T already know the number.
It's very easy to remember as 'six-101-six'. Not so much any other way.
Full marks for ad copy on this one.
|
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,286 
|
Post by rincew1nd on Jun 11, 2022 8:13:26 GMT
LU's distinction seems to be 'six (pause) one-oh-one (pause) six', which is indeed new (and, arguably, wrong - for an organisation that has done lots of research into how people respond to announcements, highlighting the '101' part is arguably not the best idea. However, given that 101 is the national non-emergency number for the police service, it makes perfect sense to me why it's been tweaked slightly. |
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jun 11, 2022 8:23:53 GMT
However, given that 101 is the national non-emergency number for the police service, it makes perfect sense to me why it's been tweaked slightly. I've been told that is indeed the reason for the change. And the other script changes also to renew it slightly. No doubt a well paid group spent some time on it! |
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Jun 12, 2022 13:38:15 GMT
It's very easy to remember as 'six-101-six'. Not so much any other way. I dunno about anyone else but I can easily remember it backwards. So that is another way.    |
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Jun 12, 2022 14:00:00 GMT
LU's distinction seems to be 'six (pause) one-oh-one (pause) six', which is indeed new (and, arguably, wrong - for an organisation that has done lots of research into how people respond to announcements, highlighting the '101' part is arguably not the best idea. I'm glad you posted this. I thought I heard 6-101-6 somewhere last week, and I kind of shuddered at it. I wasn't really listening, having heard the preamble knowing (or rather, expecting) what words were coming next, then when 6-101-6 came, thought I was hearing things, or the electronics making the noise were screwed somehow. And agree the emphasis is in the wrong place. Have to agree six one zero one six is formally correct, and even non-operational people like me had to do the e-zone comms course recently reinforcing the phonetics, and is at odds with six one owe one six. But then again, no-one (in general, outside critical comms) ever reads out telephone numbers - or IP addresses - saying zero vice owe, and Joe Public is always advised (where appropriate) verbally to call nine nine nine not nin-er nin-er nin-er and so on. Digressing, a colleague (ex military, general amateur radio crank) had some theory 61016 has some basis from Morse since 6 -.... 1 .---- i.e. 1 is the opposite of 6; seperated by 0 ----- Not convinced myself, far from it; methinks this is coincidence, and you can devise other symmetric sequences e.g. in 27572 2 and 7 are opposites ..--- and --... and ..... Not as if we have Morse code bleeps broadcast to us on trains and stations. /offtopicity |
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Jun 12, 2022 14:08:38 GMT
The intonation of 61016 and the revised script were new requirements. I'm anticipating that other operators will be told to do the same in time. I'm wondering if 6-101-6, which brings out the 101, is some early ramping up towards dropping 61016, and end up with just call 101 ? And before someone posts it, I mean nationally, not just within LU. |
|
|
|
Post by taylor on Jun 13, 2022 10:57:17 GMT
Anyone else feel the quality of the (automated) announcements on TfL rolling stock keep getting worse and worse? Compare the Julie Berry voice on the 1973 Stock and Class 315s (natural, speaks in full sentences, flows smoothly, no awkward pauses, doesn’t sound robotic) to the horrible (IMHO) announcements on the Class 345s. A massive downgrade! I’ve been away for a few weeks, so it’s really encouraging and invigorating to read that the board’s grammarians and rhetoricians are still in fine fettle. I’ve missed that. None-the-less, I do wonder if anyone at TfL has ever approached Her Majesty to record the announcements for her eponymous and other lines? That would be wonderful and help bring the announcements back up the hill down which the OP feels they’ve evidently descended. It might also lead to more personal descriptions of such stations as Tower Hill, Westminster, St. James's or Green Parks. For example, on the Elizabeth Line, approaching Slough, "Change here for one's house." could provoke the odd grin. Now should that 'one' have a capital letter? Hmm. |
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Jun 13, 2022 16:47:52 GMT
OK for Elizabeth. She'd probably be up for it, too.
You would have to get someone like Mike Yarwood to do Victoria, which would doubtless give the tired old debate a fresh airing.
G-good job G-george doesn't h-have a line...
|
|
|
|
Post by bpk on Jun 14, 2022 13:18:26 GMT
Anyone else feel the quality of the (automated) announcements on TfL rolling stock keep getting worse and worse? The current standard automated station announcements on the MICA system are uneasy on the ear and sound like they've been spliced together badly. The "Voice Perfect" system from the late 90's sounds far better, some stations have retained it fortunately. |
|
