A simple re-eq'd 5" port tuned tunnel sub will do the job quite nicely from 80Hz->40Hz (Audible Threshold). This is actually somewhat overkill. These speakers can be had <$50. - Digital Griffen
'RUMBLE' frequencies are all below 40 Hz. a "5" tunnel ported sub (woofer) won't go this low - sorry, and I've got the Sound Generator equipment (and calibrated microphones) to prove it.
Most Hi Fi Loudspeakers roll-off 18db per 8va below 100Hz, $250 JBLs below 70HZ, AND $350 acoustic suspensions below 50Hz. (Problem with A.R.'s was low efficiency). A 14" speaker system 'flat' to 70 hz is down -18db @35Hz!
D.G. I do not know the Resonant frequecy of your VELODYNE sub woofer but I suspect it will prove that providing Bass is not cheap. The lowest note on a double Bass Viol is 43 Hz and 'rumble' is below that.
The problem here is bass extension.
Extending the excursion of the cone - As per Edg. Villcher (AR), Henry Kloss (KLH), Rudy Bozak (Bozak Inc.), 1. 'Extending the 'throw' is a viable way of lowering bass fundimentals on a 12" speaker*, but on a 1" speaker is too small to be of consequence. Most HO speakers resonant frequencies are HIGHER than 500Hz. 'Tony's are 750Hz.
2. Add multiple redundant cones ... Passive Radiators??? JBL'S 10" & 12" soldl for $100 ea.
3. Roll off the middle/high range - 'fool the ear'? - but this eliminates the middle/highs.
4. Increase cone size. (Not possible) with HO or 'N'.
Someone on this forum (not you) mentioned a JBL 18" woofer. To my knowledge JBL has never had an 18" speaker. Electro Voice made one in the 50's for their '$1800 'Patrician'.
As I stated before, getting bass is not cheap.
* didn't design or make 15" because of difficulty of 'damping' the motion.
ChrisNH wrote: Actually.. as a poor man's sound solution.. I wouldnt mind just having software to simulate sound decoders right now. My layout is small enough that if all the sound came from one spot.. or maybe high/mid spread over speakers in the corners.. it would still be plenty cool.
I am not at all concerned with getting correct scale sound. What I want to do is convey the impact of a diesel locomotive rumbling by. I think a little exaggeration without shaking the foam off my trees would be very nice.
There is another side to this.. if you had a truly integrated sound system.. then not only would you get better bass but you could get better highs since your engine based speaker would not need to handle the lower frequency. That should be as easy as uploading samples to the sound decoder that only contain 600+ hz (or whatever your cutoff is)
As for hardware.. while a nice "Black box" solution by a DCC vendor would be sweet.. I would be plently happy with software that reads the DCC signals with PC through an interface and simply plays the appropriate sound files through the computers software mixer which should be plenty fine for the job. Then you can shop around or use whatever you want. I have a relatively inexpensive system on my PC that still put out plenty of bass for the needs of this application.
The nice thing about a PC (or mac or whatever) soultion is that you would not need any fancy hardware other then the PC itself. Further.. you could tune effects like reverb.. and perhaps in the future block and occupancy detection could further enhance the system.
Actually.. as a poor man's sound solution.. I wouldnt mind just having software to simulate sound decoders right now. My layout is small enough that if all the sound came from one spot.. or maybe high/mid spread over speakers in the corners.. it would still be plenty cool.
The kids would love it!
Chris
Don Gibson wrote: Like with Audio systems, what we buy is what we think we can afford - not necessarily desire. My $200 Radio Shack sub-woofer won't go below 50 hz with any amplifier. (To lower by one 8va requires 5X the cost).
Like with Audio systems, what we buy is what we think we can afford - not necessarily desire. My $200 Radio Shack sub-woofer won't go below 50 hz with any amplifier. (To lower by one 8va requires 5X the cost).
I humbly disagree. The point of this sound is not to have your whole house shaking from a lil HO locomotive. Too much noise will drive you from your layout. (Especially mine with my 18 locomotives.) And it's not like we need the most accurate bass possible. Most of the "chuff" and "rumble" we here isn't produceed by a Phil. Harmonic Symphony. So accuracy of bass isn't key here. A simple re-eq'd 5" port tuned tunnel sub will do the job quite nicely from 80Hz->40Hz (Audible Threshold). This is actually somewhat overkill. These speakers can be had <$50.
So $$$$ exspensive speakers are not necessary. (This from the man with a $50,000 B&W/ Velodyne speaker setup in his home theater)
The problem here is bass extension. You can do this several ways:
1. Create a longer excursion of the cone. (As QSI has done) This introduces more distortion...but again this isn't a problem.
2. Add multiple redundant cones that concentrate at that frequency and roll off above a certain frequencey. (Inefficient)
3. Roll off the middle/high range and have multiple speakers. (This was partially attempted by earlier QSI in BLI and P2K locos so equiped) But this distorts the middle/high ground
4. Increase cone size. (Not possible with our small engines)
But with we have right now, I am very happy. If I listen to old tapes of trains passing through a valley or mountain at somewhat a distance, it doesn't sound that much different from what we are actually hearing.
Side note:
Unfortunately our sensitivity to low and high frequencies roll off as the volume lowers. This is known as Fletcher-Munson Loudness Cruves (and hence why we have a loudness button on stereo systems to help reequalize that curve. (And why THX has a re-eq button from theater tracks))
Since "Chuffs" dominate the entire spectrum (mostly white noise), then maybe all low frequencies can be directed to a woofer. Maybe someday when railcomm is approved by NMRA we can sync woofer sounds to a small subwoofer on channel 1 of railcomm. (as the low freqs are omni directional).
Don - Specializing in layout DC->DCC conversions
Modeling C&O transition era and steel industries There's Nothing Like Big Steam!
jeffers_mz wrote: You can do this, and it will work. You can probably devise a capacitance filter that will roll of the volume grasdually on the speaker for the block being exited, and bring it up gradually in the block being entered.
You can do this, and it will work. You can probably devise a capacitance filter that will roll of the volume grasdually on the speaker for the block being exited, and bring it up gradually in the block being entered.
Perhaps. OTOH, I have no idea how something like that might work let alone put one together - I fully understand how relays work and how to use them but not how to use a capacitance filter in such a capacity.
You're still going to need a sound source, and probably a way to at least approximate prime mover speed with train speed. Manual would work, and I have nothing against playing the guitar, and nothing against playing the trains.There is software for the PC, free software, that will let you live mix a 5.1 spread using a simple joystick. Put your manual ptentiometer in the joystick handle and it wouldn't be too tough to make it look like a throttle.Once the PC is involved, you can try some of the 16 bit samples suggested earlier, and I suspect that once you hear them, 8 bit sound might get old pretty fast.
You're still going to need a sound source, and probably a way to at least approximate prime mover speed with train speed. Manual would work, and I have nothing against playing the guitar, and nothing against playing the trains.
There is software for the PC, free software, that will let you live mix a 5.1 spread using a simple joystick. Put your manual ptentiometer in the joystick handle and it wouldn't be too tough to make it look like a throttle.
Once the PC is involved, you can try some of the 16 bit samples suggested earlier, and I suspect that once you hear them, 8 bit sound might get old pretty fast.
Once a PC is involved why not use it to control the trains as well?
What I don't understand is why some bright boy at one of the controller companies hasn't realized that they are designing digital equipment to mimic analog controllers, when all they realy need to do, is make a interface ( USB or wireless ) to hook in a PC between the control pack and the track - it's not like the PC can't send out and recieve thousands of signals a minute - even an old 386 could do the job and you can get those for free. Yes, I know some people have done it on their own, but, not everyone has that type of skill.
Put a simple sensor system along the track and combine it with motor feedback, the computer could caculate the scale speed to less than a .5 mph, and sync the sound to the proper set of undertable speakers accordingly, and let the user adjust the sound with the computer's volume & equalizer controls to get just the right tones. If sensors 23 through 36 are on a incline, and the computer knows the train is going uphill, it can increase the sound of the engine like would happen prototypicaly.
Then the company could design a control pack to look just like a real throttle, break, horn and bell controls, instead of push buttons and dials. Control a few thousand trains and other things on a layout all at the same time.
In a way, this is kind of a neat time to be modeling sound. Back in the days of HF train control, (and in the days when chase syncing DA to MIDI cost $100k ballpark), there was all kinds of experimentation going on, and new ideas appearing frequently. Sort of like the wild west before and after it got all settled and civilized.Sound is just another palatte to paint with, except right now, it's all new and exciting, instead of programmed options you choose from a list. The next few years should be pretty interesting, if nothing else.
In a way, this is kind of a neat time to be modeling sound. Back in the days of HF train control, (and in the days when chase syncing DA to MIDI cost $100k ballpark), there was all kinds of experimentation going on, and new ideas appearing frequently. Sort of like the wild west before and after it got all settled and civilized.
Sound is just another palatte to paint with, except right now, it's all new and exciting, instead of programmed options you choose from a list. The next few years should be pretty interesting, if nothing else.
Either they will be interesting or the companies will fall flat on their face because they failed to listen to the customer - again.
From the far, far reaches of the wild, wild west I am: rtpoteet
Don Gibson wrote:Like with Audio systems, what we buy is what we think we can afford - not necessarily desire. My $200 Radio Shack sub-woofer won't go below 50 hz with any amplifier. (To lower by one 8va requires 5X the cost).
That's why I used to love my 18" JBL Pro subwoofers They could reproduce full usable waveform down to 10Hz. Think earthquake. And, they could handle something like 3500 watts RMS. They also had a 9" throw in the cone. They could move some major air. Of course today they run about $1500 each.......... I also get to wear hearing aids these days.
There are many ways that sound for model railroads can (and will be) improved in the next decade or two. The question is: Will You and I be around to see, or hear it?
Ray Seneca Lake, Ontario, and Western R.R. (S.L.O.&W.) in HO
We'll get there sooner or later!
Gentlemen: (Oversimplification)
OUR EARS hear vibrations in air. Loudspeakers move air.
Speakers were invented by Bell Telephone Labs around 1915 for the Motion Picture Industry ('Talkies').
Small speakers are grossly inefficient at LOW frequencies. (Laws of physics). Since BASS requires moving large quantities of air,The lower the frequency / the more air is to be moved - due to the inefficiencies of the human ear.
Large speakers can move more air, therefor are more efficient for producing audible lower frequencies.
Improvements have been made in Loudspeakers over the years, but they've been relatively minor - Permanent Magnent have replaced Electro magnets - Cone materials and suspensions have changed resonent frequencies somewhat in 92 years - but Laws of physics are still in place. Most 'improvements' have been in controlling propagation (dispersion) and resonances).
Future: small 'satelite' speakers with a sub-woofer have become ''Theater or Surround" for leading edge types. Digital transmission is already here.
SOUNDTRAXX already has a 'black box' for use with existing "Surround" Speaker systems. They cancelled entry into the market for various reasons, including Co$ts and the impending threat of litigation from MTH re: 'Back EMF".
Multi-channel Sattellite sound with Sub-Woofers is the wave of the future - unfortunately it requires the big bucks. 'Theater' Sound is only as good as its sub-woofer (the most costly part) of the system. Theaters use multiple 15" drivers (moves air).
Maybe SOMEDAY?
selector wrote: EL, I think he means the bass is a gonner anyway, but you can reduce the nasal reproductions in what the speaker will produce in abundance, and coincidentally what your ear is likely most selectively attuned to, by equalizing their volumes downard a bit...thus enhancing the somewhat higher freqs that will tell us we have improved sound in our tenders? Did I get that right?
EL, I think he means the bass is a gonner anyway, but you can reduce the nasal reproductions in what the speaker will produce in abundance, and coincidentally what your ear is likely most selectively attuned to, by equalizing their volumes downard a bit...thus enhancing the somewhat higher freqs that will tell us we have improved sound in our tenders?
Did I get that right?
Yes.
If you cut "nasal" on a speaker that only produces nasal, all you're doing is turning it down, not changing the timbre.
With this speaker, you can cut nasal and still have something left.
A speaker like this will also work better with a stationary subwoofer, since it won't leave as much of a hole in the low midranges as other speakers will.
Try this:
http://www.qsisolutions.com/news/qhbspk_072907.html
Today's sound decoders use digital technology similar to that found in CD players to store and reproduce the sounds associated with our favorite engines. The original recordings are usually reasonably well done, and the digital technology allows the recordings to be stored and played with a quality that is very close to the original sound. Indeed, listening to the output of one of today's top sound decoders through a good set of headphones can be just like standing inside the engine compartment of a classic or modern diesel (standing inside the steam chest of a steam engine is probably not a good idea).While the quality of the sound at the output of the decoder is quite good, it must somehow be coupled into the surrounding air to create the sounds waves that we hear. There is the weak link in the system: the speaker. Unless you operate one of the larger gauge models, there is probably only room for maybe a 1" speaker (or smaller) in your model. In speaker theory, there is a frequency, designated Fs, that is the free air natural resonance frequency of the speaker. The critical information related to Fs is that the speaker is physically unable to reproduce any frequency significantly lower that Fs. Thus, the lower Fs, the lower the minimum frequency that the speaker can reproduce and the more bass. Fs is determined primarily by the moving mass of the cone and the stiffness of the suspension. Small speakers have a small cone, and therefore a small cone mass, and normally have a relatively stiff suspension so that the speaker cone does not move too far and damage the cone. The net result of this design is that most of the speakers used in model train sound reproduction have a relatively high Fs and are therefore are unable to reproduce the low sounds associated with "diesel rumble" or the throaty sounds of a steam chuff. Even worse for the model sound enthusiast is that when you place a speaker in an enclosed baffle (such as an engine car body or other small enclosed space), the value of Fs increases due to the stiffness of the air trapped behind the speaker (note that you do need the baffle, because if it is not present, the sound behind the speaker will simply flow around the edge of the speaker and cancel the sound in front).QSI Solutions has found a speaker that significantly improves on the existing situation. It is shown in the picture below:
Today's sound decoders use digital technology similar to that found in CD players to store and reproduce the sounds associated with our favorite engines. The original recordings are usually reasonably well done, and the digital technology allows the recordings to be stored and played with a quality that is very close to the original sound. Indeed, listening to the output of one of today's top sound decoders through a good set of headphones can be just like standing inside the engine compartment of a classic or modern diesel (standing inside the steam chest of a steam engine is probably not a good idea).
While the quality of the sound at the output of the decoder is quite good, it must somehow be coupled into the surrounding air to create the sounds waves that we hear. There is the weak link in the system: the speaker. Unless you operate one of the larger gauge models, there is probably only room for maybe a 1" speaker (or smaller) in your model. In speaker theory, there is a frequency, designated Fs, that is the free air natural resonance frequency of the speaker. The critical information related to Fs is that the speaker is physically unable to reproduce any frequency significantly lower that Fs. Thus, the lower Fs, the lower the minimum frequency that the speaker can reproduce and the more bass. Fs is determined primarily by the moving mass of the cone and the stiffness of the suspension. Small speakers have a small cone, and therefore a small cone mass, and normally have a relatively stiff suspension so that the speaker cone does not move too far and damage the cone. The net result of this design is that most of the speakers used in model train sound reproduction have a relatively high Fs and are therefore are unable to reproduce the low sounds associated with "diesel rumble" or the throaty sounds of a steam chuff. Even worse for the model sound enthusiast is that when you place a speaker in an enclosed baffle (such as an engine car body or other small enclosed space), the value of Fs increases due to the stiffness of the air trapped behind the speaker (note that you do need the baffle, because if it is not present, the sound behind the speaker will simply flow around the edge of the speaker and cancel the sound in front).
QSI Solutions has found a speaker that significantly improves on the existing situation. It is shown in the picture below:
My (Don's) comment:
This is what is known as a high excursion "woofer." Because it moves further, it extracts more bass. However because the cone is traveling further, it also means that it's going outside the linear gap of the magnet. So this creates greater distortion. Luckily we don't mind a little distortion when a lot of locomotives main noise is pink/white band type which is friendly to mild distortion.
Seems that QSI "heared" me....lets see what happens with this new speakers...but all you think ahead, 3, 5 years ahead in this DIGITAL WORLD!!!
Don Gibson wrote:How can a EQ make the bass any better if the speaker can't reproduce it?It can't. EQ can reduce highs to fool your brain/ear that you are hearing more bass (by removing the highs/mids).
How can a EQ make the bass any better if the speaker can't reproduce it?
It can't.
EQ can reduce highs to fool your brain/ear that you are hearing more bass (by removing the highs/mids).
Good way to put it Don. In actual fact a really good tweeter (1" or even smaller) can vibrate from 10Hz (Vibrations per second which is roughly 1 and 1/2 octave below the range of human hearing) to 20,000 Hz or more. The problem as has been said is a small speaker can't move enough air to get a hearable Bass (or low midrange) wave to your ear from 2 or 3 feet away. EQing out the midrange (2,000Hz t0 4,000Hz typically) means that the percentage of Bass and Treble in the mix has been upped. Hence it sounds like there is more Bass there. Since most on board sound tends to be set extremly loud to start with, turning the volume down and if possible lowering midrange EQ will indeed help the quality of sound. I keep telling people mixing sound for me that lowering the midrange in effect is the same as raising the Bass and Treble and doesn't make the output of the channel clip..... Even 3 Db of change in the midrange can make a big difference in the sound.
"With EQ, you can also screw things up royally" - Mackie Mixer Owner's Manual
BTW, Electrical speakers have been around commercially since the late 1920's, I believe. Very little was done to improve them until the Mid 1980's when several improvements took place. Again in the mid to late 1990's another round of major new ideas improved and allowed speakers to be much smaller and still produce better sound. Bose was instrumental in leading the research into speaker placement being a major factor. According to some people in the Pro-Audio profession, we are on the verge of some more major changes in speaker technology. I would not be at all suprised if within 20 years the sound we are all looking for in a model loco becomes a reality. Unfortunately by that time I will be sitting around in my wheelchair in the nursing home saying, "WHAT, Speak up, Huh?"
Edit: I must have been distracted when I posted this..... It should be Midrange 400Hz to 4000HZ (depending on who you read). Sorry! That puts it in musical terms from about the A above middle C to about 4 octaves ubove that. The improvement made reducing the midrange assumes that you have some bass there to begin with which onboard sound really doesn't have. So ignore most of this post!
Cloth suspensions (shades of Edgar Villcher) and heavier cones make for lowering f1 resonance but it doesn't make up for moving air.
Speakers have a free air resonnce which changes with the cavity (cabinet) resonance, but small speakers move very little air. Since few have room for a 30 foot air column, enlosure resonances are brought into play - especially with sub woofers.
Ever wonder WHY your voice sounds deeper in a shower? (It really isn't).
Theaters used multiple 15" heavy speakers with folded Megaphones (horns) for bass. Early Audiophiles bought $300 18" speakers, and good/deep bass sub-woofers run $500-$1000.
electrolove wrote:Just want to show you guys a link:http://www.qsisolutions.com/products/q-hb_speaker.html
By the specs given, this speaker will give you an audible improvement in sound, but not much extra bass, if any.
Defining "bass" is a subjective realm, in more ways than one. Depending on who you listen to, bass frequencies begin between 125 htz and 250 htz, descending from there. This speaker rolls off sharply beginning at 310 htz,
The smallest noticable increment in sound pressure levels (loudness, roughly) is about 3 decibels. Three of these smallest perceptible increments will result in a perceived doubling in loudess, about 10 decibels.
This speaker's performance shows a ten db drop at the upper end of the bass frequencies, rapidly dropping to zero just below that. In other words, the upper limit of what some call bass and what other's call low midrange, will be half as loud as the normal range of the speaker's output, with nothing beneath.
All is not lost, however. If all you're after is bass, you're still out of luck. But many people's complaint with onboard sound is the whiny, nasally quantity of the sound produced. Believe it or not, terms like "nasal" have actually been defined, at least in the general sense, in the recording industry and we know where they live.
Before getting too far into that, there's an important principle to understand. A speaker with a perfectly flat (same loudness) frequency response from 20 to 20,000 cycles per second would not be perceived as flat by most people. Evolution has "tuned" your ears to hear the frequency range associated with human speech easier than other frequencies. More specific, evolution has favored the offspring, of parents so tuned to the frequencies at which babies cry, that it is mentally or physically painful.
So two things are working here to make your trains sound less pleasing.
One, the speakers tend to roll off below 300-500 htz, just below "nasal, at around 800 htz. "Nasal" is the lowest frequency produced by most small onboard speakers. Your ears hear higher frequencies less well, so "nasal" is the loudest perceived frequency band small train speakers produce.
Two, one million years of evolution has pre-selected you to exist and thrive, IF the nasal frequencies so irritated your parents that they were willing to take action when you cried.
"Nasal" IS the loudest frequency produced, and since nasal is the loudest you normally hear, you end up with "nasal times two".
By filling in the lower end of the midrange spectrum, and delving into upper bass registers, not only will this speaker sound less nasal, TWICE over, but it allows you to EQ the output to even furtherreduce the strident nasal frequencies. Not you actually, unless you are recording your own samples or have an EQ built into the decoder, but this can be done in the design and manufacture of the decoders.
While you might not see any improvement in bass response at all, I am reasonably confident you will like the sound MUCH better, assuming of course, that the decoder sound samples and circuitry design take advantage of these new output capabilities..
This can get as complicated as one wants it to be, the quality of the membranes are important, the cone and so on. Let's not forget the casings, they are extremely important to the quality of small speaker sound. If you design a large tender as a vessel for a superior speaker you could create a very good one. But it would eat a lot of juice and would make it very expensive. As I said before, the speaker would come with a train, not the other way around.
I've listened to extremely high end small speakers and the sound is superb. Of course, when it comes to bass it can not beat a sub woofer. Then again, I've seen small sub woofers have a lot more bass then a larger one due to the way they are built and encased.
Magnus
electrolove, that was a fasinating link. Traditional speakers used in HO sound have been Tweeters from the standard two or three way home speaker systems or the same speakers used in headphones. The issue is not only the amount of air to be moved to produce a bass response, but the actual ability of the speakers to be able to vibrate at the low hertzes, although the two are very much related. In a small enclosed space, such as headphones, small speakers can reproduce bass without a problem as it is a very small acoustically perfect space inside the headphones on your ear. Take off the headphones, put them on the table and then listen to the sound and you have what has been produced by HO on board sound. Very tinny as the bass is missing. That is the first problem in action.
It looks like the new design may be a major step forward in authentic sound for us. However, note the increase in power needed to drive the speakers (as would be expected to be able to move enough air) to create better sounding Bass. That article did a great job of explaining what the problem is BTW as well as showing how the new design will help correct it. I may have to rethink my avoidance of Sound in the hobby if this actually works and they keep moving forward with the technology!
Ray Howard, owner
Howard's Music Service
Lillen wrote:The better speakers that are now available and that Electrolove links to is the thing. To many people puts width and size as the same thing. When comparing Bass output this have often been thing. But, it's the amount moved that is important. This can be achieved by letting the speaker pump it out by having a greater depth rather then width. Unfortunately I don't know the English words for this since my audiophile nature is taught in Swedish. But basically. In a large tender, like a Big boy or something you could have a very deep speaker. It's width would be the same as today but the volume of air being pressed out would be greater since the speaker would be able to move a lot more if you have these new things. Magnus
The better speakers that are now available and that Electrolove links to is the thing. To many people puts width and size as the same thing. When comparing Bass output this have often been thing. But, it's the amount moved that is important. This can be achieved by letting the speaker pump it out by having a greater depth rather then width. Unfortunately I don't know the English words for this since my audiophile nature is taught in Swedish.
But basically. In a large tender, like a Big boy or something you could have a very deep speaker. It's width would be the same as today but the volume of air being pressed out would be greater since the speaker would be able to move a lot more if you have these new things.
Greg H. wrote: jeffers_mz wrote: 1. The air absorbs and dampens high frequencies, not bass. That's why thunder, heard at a distance, is all bass component.2. Making bass is a matter of moving large quantities of air, which requires large speakers, which require massive amplifiers. Never going to happen onboard model trains.3. Bass is omnidirectional, treble is unidirectional. That's why home theaters and 5.1 sound systems have many small satellite speakers for the high end, but only one subwoofer. For improved frequency response in model train sound systems, you don't need block detection. leave the high frequencies onboard, feed the bass to a stationary subwoofer, and you ears will "cause" the bass to follow the train around the track.4. There's a technological hurdle involved in doing sound this way. The sound signal source is in the decoder, on the train. That electrical signal either has to travel along wires to the subwoofer amp and speaker, or else you have to use two decoders, and make sure they stay in perfect sync. If you reverse the wires on one speaker in your home stereo, one speaker will be pushing, while the other is pulling. They cancel each other out, in strange ways. The effect can be weak, tinny sound, or it can be an effect called comb filtering, which just sounds strange.Trying to feed an audio signal through the rails will interfere with the AC power already running there. Bass is typically defined as being those frequencies between 20 and 125 cycles per second (hertz). Standard power line alternating current is right in the middle, at 60 hertz. No idea what frequency DCC power signals alternate at. There are also bandwidth issues to contend with, and in the case of multiple trains operating simultaneausly, these problems are compounded.You could transmit the signal wirelessly, if you had room for a transmitter in the model, and were willing to suffer audio degradation in a high RF environment.Most likely solution is going to be two decoders, one onboard, one stationary. A much lower bandwidth timing pulse should be able to keep them in sync well enough to avoid most audio problems. If both decoders were slaves in the timing arrangement, and the "power pack" was the master, then the onboard decoders would not have to generate the timing pulses. However, they would have to respond to the timing pulses, and therefore, all yoour onboard sound decoders would have to be replaced.5. Yet another significant issue exists. The tiny speakers onboard trains don't just fail miserably in producing bass, they also fall well short of the mark in midrange frequencies. These frequencies are those that the human ear is most sensitive too, and their absence will not go unnoticed. If you try to send these to a stationary decoder, then you lose the effect of omnidirectionality, and have to jump through complicated hoops to make the sound move with the train.6. Finally, you have the problem of the sound samples stored in existing decoders. Every bit of audio data takes up storage space. 8 bit samples are roughly equal in quality to the sound quality of a telephone. Moving up to 16 bit samples halves the decoder's storage space. often the samples themselves lack bass, since the speaker can't reproduce it, and the manufacturer chose to maximize storage space usage. If the bass never existed in the original sample, or the decoder manufacturer EQed it out before burning the sample to the chip, it's gone, and you can't get it back.There's another way, much simpler, and it deals with every problem listed here, plus those of modelers who complain about hearing trains in tunnels, and on the far side of the layout and the cacaphony you hear when several trains run at once.Typical prototype experience begins with no audible train noises,, then you pick up the bass, and perhaps the rails singing, then a rapid gain is sound pressure levels, to or above the audible pain threshold, a doppler shift, and then a rapid decline in locomotive noise, while the clackety clack of wheels on rail splices continues till the train is past.At a given "viewing point", stereo samples at 16 or even 24 bit fidelity, play back through a standard stereo pair of fixed speakers, when trains roll past. To accomplish this, you need no more than an old computer with soundcard, speakers to match your preferences in quality, and a copy of the Winamp software. The sounds are easily triggered manually from a keyboard, and with a small additional investment, could be triggered automatically with crossing dectectors, though you'd have to write a bit of your own software to make that happen. Nothing major, the computer will know when the digital trigger is tripped, you just have to tell it what to do at that point.Since the average layout compresses so much railroad into a much smaller space, I think the ultimate solution will end up being a hybrid of the techniques described so far, and some others. In my opinion, the PC figures largely into most or all of the sound issues. The PC's CD player can play normal background sounds, birds, weather, traffic wildlife, machinery, etc. It can also hold, trigger and play back sparkling CD quality digital bypass samples, through a full range sound system.Raising the bar a little higher, a PC is easily equipped with a 5.1 soundcard, and attached to a THX quality speaker array. With this setup, and about $100 in commercial software, DVD background audio and triggered train bypasses can move with the train or other sound source in three dimensions, though the sound's spatial distribution and movement will be specific for each layout.Having had a ringside seat through the invention and development of both MIDI and digital audio technologies, my assessment of current DCC onboard sound is that it's currently well short of prime time. If your goal is high quality audio, either at 1:1 volume levels or at scale values, prototypical fidelity on a level to match your model's and layout's fine detail, odds are you'll almost certainly have to replace your existing decoder investment, and possibly your control infrastructure as well.I'd say you'll see a completely new set of standards within ten to twenty years from now. There is much work being done in the field, but the first step is to field a system that works, at the much higher audio standards, then as competitors enter the market, there will be a period of struggling for dominance in those markets, and eventually a victor will emerge and a general standard consensus reached. That takes time. If there's not a market for high end audio, it will never take off. I think there is. I remember well when the primative ancestors of DCC first appeared and the debates that raged way back then. Today, most modelers wouldn't even think of running their layouts on DC. Tomorrow, the elite will sneer at 8 bit onboard only audio. The current trend shows audio expense increasing at near exponential rates, and the market is clamoring for more sound, not less.If you're interested in building a first class railroad , with first class sound, now, and don't want to wait for that long, the first place to begin is by integrating a PC in the audio chain as early as possible. Be prepared to think outside the box and solve some problems yourself, because the Reply Don Gibson Member sinceJune 2004 From: Pacific Northwest 3,864 posts Posted by Don Gibson on Saturday, September 15, 2007 10:52 PM doc manago wrote: In order to have more and better bass, I can´t understand how, in 2007, no DCC manufacturer developed a better speaker, heaviest, with an important magnet and Kevlar cone, not the cheap and thin thing that they are today...! What do you think? Bye.Doc:Speakers are 'Transducers' ie: an (AC) mechanical devices that change one form of energy into another.DC is Electrical EnergyDCC is Digitalyl Encoded information imbedded in DC, that a Decoder translates to the motor.Digital transmission is HERE.(As you'll discover in 2008 or 2009 when your TV's won't work).MODEL TRAINS are miniatration. Small speakers move little air. Your EARS only hear air in motion.BASS means much air in motion. mzJeffers is right on. Bass is 'pumping air'. Muscles are acheived by pumping Iron.If you want BASS it Co$ts money. HOW MUCH are you willing to spend?????????????????????A speaker that produces AC analogue signals will not work on DC - nor will Digital transmission run a DC motor - nor do ANY DCC manufacturers manufacture speakers! Even QSI / Lok Sound /and MRC buy theirs.YOU appear to want the moon, but can you pay for the rocket fuel to get there? If not you're out of gas. Don Gibson .............. ________ _______ I I__()____||__| ||||| I / I ((|__|----------| | |||||||||| I ______ I // o--O O O O-----o o OO-------OO ########################### Reply Don Gibson Member sinceJune 2004 From: Pacific Northwest 3,864 posts Posted by Don Gibson on Saturday, September 15, 2007 10:02 PM IT'S SIMPLE.SMALL speakers cannot create enought bass to virate your eardrums. it's the Laws of Physics. Neither can a 'knothole' allow enought light in to illuminate a room.Speakers are 'Transducers' - a disk or megaphone of sorts that vibrates the air. 1. Your ears hear 'air' vibrations - nothing more. 2. Bass (moving air) is expen$ive. A 30 foot air column will produce 'bass'. Pipe Organs have a raft of these, so will a $500+ subwoofer with a large cone driver. Computer speakers won't do it. Metal cones won't either, nor 'bottle cap' enclosures (both reinforce the highs)\.3. Want bass on the cheap? (A pair of good stereo headphones - around $50) - provided you have 10 watts of amplifier to drive them.1" speakers with a 1 watt amplifier won't cut it, however SOMETHING is better than nothing, Yes? Don Gibson .............. ________ _______ I I__()____||__| ||||| I / I ((|__|----------| | |||||||||| I ______ I // o--O O O O-----o o OO-------OO ########################### Reply accord1959 Member sinceJuly 2005 From: Ottawa, Ontario 364 posts Posted by accord1959 on Saturday, September 15, 2007 9:53 PM Greg H. wrote:I've been thinking about this even since I started getting involved with hobby ( all of about 4 months now ) and I believe that ChrisNH, has the answer right on the nose. Under table subwoofers, with on board speaker for the high range sounds. If layouts had subwoofers placed at various locations underneath, you'd have to compete with the youngsters stopped at public crossings at grade with there subwoofers blaring. I think it's a great idea, what is missing is the rumble of the prime mover as the loco rolls by and I think a subwoofer under the layout would definately replicate that sound. Reply chessiecat Member sinceOctober 2004 From: Eastern Panhandle of West Virginia 245 posts Posted by chessiecat on Saturday, September 15, 2007 8:54 PM I ordered a pair of what they call High-Bass speakers from Tony's. They have a heavy metal cone and a large gasket that it floats on. I got both sizes, a 1.10 inch and a 1.06 inch speaker but the enclosures for them are on backorder. I was going try to hook one up to my Tsunami I installed in my Allegheny but then I ended up being selected for a jury. Hope that it ends this coming week. The speakers look to be thicker than most at least a half inch so they may be a little hard to squeeze in the tender.Thanks Jim Reply selector Member sinceFebruary 2005 From: Vancouver Island, BC 23,330 posts Posted by selector on Saturday, September 15, 2007 7:47 PM Magnus, either the tender cover lifts off and you'll find the master volume screw, or one of the covers comes off...maybe the water filler hatch must be pryed off with a sharp blade wedged between the cover and the deck? Don't the instructions have an exploded diagram showing the cover that comes off?-Crandell Reply Greg H. Member sinceJuly 2007 From: Colorado 472 posts Posted by Greg H. on Saturday, September 15, 2007 7:15 PM jeffers_mz wrote: 1. The air absorbs and dampens high frequencies, not bass. That's why thunder, heard at a distance, is all bass component.2. Making bass is a matter of moving large quantities of air, which requires large speakers, which require massive amplifiers. Never going to happen onboard model trains.3. Bass is omnidirectional, treble is unidirectional. That's why home theaters and 5.1 sound systems have many small satellite speakers for the high end, but only one subwoofer. For improved frequency response in model train sound systems, you don't need block detection. leave the high frequencies onboard, feed the bass to a stationary subwoofer, and you ears will "cause" the bass to follow the train around the track.4. There's a technological hurdle involved in doing sound this way. The sound signal source is in the decoder, on the train. That electrical signal either has to travel along wires to the subwoofer amp and speaker, or else you have to use two decoders, and make sure they stay in perfect sync. If you reverse the wires on one speaker in your home stereo, one speaker will be pushing, while the other is pulling. They cancel each other out, in strange ways. The effect can be weak, tinny sound, or it can be an effect called comb filtering, which just sounds strange.Trying to feed an audio signal through the rails will interfere with the AC power already running there. Bass is typically defined as being those frequencies between 20 and 125 cycles per second (hertz). Standard power line alternating current is right in the middle, at 60 hertz. No idea what frequency DCC power signals alternate at. There are also bandwidth issues to contend with, and in the case of multiple trains operating simultaneausly, these problems are compounded.You could transmit the signal wirelessly, if you had room for a transmitter in the model, and were willing to suffer audio degradation in a high RF environment.Most likely solution is going to be two decoders, one onboard, one stationary. A much lower bandwidth timing pulse should be able to keep them in sync well enough to avoid most audio problems. If both decoders were slaves in the timing arrangement, and the "power pack" was the master, then the onboard decoders would not have to generate the timing pulses. However, they would have to respond to the timing pulses, and therefore, all yoour onboard sound decoders would have to be replaced.5. Yet another significant issue exists. The tiny speakers onboard trains don't just fail miserably in producing bass, they also fall well short of the mark in midrange frequencies. These frequencies are those that the human ear is most sensitive too, and their absence will not go unnoticed. If you try to send these to a stationary decoder, then you lose the effect of omnidirectionality, and have to jump through complicated hoops to make the sound move with the train.6. Finally, you have the problem of the sound samples stored in existing decoders. Every bit of audio data takes up storage space. 8 bit samples are roughly equal in quality to the sound quality of a telephone. Moving up to 16 bit samples halves the decoder's storage space. often the samples themselves lack bass, since the speaker can't reproduce it, and the manufacturer chose to maximize storage space usage. If the bass never existed in the original sample, or the decoder manufacturer EQed it out before burning the sample to the chip, it's gone, and you can't get it back.There's another way, much simpler, and it deals with every problem listed here, plus those of modelers who complain about hearing trains in tunnels, and on the far side of the layout and the cacaphony you hear when several trains run at once.Typical prototype experience begins with no audible train noises,, then you pick up the bass, and perhaps the rails singing, then a rapid gain is sound pressure levels, to or above the audible pain threshold, a doppler shift, and then a rapid decline in locomotive noise, while the clackety clack of wheels on rail splices continues till the train is past.At a given "viewing point", stereo samples at 16 or even 24 bit fidelity, play back through a standard stereo pair of fixed speakers, when trains roll past. To accomplish this, you need no more than an old computer with soundcard, speakers to match your preferences in quality, and a copy of the Winamp software. The sounds are easily triggered manually from a keyboard, and with a small additional investment, could be triggered automatically with crossing dectectors, though you'd have to write a bit of your own software to make that happen. Nothing major, the computer will know when the digital trigger is tripped, you just have to tell it what to do at that point.Since the average layout compresses so much railroad into a much smaller space, I think the ultimate solution will end up being a hybrid of the techniques described so far, and some others. In my opinion, the PC figures largely into most or all of the sound issues. The PC's CD player can play normal background sounds, birds, weather, traffic wildlife, machinery, etc. It can also hold, trigger and play back sparkling CD quality digital bypass samples, through a full range sound system.Raising the bar a little higher, a PC is easily equipped with a 5.1 soundcard, and attached to a THX quality speaker array. With this setup, and about $100 in commercial software, DVD background audio and triggered train bypasses can move with the train or other sound source in three dimensions, though the sound's spatial distribution and movement will be specific for each layout.Having had a ringside seat through the invention and development of both MIDI and digital audio technologies, my assessment of current DCC onboard sound is that it's currently well short of prime time. If your goal is high quality audio, either at 1:1 volume levels or at scale values, prototypical fidelity on a level to match your model's and layout's fine detail, odds are you'll almost certainly have to replace your existing decoder investment, and possibly your control infrastructure as well.I'd say you'll see a completely new set of standards within ten to twenty years from now. There is much work being done in the field, but the first step is to field a system that works, at the much higher audio standards, then as competitors enter the market, there will be a period of struggling for dominance in those markets, and eventually a victor will emerge and a general standard consensus reached. That takes time. If there's not a market for high end audio, it will never take off. I think there is. I remember well when the primative ancestors of DCC first appeared and the debates that raged way back then. Today, most modelers wouldn't even think of running their layouts on DC. Tomorrow, the elite will sneer at 8 bit onboard only audio. The current trend shows audio expense increasing at near exponential rates, and the market is clamoring for more sound, not less.If you're interested in building a first class railroad , with first class sound, now, and don't want to wait for that long, the first place to begin is by integrating a PC in the audio chain as early as possible. Be prepared to think outside the box and solve some problems yourself, because the infrastructure and COTS equipment isn't in place yet.Good ideas.I had this visi Greg H. Reply rrinker Member sinceFebruary 2002 From: Reading, PA 30,002 posts Posted by rrinker on Saturday, September 15, 2007 4:15 PM davidmbedard wrote:Scale the sound people....scale the sound. Go stand 300 feet from a rail line and take a listen. David B Very true. I think on a larger layout with 6-7 trains runnign during an op session, if you could hear ALL of the locos anywhere in the room it would quickly get annoying. Standing in one spot, you should hear a train as it approaches your location and as it departs, btu not when it's a scale 20 miles away. --Randy Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more. Reply 12 Subscriber & Member Login Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more! Login Register Users Online There are no community member online Search the Community ADVERTISEMENT ADVERTISEMENT ADVERTISEMENT Model Railroader Newsletter See all Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox! Sign up
jeffers_mz wrote: 1. The air absorbs and dampens high frequencies, not bass. That's why thunder, heard at a distance, is all bass component.2. Making bass is a matter of moving large quantities of air, which requires large speakers, which require massive amplifiers. Never going to happen onboard model trains.3. Bass is omnidirectional, treble is unidirectional. That's why home theaters and 5.1 sound systems have many small satellite speakers for the high end, but only one subwoofer. For improved frequency response in model train sound systems, you don't need block detection. leave the high frequencies onboard, feed the bass to a stationary subwoofer, and you ears will "cause" the bass to follow the train around the track.4. There's a technological hurdle involved in doing sound this way. The sound signal source is in the decoder, on the train. That electrical signal either has to travel along wires to the subwoofer amp and speaker, or else you have to use two decoders, and make sure they stay in perfect sync. If you reverse the wires on one speaker in your home stereo, one speaker will be pushing, while the other is pulling. They cancel each other out, in strange ways. The effect can be weak, tinny sound, or it can be an effect called comb filtering, which just sounds strange.Trying to feed an audio signal through the rails will interfere with the AC power already running there. Bass is typically defined as being those frequencies between 20 and 125 cycles per second (hertz). Standard power line alternating current is right in the middle, at 60 hertz. No idea what frequency DCC power signals alternate at. There are also bandwidth issues to contend with, and in the case of multiple trains operating simultaneausly, these problems are compounded.You could transmit the signal wirelessly, if you had room for a transmitter in the model, and were willing to suffer audio degradation in a high RF environment.Most likely solution is going to be two decoders, one onboard, one stationary. A much lower bandwidth timing pulse should be able to keep them in sync well enough to avoid most audio problems. If both decoders were slaves in the timing arrangement, and the "power pack" was the master, then the onboard decoders would not have to generate the timing pulses. However, they would have to respond to the timing pulses, and therefore, all yoour onboard sound decoders would have to be replaced.5. Yet another significant issue exists. The tiny speakers onboard trains don't just fail miserably in producing bass, they also fall well short of the mark in midrange frequencies. These frequencies are those that the human ear is most sensitive too, and their absence will not go unnoticed. If you try to send these to a stationary decoder, then you lose the effect of omnidirectionality, and have to jump through complicated hoops to make the sound move with the train.6. Finally, you have the problem of the sound samples stored in existing decoders. Every bit of audio data takes up storage space. 8 bit samples are roughly equal in quality to the sound quality of a telephone. Moving up to 16 bit samples halves the decoder's storage space. often the samples themselves lack bass, since the speaker can't reproduce it, and the manufacturer chose to maximize storage space usage. If the bass never existed in the original sample, or the decoder manufacturer EQed it out before burning the sample to the chip, it's gone, and you can't get it back.There's another way, much simpler, and it deals with every problem listed here, plus those of modelers who complain about hearing trains in tunnels, and on the far side of the layout and the cacaphony you hear when several trains run at once.Typical prototype experience begins with no audible train noises,, then you pick up the bass, and perhaps the rails singing, then a rapid gain is sound pressure levels, to or above the audible pain threshold, a doppler shift, and then a rapid decline in locomotive noise, while the clackety clack of wheels on rail splices continues till the train is past.At a given "viewing point", stereo samples at 16 or even 24 bit fidelity, play back through a standard stereo pair of fixed speakers, when trains roll past. To accomplish this, you need no more than an old computer with soundcard, speakers to match your preferences in quality, and a copy of the Winamp software. The sounds are easily triggered manually from a keyboard, and with a small additional investment, could be triggered automatically with crossing dectectors, though you'd have to write a bit of your own software to make that happen. Nothing major, the computer will know when the digital trigger is tripped, you just have to tell it what to do at that point.Since the average layout compresses so much railroad into a much smaller space, I think the ultimate solution will end up being a hybrid of the techniques described so far, and some others. In my opinion, the PC figures largely into most or all of the sound issues. The PC's CD player can play normal background sounds, birds, weather, traffic wildlife, machinery, etc. It can also hold, trigger and play back sparkling CD quality digital bypass samples, through a full range sound system.Raising the bar a little higher, a PC is easily equipped with a 5.1 soundcard, and attached to a THX quality speaker array. With this setup, and about $100 in commercial software, DVD background audio and triggered train bypasses can move with the train or other sound source in three dimensions, though the sound's spatial distribution and movement will be specific for each layout.Having had a ringside seat through the invention and development of both MIDI and digital audio technologies, my assessment of current DCC onboard sound is that it's currently well short of prime time. If your goal is high quality audio, either at 1:1 volume levels or at scale values, prototypical fidelity on a level to match your model's and layout's fine detail, odds are you'll almost certainly have to replace your existing decoder investment, and possibly your control infrastructure as well.I'd say you'll see a completely new set of standards within ten to twenty years from now. There is much work being done in the field, but the first step is to field a system that works, at the much higher audio standards, then as competitors enter the market, there will be a period of struggling for dominance in those markets, and eventually a victor will emerge and a general standard consensus reached. That takes time. If there's not a market for high end audio, it will never take off. I think there is. I remember well when the primative ancestors of DCC first appeared and the debates that raged way back then. Today, most modelers wouldn't even think of running their layouts on DC. Tomorrow, the elite will sneer at 8 bit onboard only audio. The current trend shows audio expense increasing at near exponential rates, and the market is clamoring for more sound, not less.If you're interested in building a first class railroad , with first class sound, now, and don't want to wait for that long, the first place to begin is by integrating a PC in the audio chain as early as possible. Be prepared to think outside the box and solve some problems yourself, because the Reply Don Gibson Member sinceJune 2004 From: Pacific Northwest 3,864 posts Posted by Don Gibson on Saturday, September 15, 2007 10:52 PM doc manago wrote: In order to have more and better bass, I can´t understand how, in 2007, no DCC manufacturer developed a better speaker, heaviest, with an important magnet and Kevlar cone, not the cheap and thin thing that they are today...! What do you think? Bye.Doc:Speakers are 'Transducers' ie: an (AC) mechanical devices that change one form of energy into another.DC is Electrical EnergyDCC is Digitalyl Encoded information imbedded in DC, that a Decoder translates to the motor.Digital transmission is HERE.(As you'll discover in 2008 or 2009 when your TV's won't work).MODEL TRAINS are miniatration. Small speakers move little air. Your EARS only hear air in motion.BASS means much air in motion. mzJeffers is right on. Bass is 'pumping air'. Muscles are acheived by pumping Iron.If you want BASS it Co$ts money. HOW MUCH are you willing to spend?????????????????????A speaker that produces AC analogue signals will not work on DC - nor will Digital transmission run a DC motor - nor do ANY DCC manufacturers manufacture speakers! Even QSI / Lok Sound /and MRC buy theirs.YOU appear to want the moon, but can you pay for the rocket fuel to get there? If not you're out of gas. Don Gibson .............. ________ _______ I I__()____||__| ||||| I / I ((|__|----------| | |||||||||| I ______ I // o--O O O O-----o o OO-------OO ########################### Reply Don Gibson Member sinceJune 2004 From: Pacific Northwest 3,864 posts Posted by Don Gibson on Saturday, September 15, 2007 10:02 PM IT'S SIMPLE.SMALL speakers cannot create enought bass to virate your eardrums. it's the Laws of Physics. Neither can a 'knothole' allow enought light in to illuminate a room.Speakers are 'Transducers' - a disk or megaphone of sorts that vibrates the air. 1. Your ears hear 'air' vibrations - nothing more. 2. Bass (moving air) is expen$ive. A 30 foot air column will produce 'bass'. Pipe Organs have a raft of these, so will a $500+ subwoofer with a large cone driver. Computer speakers won't do it. Metal cones won't either, nor 'bottle cap' enclosures (both reinforce the highs)\.3. Want bass on the cheap? (A pair of good stereo headphones - around $50) - provided you have 10 watts of amplifier to drive them.1" speakers with a 1 watt amplifier won't cut it, however SOMETHING is better than nothing, Yes? Don Gibson .............. ________ _______ I I__()____||__| ||||| I / I ((|__|----------| | |||||||||| I ______ I // o--O O O O-----o o OO-------OO ########################### Reply accord1959 Member sinceJuly 2005 From: Ottawa, Ontario 364 posts Posted by accord1959 on Saturday, September 15, 2007 9:53 PM Greg H. wrote:I've been thinking about this even since I started getting involved with hobby ( all of about 4 months now ) and I believe that ChrisNH, has the answer right on the nose. Under table subwoofers, with on board speaker for the high range sounds. If layouts had subwoofers placed at various locations underneath, you'd have to compete with the youngsters stopped at public crossings at grade with there subwoofers blaring. I think it's a great idea, what is missing is the rumble of the prime mover as the loco rolls by and I think a subwoofer under the layout would definately replicate that sound. Reply chessiecat Member sinceOctober 2004 From: Eastern Panhandle of West Virginia 245 posts Posted by chessiecat on Saturday, September 15, 2007 8:54 PM I ordered a pair of what they call High-Bass speakers from Tony's. They have a heavy metal cone and a large gasket that it floats on. I got both sizes, a 1.10 inch and a 1.06 inch speaker but the enclosures for them are on backorder. I was going try to hook one up to my Tsunami I installed in my Allegheny but then I ended up being selected for a jury. Hope that it ends this coming week. The speakers look to be thicker than most at least a half inch so they may be a little hard to squeeze in the tender.Thanks Jim Reply selector Member sinceFebruary 2005 From: Vancouver Island, BC 23,330 posts Posted by selector on Saturday, September 15, 2007 7:47 PM Magnus, either the tender cover lifts off and you'll find the master volume screw, or one of the covers comes off...maybe the water filler hatch must be pryed off with a sharp blade wedged between the cover and the deck? Don't the instructions have an exploded diagram showing the cover that comes off?-Crandell Reply Greg H. Member sinceJuly 2007 From: Colorado 472 posts Posted by Greg H. on Saturday, September 15, 2007 7:15 PM jeffers_mz wrote: 1. The air absorbs and dampens high frequencies, not bass. That's why thunder, heard at a distance, is all bass component.2. Making bass is a matter of moving large quantities of air, which requires large speakers, which require massive amplifiers. Never going to happen onboard model trains.3. Bass is omnidirectional, treble is unidirectional. That's why home theaters and 5.1 sound systems have many small satellite speakers for the high end, but only one subwoofer. For improved frequency response in model train sound systems, you don't need block detection. leave the high frequencies onboard, feed the bass to a stationary subwoofer, and you ears will "cause" the bass to follow the train around the track.4. There's a technological hurdle involved in doing sound this way. The sound signal source is in the decoder, on the train. That electrical signal either has to travel along wires to the subwoofer amp and speaker, or else you have to use two decoders, and make sure they stay in perfect sync. If you reverse the wires on one speaker in your home stereo, one speaker will be pushing, while the other is pulling. They cancel each other out, in strange ways. The effect can be weak, tinny sound, or it can be an effect called comb filtering, which just sounds strange.Trying to feed an audio signal through the rails will interfere with the AC power already running there. Bass is typically defined as being those frequencies between 20 and 125 cycles per second (hertz). Standard power line alternating current is right in the middle, at 60 hertz. No idea what frequency DCC power signals alternate at. There are also bandwidth issues to contend with, and in the case of multiple trains operating simultaneausly, these problems are compounded.You could transmit the signal wirelessly, if you had room for a transmitter in the model, and were willing to suffer audio degradation in a high RF environment.Most likely solution is going to be two decoders, one onboard, one stationary. A much lower bandwidth timing pulse should be able to keep them in sync well enough to avoid most audio problems. If both decoders were slaves in the timing arrangement, and the "power pack" was the master, then the onboard decoders would not have to generate the timing pulses. However, they would have to respond to the timing pulses, and therefore, all yoour onboard sound decoders would have to be replaced.5. Yet another significant issue exists. The tiny speakers onboard trains don't just fail miserably in producing bass, they also fall well short of the mark in midrange frequencies. These frequencies are those that the human ear is most sensitive too, and their absence will not go unnoticed. If you try to send these to a stationary decoder, then you lose the effect of omnidirectionality, and have to jump through complicated hoops to make the sound move with the train.6. Finally, you have the problem of the sound samples stored in existing decoders. Every bit of audio data takes up storage space. 8 bit samples are roughly equal in quality to the sound quality of a telephone. Moving up to 16 bit samples halves the decoder's storage space. often the samples themselves lack bass, since the speaker can't reproduce it, and the manufacturer chose to maximize storage space usage. If the bass never existed in the original sample, or the decoder manufacturer EQed it out before burning the sample to the chip, it's gone, and you can't get it back.There's another way, much simpler, and it deals with every problem listed here, plus those of modelers who complain about hearing trains in tunnels, and on the far side of the layout and the cacaphony you hear when several trains run at once.Typical prototype experience begins with no audible train noises,, then you pick up the bass, and perhaps the rails singing, then a rapid gain is sound pressure levels, to or above the audible pain threshold, a doppler shift, and then a rapid decline in locomotive noise, while the clackety clack of wheels on rail splices continues till the train is past.At a given "viewing point", stereo samples at 16 or even 24 bit fidelity, play back through a standard stereo pair of fixed speakers, when trains roll past. To accomplish this, you need no more than an old computer with soundcard, speakers to match your preferences in quality, and a copy of the Winamp software. The sounds are easily triggered manually from a keyboard, and with a small additional investment, could be triggered automatically with crossing dectectors, though you'd have to write a bit of your own software to make that happen. Nothing major, the computer will know when the digital trigger is tripped, you just have to tell it what to do at that point.Since the average layout compresses so much railroad into a much smaller space, I think the ultimate solution will end up being a hybrid of the techniques described so far, and some others. In my opinion, the PC figures largely into most or all of the sound issues. The PC's CD player can play normal background sounds, birds, weather, traffic wildlife, machinery, etc. It can also hold, trigger and play back sparkling CD quality digital bypass samples, through a full range sound system.Raising the bar a little higher, a PC is easily equipped with a 5.1 soundcard, and attached to a THX quality speaker array. With this setup, and about $100 in commercial software, DVD background audio and triggered train bypasses can move with the train or other sound source in three dimensions, though the sound's spatial distribution and movement will be specific for each layout.Having had a ringside seat through the invention and development of both MIDI and digital audio technologies, my assessment of current DCC onboard sound is that it's currently well short of prime time. If your goal is high quality audio, either at 1:1 volume levels or at scale values, prototypical fidelity on a level to match your model's and layout's fine detail, odds are you'll almost certainly have to replace your existing decoder investment, and possibly your control infrastructure as well.I'd say you'll see a completely new set of standards within ten to twenty years from now. There is much work being done in the field, but the first step is to field a system that works, at the much higher audio standards, then as competitors enter the market, there will be a period of struggling for dominance in those markets, and eventually a victor will emerge and a general standard consensus reached. That takes time. If there's not a market for high end audio, it will never take off. I think there is. I remember well when the primative ancestors of DCC first appeared and the debates that raged way back then. Today, most modelers wouldn't even think of running their layouts on DC. Tomorrow, the elite will sneer at 8 bit onboard only audio. The current trend shows audio expense increasing at near exponential rates, and the market is clamoring for more sound, not less.If you're interested in building a first class railroad , with first class sound, now, and don't want to wait for that long, the first place to begin is by integrating a PC in the audio chain as early as possible. Be prepared to think outside the box and solve some problems yourself, because the infrastructure and COTS equipment isn't in place yet.Good ideas.I had this visi Greg H. Reply rrinker Member sinceFebruary 2002 From: Reading, PA 30,002 posts Posted by rrinker on Saturday, September 15, 2007 4:15 PM davidmbedard wrote:Scale the sound people....scale the sound. Go stand 300 feet from a rail line and take a listen. David B Very true. I think on a larger layout with 6-7 trains runnign during an op session, if you could hear ALL of the locos anywhere in the room it would quickly get annoying. Standing in one spot, you should hear a train as it approaches your location and as it departs, btu not when it's a scale 20 miles away. --Randy Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more. Reply 12 Subscriber & Member Login Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more! Login Register Users Online There are no community member online Search the Community ADVERTISEMENT ADVERTISEMENT ADVERTISEMENT Model Railroader Newsletter See all Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox! Sign up
1. The air absorbs and dampens high frequencies, not bass. That's why thunder, heard at a distance, is all bass component.
2. Making bass is a matter of moving large quantities of air, which requires large speakers, which require massive amplifiers. Never going to happen onboard model trains.
3. Bass is omnidirectional, treble is unidirectional. That's why home theaters and 5.1 sound systems have many small satellite speakers for the high end, but only one subwoofer. For improved frequency response in model train sound systems, you don't need block detection. leave the high frequencies onboard, feed the bass to a stationary subwoofer, and you ears will "cause" the bass to follow the train around the track.
4. There's a technological hurdle involved in doing sound this way. The sound signal source is in the decoder, on the train. That electrical signal either has to travel along wires to the subwoofer amp and speaker, or else you have to use two decoders, and make sure they stay in perfect sync. If you reverse the wires on one speaker in your home stereo, one speaker will be pushing, while the other is pulling. They cancel each other out, in strange ways. The effect can be weak, tinny sound, or it can be an effect called comb filtering, which just sounds strange.
Trying to feed an audio signal through the rails will interfere with the AC power already running there. Bass is typically defined as being those frequencies between 20 and 125 cycles per second (hertz). Standard power line alternating current is right in the middle, at 60 hertz. No idea what frequency DCC power signals alternate at. There are also bandwidth issues to contend with, and in the case of multiple trains operating simultaneausly, these problems are compounded.
You could transmit the signal wirelessly, if you had room for a transmitter in the model, and were willing to suffer audio degradation in a high RF environment.
Most likely solution is going to be two decoders, one onboard, one stationary. A much lower bandwidth timing pulse should be able to keep them in sync well enough to avoid most audio problems. If both decoders were slaves in the timing arrangement, and the "power pack" was the master, then the onboard decoders would not have to generate the timing pulses. However, they would have to respond to the timing pulses, and therefore, all yoour onboard sound decoders would have to be replaced.
5. Yet another significant issue exists. The tiny speakers onboard trains don't just fail miserably in producing bass, they also fall well short of the mark in midrange frequencies. These frequencies are those that the human ear is most sensitive too, and their absence will not go unnoticed. If you try to send these to a stationary decoder, then you lose the effect of omnidirectionality, and have to jump through complicated hoops to make the sound move with the train.
6. Finally, you have the problem of the sound samples stored in existing decoders. Every bit of audio data takes up storage space. 8 bit samples are roughly equal in quality to the sound quality of a telephone. Moving up to 16 bit samples halves the decoder's storage space. often the samples themselves lack bass, since the speaker can't reproduce it, and the manufacturer chose to maximize storage space usage. If the bass never existed in the original sample, or the decoder manufacturer EQed it out before burning the sample to the chip, it's gone, and you can't get it back.
There's another way, much simpler, and it deals with every problem listed here, plus those of modelers who complain about hearing trains in tunnels, and on the far side of the layout and the cacaphony you hear when several trains run at once.
Typical prototype experience begins with no audible train noises,, then you pick up the bass, and perhaps the rails singing, then a rapid gain is sound pressure levels, to or above the audible pain threshold, a doppler shift, and then a rapid decline in locomotive noise, while the clackety clack of wheels on rail splices continues till the train is past.
At a given "viewing point", stereo samples at 16 or even 24 bit fidelity, play back through a standard stereo pair of fixed speakers, when trains roll past. To accomplish this, you need no more than an old computer with soundcard, speakers to match your preferences in quality, and a copy of the Winamp software. The sounds are easily triggered manually from a keyboard, and with a small additional investment, could be triggered automatically with crossing dectectors, though you'd have to write a bit of your own software to make that happen. Nothing major, the computer will know when the digital trigger is tripped, you just have to tell it what to do at that point.
Since the average layout compresses so much railroad into a much smaller space, I think the ultimate solution will end up being a hybrid of the techniques described so far, and some others. In my opinion, the PC figures largely into most or all of the sound issues. The PC's CD player can play normal background sounds, birds, weather, traffic wildlife, machinery, etc. It can also hold, trigger and play back sparkling CD quality digital bypass samples, through a full range sound system.
Raising the bar a little higher, a PC is easily equipped with a 5.1 soundcard, and attached to a THX quality speaker array. With this setup, and about $100 in commercial software, DVD background audio and triggered train bypasses can move with the train or other sound source in three dimensions, though the sound's spatial distribution and movement will be specific for each layout.
Having had a ringside seat through the invention and development of both MIDI and digital audio technologies, my assessment of current DCC onboard sound is that it's currently well short of prime time.
If your goal is high quality audio, either at 1:1 volume levels or at scale values, prototypical fidelity on a level to match your model's and layout's fine detail, odds are you'll almost certainly have to replace your existing decoder investment, and possibly your control infrastructure as well.
I'd say you'll see a completely new set of standards within ten to twenty years from now. There is much work being done in the field, but the first step is to field a system that works, at the much higher audio standards, then as competitors enter the market, there will be a period of struggling for dominance in those markets, and eventually a victor will emerge and a general standard consensus reached. That takes time. If there's not a market for high end audio, it will never take off. I think there is. I remember well when the primative ancestors of DCC first appeared and the debates that raged way back then. Today, most modelers wouldn't even think of running their layouts on DC. Tomorrow, the elite will sneer at 8 bit onboard only audio. The current trend shows audio expense increasing at near exponential rates, and the market is clamoring for more sound, not less.
If you're interested in building a first class railroad , with first class sound, now, and don't want to wait for that long, the first place to begin is by integrating a PC in the audio chain as early as possible. Be prepared to think outside the box and solve some problems yourself, because the
doc manago wrote: In order to have more and better bass, I can´t understand how, in 2007, no DCC manufacturer developed a better speaker, heaviest, with an important magnet and Kevlar cone, not the cheap and thin thing that they are today...! What do you think? Bye.
In order to have more and better bass, I can´t understand how, in 2007, no DCC manufacturer developed a better speaker, heaviest, with an important magnet and Kevlar cone, not the cheap and thin thing that they are today...! What do you think? Bye.
IT'S SIMPLE.
SMALL speakers cannot create enought bass to virate your eardrums. it's the Laws of Physics. Neither can a 'knothole' allow enought light in to illuminate a room.
Speakers are 'Transducers' - a disk or megaphone of sorts that vibrates the air. 1. Your ears hear 'air' vibrations - nothing more.
2. Bass (moving air) is expen$ive. A 30 foot air column will produce 'bass'. Pipe Organs have a raft of these, so will a $500+ subwoofer with a large cone driver. Computer speakers won't do it. Metal cones won't either, nor 'bottle cap' enclosures (both reinforce the highs)\.
3. Want bass on the cheap? (A pair of good stereo headphones - around $50) - provided you have 10 watts of amplifier to drive them.
1" speakers with a 1 watt amplifier won't cut it, however SOMETHING is better than nothing, Yes?
Greg H. wrote:I've been thinking about this even since I started getting involved with hobby ( all of about 4 months now ) and I believe that ChrisNH, has the answer right on the nose. Under table subwoofers, with on board speaker for the high range sounds.
If layouts had subwoofers placed at various locations underneath, you'd have to compete with the youngsters stopped at public crossings at grade with there subwoofers blaring. I think it's a great idea, what is missing is the rumble of the prime mover as the loco rolls by and I think a subwoofer under the layout would definately replicate that sound.
I ordered a pair of what they call High-Bass speakers from Tony's. They have a heavy metal cone and a large gasket that it floats on. I got both sizes, a 1.10 inch and a 1.06 inch speaker but the enclosures for them are on backorder. I was going try to hook one up to my Tsunami I installed in my Allegheny but then I ended up being selected for a jury. Hope that it ends this coming week. The speakers look to be thicker than most at least a half inch so they may be a little hard to squeeze in the tender.
Thanks Jim
Magnus, either the tender cover lifts off and you'll find the master volume screw, or one of the covers comes off...maybe the water filler hatch must be pryed off with a sharp blade wedged between the cover and the deck? Don't the instructions have an exploded diagram showing the cover that comes off?
-Crandell
jeffers_mz wrote: 1. The air absorbs and dampens high frequencies, not bass. That's why thunder, heard at a distance, is all bass component.2. Making bass is a matter of moving large quantities of air, which requires large speakers, which require massive amplifiers. Never going to happen onboard model trains.3. Bass is omnidirectional, treble is unidirectional. That's why home theaters and 5.1 sound systems have many small satellite speakers for the high end, but only one subwoofer. For improved frequency response in model train sound systems, you don't need block detection. leave the high frequencies onboard, feed the bass to a stationary subwoofer, and you ears will "cause" the bass to follow the train around the track.4. There's a technological hurdle involved in doing sound this way. The sound signal source is in the decoder, on the train. That electrical signal either has to travel along wires to the subwoofer amp and speaker, or else you have to use two decoders, and make sure they stay in perfect sync. If you reverse the wires on one speaker in your home stereo, one speaker will be pushing, while the other is pulling. They cancel each other out, in strange ways. The effect can be weak, tinny sound, or it can be an effect called comb filtering, which just sounds strange.Trying to feed an audio signal through the rails will interfere with the AC power already running there. Bass is typically defined as being those frequencies between 20 and 125 cycles per second (hertz). Standard power line alternating current is right in the middle, at 60 hertz. No idea what frequency DCC power signals alternate at. There are also bandwidth issues to contend with, and in the case of multiple trains operating simultaneausly, these problems are compounded.You could transmit the signal wirelessly, if you had room for a transmitter in the model, and were willing to suffer audio degradation in a high RF environment.Most likely solution is going to be two decoders, one onboard, one stationary. A much lower bandwidth timing pulse should be able to keep them in sync well enough to avoid most audio problems. If both decoders were slaves in the timing arrangement, and the "power pack" was the master, then the onboard decoders would not have to generate the timing pulses. However, they would have to respond to the timing pulses, and therefore, all yoour onboard sound decoders would have to be replaced.5. Yet another significant issue exists. The tiny speakers onboard trains don't just fail miserably in producing bass, they also fall well short of the mark in midrange frequencies. These frequencies are those that the human ear is most sensitive too, and their absence will not go unnoticed. If you try to send these to a stationary decoder, then you lose the effect of omnidirectionality, and have to jump through complicated hoops to make the sound move with the train.6. Finally, you have the problem of the sound samples stored in existing decoders. Every bit of audio data takes up storage space. 8 bit samples are roughly equal in quality to the sound quality of a telephone. Moving up to 16 bit samples halves the decoder's storage space. often the samples themselves lack bass, since the speaker can't reproduce it, and the manufacturer chose to maximize storage space usage. If the bass never existed in the original sample, or the decoder manufacturer EQed it out before burning the sample to the chip, it's gone, and you can't get it back.There's another way, much simpler, and it deals with every problem listed here, plus those of modelers who complain about hearing trains in tunnels, and on the far side of the layout and the cacaphony you hear when several trains run at once.Typical prototype experience begins with no audible train noises,, then you pick up the bass, and perhaps the rails singing, then a rapid gain is sound pressure levels, to or above the audible pain threshold, a doppler shift, and then a rapid decline in locomotive noise, while the clackety clack of wheels on rail splices continues till the train is past.At a given "viewing point", stereo samples at 16 or even 24 bit fidelity, play back through a standard stereo pair of fixed speakers, when trains roll past. To accomplish this, you need no more than an old computer with soundcard, speakers to match your preferences in quality, and a copy of the Winamp software. The sounds are easily triggered manually from a keyboard, and with a small additional investment, could be triggered automatically with crossing dectectors, though you'd have to write a bit of your own software to make that happen. Nothing major, the computer will know when the digital trigger is tripped, you just have to tell it what to do at that point.Since the average layout compresses so much railroad into a much smaller space, I think the ultimate solution will end up being a hybrid of the techniques described so far, and some others. In my opinion, the PC figures largely into most or all of the sound issues. The PC's CD player can play normal background sounds, birds, weather, traffic wildlife, machinery, etc. It can also hold, trigger and play back sparkling CD quality digital bypass samples, through a full range sound system.Raising the bar a little higher, a PC is easily equipped with a 5.1 soundcard, and attached to a THX quality speaker array. With this setup, and about $100 in commercial software, DVD background audio and triggered train bypasses can move with the train or other sound source in three dimensions, though the sound's spatial distribution and movement will be specific for each layout.Having had a ringside seat through the invention and development of both MIDI and digital audio technologies, my assessment of current DCC onboard sound is that it's currently well short of prime time. If your goal is high quality audio, either at 1:1 volume levels or at scale values, prototypical fidelity on a level to match your model's and layout's fine detail, odds are you'll almost certainly have to replace your existing decoder investment, and possibly your control infrastructure as well.I'd say you'll see a completely new set of standards within ten to twenty years from now. There is much work being done in the field, but the first step is to field a system that works, at the much higher audio standards, then as competitors enter the market, there will be a period of struggling for dominance in those markets, and eventually a victor will emerge and a general standard consensus reached. That takes time. If there's not a market for high end audio, it will never take off. I think there is. I remember well when the primative ancestors of DCC first appeared and the debates that raged way back then. Today, most modelers wouldn't even think of running their layouts on DC. Tomorrow, the elite will sneer at 8 bit onboard only audio. The current trend shows audio expense increasing at near exponential rates, and the market is clamoring for more sound, not less.If you're interested in building a first class railroad , with first class sound, now, and don't want to wait for that long, the first place to begin is by integrating a PC in the audio chain as early as possible. Be prepared to think outside the box and solve some problems yourself, because the infrastructure and COTS equipment isn't in place yet.
If you're interested in building a first class railroad , with first class sound, now, and don't want to wait for that long, the first place to begin is by integrating a PC in the audio chain as early as possible. Be prepared to think outside the box and solve some problems yourself, because the infrastructure and COTS equipment isn't in place yet.
Good ideas.
I had this visi
davidmbedard wrote:Scale the sound people....scale the sound. Go stand 300 feet from a rail line and take a listen. David B
Scale the sound people....scale the sound. Go stand 300 feet from a rail line and take a listen.
David B
Very true. I think on a larger layout with 6-7 trains runnign during an op session, if you could hear ALL of the locos anywhere in the room it would quickly get annoying. Standing in one spot, you should hear a train as it approaches your location and as it departs, btu not when it's a scale 20 miles away.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.