In the latest issue of Model Railroad News (June 2010), there is a written review of MRC's DCC Software & Hardware on page 65-67 by Steven Goehring.
Interesting tidbits:Wireless PC interface for PA, PA2 or PAE: $95.Cabled PC interface for PA, PA2, or PAE: $55.Wireless PC interface for Prodigy Wireless: $70.
Runs on Windows 98 to Windows 7, but no Mac OSX support.
One must download the software from MRC's website (none included with hardware).
The MRC software is free.
The screen "GUI" is almost completely mouse based...no keyboard shortcuts without first clicking on the item with the mouse first.
It does handle routes and consists.
Questionable:1Q). "As MRN's resident MRC-user, I got the chance to try out the new Wireless Computer Interface. It measures up fairly well in the still-new model railroad control software market and, with a software upgrade here and there, it could become truly great."
1A). Um, "...Still new..."? Is 10+ years "still new"? The Digitrax PR-1 and MS100 were compatible with Windows 3.1 and MS-DOS (!) for pete's sake. And I don't know when KAM, RR&Co., or Digitoys started, but more than a few years ago for each of them. JMRI's website says they started in 1997. And I haven't even mentioned the old C/MRI from Model Railroader that started in 1985...25 years ago. This is "still new"?
2Q). "While some may gripe that it does not support the more common Decoder Pro software, I say put a lid on the griping and watch to see what MRC does next with this software."
2A). Whaaaat? "...Put a lid on the griping"? That's a rather outrageous comment to make in a product review IMHO (psst...telling your customers to shut up is not the best of PR moves). Imagine if he said the same thing about a model? "While some may gripe about the wrong colors of this model, I say put a lid on the griping and watch to see what MRC does next." This incompatiblity is a ligitimate concern, and the product reviewer just brushes it off as it were nothing important. That the new MRC hardware does not support the most popular model railroad software on the market (AKA JMRI) is right up there with a new model not supporting the standard Kadee coupler shank. If the MRC software is free like JMRI is, then why did they bother to keep JMRI from using their hardware interface?
3Q). "For my MRC sound decoder fleet, JMRI is sadly lacking, so MRC is the runaway winner in my case."3A). Huh? Looking at the JMRI website, they seem to support:MRC 14/28/128 step decoders FamilyAD322 MRC 14/28 step decoders FamilyAD310 AD330 MRC 14 step decoders FamilyAD305 MRC AD370 Sound decoders FamilyAD370 MRC Athearn FamilyAthearn Genesis SD45-2 Athearn Big Boy and 4-8-4 FEF Athearn Big Boy and Challenger NScale Athearn Genesis Challenger Athearn Genesis F45/FP45 Athearn Genesis F Unit Athearn Genesis MP 15 Athearn SD45/SD60 MRC-1825 MRC Rapido FamilyTurboTrain MRC Sound Decoders FamilySynch Diesel Sound 1829 MRC Light Effect Decoders Family5 Function decoder 1650 MRC Sound Decoders FamilySynch Diesel Sound 1626 Synch Steam Sound 1627 Synch Diesel Sound 1634 MRC Brilliance Sound Decoders FamilySynch Steam Sound 1630 Synch Diesel Sound 1631 Synch Diesel Sound 1632 Synch Diesel Sound 1633 Synch Diesel Sound 1636 Synch Steam Sound 1637 Mini HO EMD Modern Large Diesel Sound 1638 Mini HO/N Synch Steam Sound 1639 Synch Diesel Sound 1644 Synch Diesel Sound 1645 Synch Steam Sound 1656 Synch Diesel Sound 1658 - Kato N F3 Synch Diesel Sound 1663 - Atlas S2/S4 Synch Diesel Sound 1800 - HO UNIVERSAL ALCO/ SD60/SD70/F Synch Diesel Sound 1801 - HO DROP-IN ALCO/SD60/SD70/F Synch Diesel Sound 1802 - HO Scale KATO SD40-2 Synch Diesel Sound 1806 - N Scale KATO SD40-2 Synch Diesel Sound 1811 - G.E. U23B Prime Mover Synch Diesel Sound 1808 - N Scale KATO SD80 - SD90/43MAC Synch Diesel Sound 1810 - N Scale KATO F40PH Synch Diesel Sound 1812 - N Scale Atlas Short Board Dropin G Gauge Steam Decoder 1819 Synch Diesel Sound 1820 - Athearn RS3 Synch Diesel Sound 1827 - N - KATO PA1 Athearn Big Boy or Challenger MRC Sounder Decoders FamilyDiesel Sound Decoder 1662 SD45-SW1500 Steam Sound Decoder 1665 Diesel Sound Decoder 1666 Alco244SD60-70 Is there anything missing from this list that would make it "sadly lacking" in regards to MRC sound decoders? I don't think it's possible. Therefore, this reviewer in MRN is dead wrong.
4Q). "And MRC will have to decide if they will...push their computer DCC interface to definitively seize the top spot of personal computer train control." 4A). That's sort of a laugh until they make it available to all DCC users, isn't it? As far as I can figure, in order to use their free software, you have to 1). buy their hardware interface, and 2). have an MRC system to plug it in to. So this rather leaves out the users of the "Big 3" of DCC: Digitrax, NCE & Lenz (not to mention EasyDCC, Zimo, etc.). How can anyone seriously suggest that MRC could ever "sieze the top spot" for PC interfaces with that kind of limitation?
Unintentionally hilarious:"So far though, I've found that the programmer tends to cut out when trying to read data from a decoder...I had to read the entire 28-step speed table from my FP7 three times to get all the data...And reading CV's from the main CV Blaster page returned nothing. I could read the address but not any other CV."
Heh. Just like their decoders, they don't want to read either!
Paul A. Cutler III
I'm sure some MRC users will complain about this being another MRC bashing thread, but honestly, when it comes to comparing MRC's software to JMRI, there is no comparison. MRC's software will only do a small fraction of what JMRI(and others, for that matter) will. A few missing features: graphical display of layout for turnout control and block occupancy, automated running, signaling logic, network and internet access for remote users, iPod/iPhone/Droid throttle software...
I mentioned this in one of the other MRC threads - perhaps JMRI is 'lacking' in that the publicaly available information used to create the decoder definitions is not the whole story - maybe there are some additional 'undocumented' CVs or possible CV values that MRC put in their software. Who knows.
As for layout control - we don't even know if anything is possible with MRC outside of controlling accessory decoders via track commands because apart from telling you that they uise 8-wire RJ45 cables for their cab bus, the manuals tell you absolutely NOTHING about what the type of communications is and what possible commands it could support. And MRC does not want to give out this information like EVERY OTHER DCC manufacturer has. Is it RS-485 derived? Ethernet derived? (almost certainly not, since there is a switch to change how many cabs are supported - clearly it's a polled system)
Capabilities of the system notwithstanding, the fact that they simply do not tell you any technical details would elmininate MRC from my list of possible systems to use. Either it doesn't do much beyond what you see on the surface (which would explain how they can put it all in only 30 pages) or there's a whole lot more there that for whatever reason they don;t want to tell us about.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
Ohmigosh! A blatantly promotional review of a high-dollar advertiser's product in a glossy model railroading magazine. Have we really come to this? O tempore! O mores!
Not MRC bashing. MRRNews bashing. News flash: MRRNews, like most magazines, is not a public service. They do it for the money!
You want the possibility of an unbiased review - of anything - check out an open blog-site. Then you'll only have to guess at the reviewer's personal bias. And their competence. But a glossy mag, where the review is printed right opposite a full-page 4-color ad from the manufacturer? Not too likely!
I've generaly foudn MRN to be quite fair and unbiased in their reviews - until this issue. The only MRC ad in it is for their trees, not for the DCC systems. But they also missed some (to me anyway) serious flaws in the USA Trains large scale Northeastern caboose. I don;t do large scale so I really don't care all that much, but even in the full-page ad in the same issue it's pretty obvious the roof's on backwards. Maybe it can be removed and replaced easily and it's just a photo mistake. They did comment on the painting it for a couple dozen roads, most of which never had an even remotely similar caboose. They had no problem mentioning that one of their Intermountain cab-forwards didn't run worth a darn and had to be sent back.
I've subscribed to MRN mainly because of the reviews and general feeling of impartiality. The reviews are far more in depth than anyone else's, AND since it's basically an all-review magazine, they cover more of the new products than a more general purpose magazine could hope to cover.
What percentage of model train enthusists even use a computer in conjunction with their layouts? 1% maybe 2%? Heck, a sizable number of the hundreds of thousands of model railroaders are just switching to DCC or Kadee couplers for goodness sake. Personally, I'll never get to the point where Im using a computer to program decoders, its too easy to do it on a track with my handheld. Of course, I usually only change the horn, maybe adjust the volumn on an effect or two, change the start voltage, momentum or program a consist. Why do people spend so much energy bashing something they have no intention of using theirselves?
I'm with David on the computer use thing. I have a bunch of Tsunamis that I have programmed manually and once you get to about the 30th CV or so, It gets old. I like to re-map functions, set up the labored chuff, set the bemf (or what ever Soundrtraxx calls it) set the volume levels (crank the water fill, whistle, chuff volume, lower the dynamo, bell) kill Fireman Fred, set the reverb and frequency response - you get the idea. Lots of CV's.
This is very time consuming and not much fun if the decoder decides to scramble and has to be reset.....I don't use JMRI yet, but it is on the list when I start running trains after the heavy construction phase the railroad is in right now..I think we are going to see a lot more use of computer interfaces for programming once people start delving into these decoders past the "isn't that amazing" stage..
As for MRRN, I am surprised that they would publish a review as biased as the one described here.. I have come to expect more from them.
Guy
see stuff at: the Willoughby Line Site
I use the computer more along the lines of a virtual CTC than for programming. I have exactly 1 loco with a sound decoder,a dn I model a prototype and era prior to ditchlights and flashing beacons - mine don't even have Mars lights. So it is every bit as easy to just program with my throttle.
I consider the computer free for model railroad purposes - I didn't buy a seperate one for the layout, and even if I wasn't into model railroading at all I would still have this computer. And I think a lot more than 1% of all model railroaders post here, and on the Atlas forums, and on the Bachmann forums, and Railnet, and... etc. I doubt these people are all heading to the local public library to use a computer.
I generally like MRN but couldn't believe what I was reading in this review. I've been a strong advocate of JMRI. Even with my new, smaller layout (N scale and only 8 non-sound Digitrax decoders) I definitely use JMRI. Even with my simple needs things like the speed tables for speed matching, function mapping, roster file storage, Digitrax slot monitor and WiThrottle access are so nice to use.
The problem is that DCC newcomers don't know what they don't know. That was certainly my case, and still is in many areas. Sooner or later many will come to understand how great a good computer interface/software program really is. Currently I could probably get by with the MRC interface system and related work-arounds, but one can only ask.......why should one have to? Why MRC did you do this? Sure your system has potential, but how many years will it take to even come close to JMRI, and will you expend the recources to do it right? Please tell us why? It just doesn't make any sense.
Jerry
Rio Grande vs. Santa Fe.....the battle is over but the glory remains!
Trying to program speed tables/lighting effects with a hand-held throttle is quite a chore. Using JMRI/Decoder Pro makes programming so much easier, and you can save a copy of the complicated decoder setting to disk!
I have had folks tell me that they do not need or are not interested in a computer interface when they buy a DCC system. Within 6 months they want to know how to setup a computer with their DCC system. I donated an old computer to our club and hooked it up. No one even sets DCC addresses via the throttle - They just go over to the computer and use Decoder Pro to do this kind of work. It is really an 'easy sale' to convert them.
MRC's lack of support for JMRI really just hurts their sales. All they have to do is export the internal standards of their interface and of their decoders - the 'geeks' will do the rest and it will be on the next Decoder Pro update - No cost to MRC!
Jim
Modeling BNSF and Milwaukee Road in SW Wisconsin
jrbernier No one even sets DCC addresses via the throttle - They just go over to the computer and use Decoder Pro to do this kind of work.
I believe that DecoderPro has its uses. I confess that I have not dabbled with it very much. But I'm pretty sure to use it you have to enter some information concerning the loco so that you can identify it in a roster, and associate a decoder with it. Therefore, I find it very hard to believe that one cannot program a loco address faster with the handset than with DecoderPro.
davidmbedard If you havent used the program enough to call it a dabble, then how can you have an opinion? Here are the steps involved in programming an address with Decoder Pro. 1. Turn on computer (if not already on) 2. Open Decoder Pro software (if not already on)
If you havent used the program enough to call it a dabble, then how can you have an opinion?
Here are the steps involved in programming an address with Decoder Pro.
1. Turn on computer (if not already on)
2. Open Decoder Pro software (if not already on)
You know, I don't want to argue with you because you generally know what you're talking about. But sometimes you seem to either not read the post or else shoot from the hip with your response.
What I said was that "DecoderPro has its uses". I did not say that it did not have any use.
I also said that "I have not dabbled with it very much". I did not say that I hadn't "dabbled".
The only part of jrbernier's post that I was responding to concerned the statement that "no one even sets DCC addresses via the throttle". I interpreted this to mean that this was all they wanted to do.
The computer I have on a little stand in my basement, with a version of DecoderPro loaded on it, has a 1998 vintage operating system. I guarantee you that if all I wanted to do was change an address from the short default to a long address I could get that done before the computer and DecoderPro boot up. And I wouldn't have to put the engine on the program track to do this. Finally, if all I wanted to do was change the address, I would not have had to do steps 3 through 8 of your instruction either.
Setting basic CV values is actually a strongpoint for the MRC PA system WITHOUT a computer.
I'll use the main track sequence as an example, but the program track is simmilar:
press "program"- display= prog
press program again- display= main
press enter- display= adr
enter address of unit to program (ex 3)
press enter- display=adr
enter address desired (ex 1234)
press enter- display=SVand a value (so you can set start voltage)
press enter- display= TV and a value (so you can set top voltage)
press enter- display= acc and a value (so you can set accelleration momentum)
press enter- display= dec and a value (so you can set deceleration momentum)
press enter- display= CV (so you can choose a CV to modify[which will come back to set more until you exit])
press enter
done
So two preeses of prog, two value entries and six more presses of enter.
Pretty easy. It also automatically adjusts for short/long addresses.
Well that sounds exactly like the instructions for Digitrax. Only one other bonus, you can turn the left knob to change which CV number and turn the right knob to change the value, instead of always keying them in with the keypad. When setting 2 or 4 digit addresses, CV29 is automatically changed as well.
Now, everyone repeat the mantra like good robots: "digitrax is hard to use"
Programming basic CV's is somewhat basic and essentially trivial on most DCC systems.
The real value of the JMRI suite is in the programming of much more complex things. The user interface with tabbed pages makes it very simple to significantly customize multiple CV's at once and then just let all of then get programmed in a batch. I find it of particular value when setting a host of different sound volumes for example. Drag the volume sliders for about a dozen things, and write all the changes to the decoder at once. Doing each one via the throttle is significantly more work and time. But best of all is the ability to save these configuration files. If you do a lot of customizing and want 2 locos to have the same settings you can copy one config to another locomotive.
Having said that, I like to use Decoder Pro for my initial basic setup. I set the 4 digit address, turn off analog DC support, do an initial set on the start voltage, drop the volume on all the sounds, set up the basic lighting effects that I want. There is no way I would do all that as a matter of course through the throttle of any brand of DCC system.
Simon Modelling CB&Q and Wabash See my slowly evolving layout on my picturetrail site http://www.picturetrail.com/simontrains and our videos at http://www.youtube.com/user/MrCrispybake?feature=mhum
Comparing and arguing over progamming capabilities of various systems is silly. They are all relatively easy to use. The fact remains that a good computer interface/progam (like JMRI) offers huge benefits for progamming and many other features.
I think what everyone has missed is the fact the MRC will update their software whenever they feel like it. They will fix problems if they feel like it. They will only add features if they want to. After all, they have to pay people to do the work.
The real advantage JMRI has is that the software is Open Source. It will be updated regularly and when issues are found they will be addressed. Features can be added by someone who wants that feature. Since it really belongs to no one, it will live on. Proprietary software can be abandoned tomorrow, and that is it, it is basically dead.
If you read the JMRI gorup on Yahoo, youw ill see plenty of posts where someoen asks about support for some new oddball system, and a few days later someone ill post a link and say "here, try this" - support added for said system - some of these aren't DCC systems, they are alternative communication systems to interface signals and stuff like CMRI.
Open Source isn't the solution to everything, but Open Source with an active group of developers like JMRI means constant innovation and quick fixes for bugs.
jwils1Comparing and arguing over progamming capabilities of various systems is silly. They are all relatively easy to use. The fact remains that a good computer interface/progam (like JMRI) offers huge benefits for progamming and many other features.
(My emphasis added)
I think Jerry hit the nail on the head. Decoder programming is only one aspect of a computer interface, and although good software makes that aspect better through enhanced capability, it's really just scratching the surface.
When that computer interface is opened up to other things, such as signaling, layout automation, and so forth, it really expands what you're able to do with your layout.
For example, JMRI allows simultaneous connections to multiple control systems, so you can use a DCC system for loco and turnout control, C/MRI for signaling, and X10 for layout room lighting controlled by JMRI's fast clock.
It ties all that different hardware together into a unified and highly capable system, and it's able to do that because the manufacturers of that hardware have opened up their interface protocols.
But MRC's software can't perform those functions, and as long as they keep their interface closed, no other software can do it with MRC's DCC systems, either.
betamaxI think what everyone has missed is the fact the MRC will update their software whenever they feel like it. They will fix problems if they feel like it. They will only add features if they want to. After all, they have to pay people to do the work. The real advantage JMRI has is that the software is Open Source. It will be updated regularly and when issues are found they will be addressed. Features can be added by someone who wants that feature. Since it really belongs to no one, it will live on. Proprietary software can be abandoned tomorrow, and that is it, it is basically dead.
This got me thinking: I wonder how long until MRC incorporates what JMRI has built as an "upgrade" and claim it as theirs. I'm sure it'll be done one small step at a time.
TONY
"If we never take the time, how can we ever have the time." - Merovingian (Matrix Reloaded)
Let's see, Mr. Goering writes:
"While some may gripe that it does not support the more common Decoder Pro software, I say put a lid on the griping and watch to see what MRC does next with this software."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would say to Mr. Goering: "Good grief, man! Your bosses don't mind you make a statement like that to potential customers?" and "Why does it not support DP? Will it in the future so that this would be more marketable?"
"I like my Pullman Standards & Budds in Stainless Steel flavors, thank you!"
Programming with a Digitrax DT400 hand-held throttle:
Press "Program" key (three times to get to Ops if programming on the main).
Twirl left encoder knob (throttle #1) until the CV you want is displayed.
Twirl right encoder knob (throttle #2)) until the value you want is displayed.
Press "Enter".
Press "Exit".
Play trains.
-Crandell
Decoder Pro is almost as easy...
Best part is you can do the programming when you have the time, save the results, then dump the changes to the decoder at a later time.
Bonus: since it is stored on your hard drive, you can reload the decoder with exactly the same parameters it had before you messed something up or reset the decoder. Takes literally seconds to do that. You can even read the contents of the decoder and save them to your hard drive, just in case.
Of course, for a simple decoder it may seem like a lot of effort to use DecoderPro. Yet, with a Tsunami and its million options, it can save a lot of time and frustration. You can tell in a second if the system was made for programming decoders with limited features or complex sound decoders. You can sit there with a book and your handheld, or...
And as a "why I don't use JMRI much for programming", the other night I finished installing a TCS T1 in a GP7. I did run downstairs to take a few pictures of it, but I did not bother grabbing my laptop. In c aouple of minutes with my DT400 I had programmed it (on the main, I have the Zephy temporarily attached to the bus line for the staging tracks) with its road number, flipped the direction around so it would properly run long hood forward, and set the lights for RUle 17 dimming. I less time than it would have taken to boot up the laptop and connect my Locobuffer. That's as complicated as I get on my personal locos, there are no flashing beacons or ditch lights to worry about for my road and era.
Now, fooling around with sound locos, for more than just changing the volume, is a somewhat different story.
This just goes to show that MRC DCC is complete and utter crap.
Dennis Blank Jr.
CEO,COO,CFO,CMO,Bossman,Slavedriver,Engineer,Trackforeman,Grunt. Birdsboro & Reading Railroad
I think the one point that was completely missed is the operating system needed to use JMRI and MRC's DCC Software.
With MRC, you are bound to Windows, from '98 to Vista. Not really a big issue for many people.
But JMRI will run not only on Windows. It will also run on OS X and Linux. Meaning you are not tied to one specific OS/Hardware combination. Got an old pc that is sort of slow with Windows? Linux might help there, and you can still run JMRI with it.
With NCE you can do most of the basic programming without knowing what a CV is.
This includes Addressing, Consisting, Basic Speed Matching, Direction, and DC Mode. I'm sure I'm missing some but it's pretty close to plain English.
Springfield PA
Hamltnblue With NCE you can do most of the basic programming without knowing what a CV is. This includes Addressing, Consisting, Basic Speed Matching, Direction, and DC Mode. I'm sure I'm missing some but it's pretty close to plain English.
This is true with all system I am using, I own Digitrax, NCE and use MRC on the occasion. However when it comes to adjusting sound on a loco, I always reach for JMRI.
Jack W.