I have subscribed to CTT for many years now and I like the increased Hi-Rail layout coverage. The articles flow well and content is usually very good. The October issue however featured unusual narration of one of the featured layouts by Roger Carp. I found this irriratating. Roger, please stick to the pertinent facts of the layout and its builder.
For product reviews, I think a more balanced representation from all manufacturers is needed. Bob Keller comes across a little too like a salesman.
All in all, CTT has gotten better in the last 2 years.
Paul
Modeling the Baltimore waterfront in HO scale
Doug Murphy 'We few, we happy few, we band of brothers...' Henry V.
Did not get into the whole Andy thing, mind you I like the show, but the article did get a bit irritating. That is just my opinion and they certainly don't do that kind of thing too often, which is good. As for the reviews, I think they are good and much more informative and fair than the "other" magazine. My last issue of OGR seemed like MTH is The Toy Train company, oh, and there is another company that has been around awhile (100+ years).
I did like the photos that showed a large section of the layout and feel they should be included in most photo spreads so you can get a over-all view. It is easy to make a small diorama look good, but how does it play into the whole thing? Please try to do this in the future.
dennis
TCA#09-63805
I agree that more wide-area shots of layouts are enjoyable; closeups are fine if and only if the layout article has more wide area shots. Narration of layouts - while some are boring, others are interesting. I especially like when the layout builder tells his own story, and the ones where the builder is generally enthusiastic about the layout/operations show through. I use to like Roger's narration, but it seems the last year or so they are a little too much fluff.
As for product reviews, I've owned some of the MTH engines Bob Keller has reviewed, and I don't relate to his use of adjectives - to me it sounds like he is pushing the items. Both mags should review each companies products evenly, e.g., scale steam from each, then move to diesels, electrics, semi-scale steam, etc. Then and only then will the reviewer gain an appreciation of what each product's features has, how they compare to each other, strengths and weakenesses, etc. Objectivity is not easy in what unfortunately seems to have become a politically-influened hobby.
Bob Keller
Bob,
Yes, I am a subscriber. I was wondering what people were talking about "on-line reviews", I guess its a separate forum on this site? I'll try to find it.
dwiemer wrote:Did not get into the whole Andy thing, mind you I like the show, but the article did get a bit irritating. That is just my opinion and they certainly don't do that kind of thing too often, which is good. As for the reviews, I think they are good and much more informative and fair than the "other" magazine. My last issue of OGR seemed like MTH is The Toy Train company, oh, and there is another company that has been around awhile (100+ years). I did like the photos that showed a large section of the layout and feel they should be included in most photo spreads so you can get a over-all view. It is easy to make a small diorama look good, but how does it play into the whole thing? Please try to do this in the future. dennis
North of the 49th
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Get the Classic Toy Trains newsletter delivered to your inbox twice a month