N scale sound quality

[jazzmaster48]

I currently model in HO, but am seriously researching a BNSF layout modeling the Hi-Line sub (Marias Pass) through Montana. N certainly would be a better choice as far as train length and mountain scenery, but I really enjoy the sound quality I get out of HO currently. Can I come reasonably close doing custom installs, or will I be disapointed in the sound N has to offer, especially when it comes to multiple 6 axle diesels fighting a 1.8% grade. Thanks!

[SeeYou190]

I have never been happy with HO scale sound.

.

I have worked around heavy equipment my entire life, and I know what a lot of noises sound like, and no small speaker even comes close.

.

That being said... I really don't hear mch difference in between newer HO and N scale locomotives that I hear. Maybe I just think they both sound terrible.

.

Give one a listen, make sure it is a newer one, and decide for yourself.

.

-Kevin

.

[GP-9_Man11786]

I find the sound quality varies from model to model. My Bachmann K4 is just loud enough to hear but not deafening. My Broadway Limited M1 is loud enough to wake the dead. They both render the sound quite well however.

Broadway Limited's Paragon 3 models also make use of the Rolling Thunder system, which makes use of a stationary subwoofer to recreate the low bass notes the onboard speakers just can't.

[ROBERT PETRICK]

GP-9_Man11786

Broadway Limited's Paragon 3 models also make use of the Rolling Thunder system, which makes use of a stationary subwoofer to recreate the low bass notes the onboard speakers just can't.

Yes, this is the thing that made Bose speakers revolutionize the sound industry: you can't really tell where bass sounds emanate.

I've never been satisfied with N scale sounds, but I'm coming around. Rolling Thunder sounds (pun) promising. 

Robert

[mlehman]

Those original 901s were amazing to hear, but hard to fit them in either HO or N The remote bass a la Rolling Thunder came later, but I don't recall exactly when.

What strongly drive sound capabilities aboard our trains are smart phones and other tiny portable audio devices. A good rule might be if your loco is bigger than a 'phone, plenty of room for good sound (no, not REAL sound, despite the marketing of some and the skepticism of others, but plenty good enough to work for most people). If your loco is smaller than most cellphones, it's going to be tight in there and more compromises made than in roomier situations.

That said, recent production is rather amzing in both scales, although not a guarantee that every new item is more than equal than it's kin. If you're buying a loco made 5 years ago, don't expect what may be available in current production. This may apply to even the same model by the same mfg, given constant design improvement is a goal with many companies.

[Overmod]

mlehman

Those original 901s were amazing to hear, but hard to fit them in either HO or N

Mike, the 901s were part of the direct/reflecting era at Bose.  (I am still amused when I think about them; in a perhaps unparalleled act of chutzpah someone at WPRB wrote to Bose asking if they would give us a set of monitor speakers for the listening library -- they sent a brand-new pair of 901 series IV with equalizer and stands for us!)

I think he's talking about the later use of tuned transmission-line bass neatly and cleverly folded into speaker shells and cabinets to enhance low-end response -- I was a great fan of 'tweeter-fuzz' Irving Fried and the B2/T2 satellite+subwoofer system which could be run flat down to around 10Hz, something to be more experienced than heard.

One interesting thing that has come out of recent cell-phone research is the methods that are used by very small speakers to overcome the effect of very small diaphragms, the thing that was only imperfectly solved with Helmholtz resonators.   I think this is the same thing that makes those 'sugar cube' speakers work as they do.  This gets around at least some of the low-frequency timbre issues, and separate subwoofer for the nondirectional bass a la Rolling Thunder ought to help the situation marginally more for N than needed for larger scales.

I confess to have gotten around this a somewhat cruder way back in the '70s: I built my trackwork risers so there was a 'tunnel' below the ROW collinear with the track, and arranged for a speaker system (it was actually the drivers used in the LS3/5a) to be moved along in parallel with any moving train.  This produced the expected rich, full sound many onlookers expected, although I now think a bit every time I watch one of those YouTube videos with similarly 'averaged' sound in them.

I figured out some tricks with porting the output from early steam 'sound systems' to one of those FM radio modulators you could buy for your car, thence wirelessly to an adjacent tuner or receiver connected to said speaker setup.  All sorts of fun was possible with that era's excuses for multiband equalization or distortion compensation (or eeeeeccccccchooooooo effects!) and I can only imagine that a current sound system linked this way would overcome any 'onboard' speaker limitation you might be afflicted with.

Fun ways to synchronize the train with the speaker will probably suggest themselves to you... including running the speaker 'deadhead' like a helper if you had trains running the same direction sequentially...

[trainboyH16-44]

This is a tough question to answer, and very personal. No, you won't get the feeling of raw power that watching 12000hp roar by you in notch 8 generates - but you won't get that in any other scale, either. I don't think HO and N are too dissimilar in how they sound. Neither of them are realistic, but I'd rather have sound than not.

[peahrens]

I'll second/third the suggestion to go somewhere you can compare for yourself; e.g., a good HO factory setup, a good N factory setup and then the BLI Rolling thunder.  I suggest a fair comparison, particularly re: same speaker type, otherwise it's pretty much apples & oranges.  

I'm happier with sound than without in my HO fleet.  Some think it's silly to focus on which small speaker is better, as the lower end frequencies (w/o Rolling Thunder external help), is just relative but of course far from the real thing.  Nonetheless, I have found it interesting to compare several speakers in my HO DCC conversions, e.g., typical narrow hood oval, 1.1" HiBass that fit in cab units (F, E, etc) and then the various cell phone / micro speakers.  I find it is worth the effort to get the most out of the conversion project.

If interested, join the Yahoo LokSound User Group and look at the several speaker comparison articles by Larry Hanlon in the "Files" section.  They are most informative about making choices.  More to your inquiry, the same micro speaker will sound noticeably better in a larger enclosure.  That's where you might find a noticeable difference between HO and N for the same type loco, same speaker(s), where in the HO unit you might be able to include a speaker enclosure significantly larger.  It makes a big difference.  But you will have to judge.

I've enjoyed playing with multi speaker arrangements in HO, with dual 1.1" HiBass in cab units, but lately multi-micro speakers (in styrene enclosures).  I like my C44-9Ws with quad micros, but my latest is an Athearn GTEL turbine with quad 13x18mm micros (two pairs).  The 10cc larger enclosure in the rear of the hood (a smaller 3.7mm enclosure is under the cab) is the best unit I've assembled so far.