I’d like to share some detailed observations about the sound environment of the A340. Overall, the sound set isn’t bad, but it feels incomplete and could really benefit from more depth, variation, and attention to detail. Hopefully this feedback helps the team refine it further.
Cockpit
The overhead switch sounds (fuel pumps, packs) are very generic and don’t match the mechanical "press + release/click" feel these types of switches have in reality. There should be a short mechanical sound when pressed, and another when released or latched.
The tablet (pulling out/stowing) sound also feels very artificial and lacks realism and ist not Airbus like
After connecting to the gate and shutting down the APU and packs, the cockpit becomes almost completly silent. This doesn`t feel realistic, there should still be subtle ambient and environmental variation.
The thrust lever detent clicks are monotone and lack variation. On real Airbus cockpits, those clicks are distinct and contribute a lot to immersion.
In general, there`s a noticeable lack of spatial or 3D depth. Sounds feel "flat" you don’t really get the impression of sitting in a physical cockpit where sound comes from different directions. Even wind noise doesn’t seem to have any spatial dimension or stereo image.
Also, compared to the Fenix, the CFM56 engine sounds inside the cockpit are missing the fine dynamic variations. In the Fenix, you can clearly hear the changing tones and crisp transitions of the CFM56, even below takeoff power , the airflow, whine, and tonal shifts are all layered and alive.
In the iniBuilds A340, however, it feels like there are only two main states: idle growl or takeoff buzzsaw, with little in between. Those mid-range tonal variations are a big part of what gives the cockpit audio life and realism.
Additionally, the engiine spool behavior itself doesn’t seem entirely accurate, the way the engines spool up from idle and how they behave in higher N1 ranges feels off compared to real CFM56 characteristics. Of course, that`s not directly part of Echo19`s work, but since the audio follows the engine model, the sound naturally ends up being affected by it.
Cabin
The cabin soundscape also lacks 3D presence. It feels mono and doesn’t convey the sense of being inside a large cabin four-engine aircraft.
During takeoff, there’s no noticeable low-frequency engine growl from the rear cabin. That deep resonance only appears around 250 kts suggesting it’s linked to airspeed rather than actual engine power. In other words, the rear engine sound seems disconnected from engine state.
Walking from the front to the back of the cabin doesn’t sound natural. In reality, there’s a gradual transition:
In the front, higher-pitched wind noise dominates.
Toward the middle, low-frequency resonance from the engines mixes in, you can feel the subtle not 100% synchronized resonance of four engines.
In the rear, a deeper engine growl combines with wind and airframe noise.This sense of progression and spatial layering is missing right now.
Reference Level
We’ve grown used to the kind of detail and sound layering seen in highend products for example:
Aerosoft CRJ with Boris Sound
PMDG 777 with Boris Sound
Leonardo MD-82 with immersive audio
Fenix
Ifly
If you have access to those, I`d really suggest a quick comparison:
Sit in the cockpit or walk through the cabin during different phases of flight.
Listen to how the sounds evolve, how tonal balance shifts, and how each system or surface has its own distinct signature.
Then experience the same scenario in the A340 (and A350).
The difference in tonal depth, variation, the crispness and how the soundscape evolves through the cabin is immediately noticeable.
This isn’t meant as criticism more as a benchmark. These examples show how much immersion can be achieved when every lever, switch, and ambient layer has its own unique sound character.
The A340 could absolutely reach that same level with further refinement, the base is there, it just needs that extra touch of depth and realism.
I understand that YouTube recordings aren’t technically reliable references due to compression and poor mic quality.
However, even those simple recordings often convey a sound character that feels closer to the real acoustic experience - the raw, spatial, and dynamic impression you get when being on or near the aircraft.
The current mix, while technically clean and high-end, sometimes feels a bit too processed or studio-balanced, missing that natural acoustic "life" and sense of space that real-world sound carries.
Please take this as constructive feedback, not a complaint. The aircraft is already great, with a more nuanced soundscape, it could become truly outstanding in terms of immersion.
