Various recent posts have discussed the value of the latest DCC sound decoder releases, many priced over $100. It seems that many in this forum believe that $120 for a decoder that offers accurate 567C diesel sounds or accurate BIg Boy steam sounds is worth every penny! If that's what you desire, great! However, I suspect there might be an even larger market segment for those seeking DCC sound without breaking the bank.
Not being able to remember whether I've ever even heard a 567C diesel and knowing that I've never heard a Big Boy operating, I couldn't tell you what the accurate sounds for such locomotives are supposed to be. Thus, generic diesel and steam sounds would keep me quite happy, especially when I realize that no speaker small enough to fit in my locomotives is ever going to reproduce the true sound of the prototype, no matter what recording source/playback device is used.
A few years ago, the DCC manufacturers responded to market requests for inexpensive decoders for those needing to convert their locomotive "fleet." Thus, the "fleet" decoder was born and several manufacturers provided these decoders for around $15, or less. I think it is also time for the DCC manufacturers to produce "fleet" priced sound decoders.
Though I could create a fairly inexpensive setup using a combination of a fleet decoder and a sound-only decoder, a single sound decoder with the same low cost approach would be preferable, especially since it would take up less space than two separate decoders. For instance, the NCE D13SR decoder has a "street" price of around $16 while the MRC Sounder decoders can be found for around $26. This $42 combination would give me good motor control, desirable lighting effects and an acceptable selection of generic diesel or steam sounds. Some will cringe at the suggestion of the MRC Sounder but a similar setup could be achieved by substituting a Digitrax Sound Bug. The point is that if I can already put together a DCC sound decoder combination for under $50, why isn't the equivalent single decoder equivalent available direct from any of the DCC manufacturer's (besides a few of the dreaded MRC products)? As long as my 0-6-0 switcher sounds smaller than my J3 Hudson, and likewise my EMD diesels at least sound "different" from my Alcos, I'd be happy.
How about it DCC manufacturers? A "fleet" priced (well under $50 including a speaker) full function sound decoder with a selection of decent generic diesel or steam sounds would be exactly what I, and I'm sure many others, desire! I also suspect this group represents a far greater market share than those needing a decoder with perfect AC10 or K36 sound effects.
Hornblower
hornblower Not being able to remember whether I've ever even heard a 567C diesel and knowing that I've never heard a Big Boy operating, I couldn't tell you what the accurate sounds for such locomotives are supposed to be. Thus, generic diesel and steam sounds would keep me quite happy, especially when I realize that no speaker small enough to fit in my locomotives is ever going to reproduce the true sound of the prototype, no matter what recording source/playback device is used.
What an interesting confession! And so I have suspected of many in this hobby.
Hornblower, I think you make a great point and ask a good question, but until the model press stops trying to bully the modeling public into the "everthing must be prototypically perfect" mentality, don't expect too much "generic" anything from the manufacturers. Other example - selectively compressed passenger cars for better appearance on curves.
Personally, I don't use DCC or sound and the main reason is I don't need DCC to meet my modeling goals and I have rejected onboard sound as not being suitable to my ears. If the sound was better (which it can't be until God changes the laws of Physics) or I was in a scale larger than HO, I would have sound and DCC or another onboard control system like the new Aristo Revolution. Not that I would worry about if this whistle or that prime mover was exactly right on, but simply on the same sound quality basis you expressed. Personally the "noise" of HO onboard sound is very objectional to me.
Sound is really great in larger scales. Speakers are bigger, you are closer to the train, fewer trains are near each other, your "scale" relationship with the train is more intimate. All of this makes a difference in my mind and to my ears.
Good luck, maybe they are listening.
Sheldon
hornblowerIt seems that many in this forum believe that $120 for a decoder that offers accurate 567C diesel sounds or accurate BIg Boy steam sounds is worth every penny!
Anyone that would pay $120 for a decoder must have more money than time to shop around. A little shopping shows that Loksound, the most expensive can easily be found for $110. QSI, which is my decoder of choice right now, can be found for a bit over $85. Tsunami light board style can be found for UNDER $80 with just a little shopping. All three of these choices offer great motor control, lots of lighting options and sound very good. Loksound can be fully sound programmed, QSI san be modified, Tsunami can only be used as you bought it.
As far as "generic", take a look at Digitrax. A Decoder (light board style) and a Soundbug are around $75 MSRP. I'm sure you could find these for the price range you want. You can also even use the Digitrax programmer, if and when you get tired of the generic sounds.
One other comment, if you haven't already tried putting a motor decoder and a seperate sound decoder in the same loco, be prepared for some fun. I did one early on, because I didn't know any better. It can get to be a real pain to program either one of them if you do it that way.
Sheldon,
Having about four year's of good experience with DCC sound in a trio of MDC 2-6-2 Praire kits equipped with (GASP) MRC 1629 steam sound decoders, I find that I like sound in my trains although I prefer a rather low volume. Now that I'm planning a larger layout with around a dozen more locos, I find that I would desire all to be sound equipped.
Steve58,
As you say, buyer's can shop for better "street" prices. However, you'd likely be hard pressed to find any full function sound decoder besides MRC priced below $50. Likewise, the desire to have a single decoder is reflected in your own installation experiences with two different decoders.
hornblower,
I understand, but at any volume my ears say no for me. I spent years designing Hi Fi speakers. I don't listen to ANYTHING through 1" speakers if I can help it. I keep the computer sound off except to listen when "necessary". And I still listen to vinyl records - analog music sounds better with analog reproduction.
I know many like sound, regardless of its accuracy or quality. I have never been a subscriber to the "anything is better than nothing" approach in most things.
But you are most welcome to your fun and I hope the industry continues to make products for us both.
quote by hornblower -Various recent posts have discussed the value of the latest DCC sound decoder releases, many priced over $100. It seems that many in this forum believe that $120 for a decoder that offers accurate 567C diesel sounds or accurate BIg Boy steam sounds is worth every penny! If that's what you desire, great! However, I suspect there might be an even larger market segment for those seeking DCC sound without breaking the bank. - end of quote
Even though Soundtraxx had been in the market a while, back in the early 2000s when BLI hit the market with QSI equipped HO locomotives, the reactions from modelers was astounding. Sound's popularity jumped as the months progressed.
After the novelty of sound in the smaller scales settled, quite a number of us (yes, especially schleps like me ) engaged BLI/QSI, LokSound ESU, and Soundtraxx in dialogues regarding the accuracy of sounds. The prevailing attitude was that since today's HO & N scale locomotives come equipped with much more accurate paint schemes and body detailing, the sounds emitted from the onboard systems should also be accurate. Apparently time proved that they were listening. One benefit of this was that more modelers started paying attention to the sounds that prototype units made (especially diesels). If one was not familar with what an F40PH's prime mover sounded like or which horn a typical Santa Fe Dash 9 was equipped with, it became so easy just to go to YouTube and other websites to view and hear the prototypes. Win-win. Hats off to LokSound for being on the bandwagon early on.
You're conveying that by having generic type sound decoders with quality motor controls, sound decoders could become much more affordable. Understandable point. But consider that the sound decoder with the "upload" feature is still relatively new. Even in this deplorable economy, as this technology continues to improve and competition increases, we will likely see more affordable uploadable decoders as time moves on. Remember just a few years ago Soundtraxx's DSD 101LC series, which isn't uploadable, hovered in the $80-$90 range. Now they list for $65, and you can get them for even less from web based dealers.
I may be contrary here, but imho, even modelers that aren't familiar with what certain prototype units sound like should enjoy the benefit of prototype accuracy and expect that as time passes we will see affordable sound/motor control decoders that offer prototype "accuracy or approximation".
quote by hornblower - A few years ago, the DCC manufacturers responded to market requests for inexpensive decoders for those needing to convert their locomotive "fleet." Thus, the "fleet" decoder was born and several manufacturers provided these decoders for around $15, or less. I think it is also time for the DCC manufacturers to produce "fleet" priced sound decoders. - end of quote.
Ah yes, here is the key! As mentioned a good number of us wrote and/or spoke with manufacturers reps regarding sound accuracy and remained persistent. Modelers today should do the same regarding affordability. Even with profit margins to consider, these manufacturers don't take "customer input" lightly, or have you not noticed that Athearn Genesis units are going to be equipped with Soundtraxx Tsunami's? Why? Because we spoke with our keyboards and wallets $$!
quote by ATLANTIC CENTRAL - "but until the model press stops trying to bully the modeling public into the "everything must be prototypically perfect" mentality, don't expect too much "generic" anything from the manufacturers.- end of quote.
Atlantic, remember: it's the other way around! The manufacturers are not bullying anyone. They've responded to the input from modelers. There were groups of us on Yahoo DCC/Sound forums exchanging ideas. I was pleasantly surprised when the president of BLI responded to my emails regarding the horn sounds for early EMD cab units back in 2004. Sountraxx listened to modelers and as a result the Nathan P5 and P5a horn sounds are now available in the diesel Tsunami, which may likely make N&W, Southern, NS, Rock Island, Metra, Georgia Central, Illinois Central, and "old school" Amtrak modelers happy . Canadian modelers have been included as well with the "Holden" series horn schemes. Add to that, looking back at past posts on this forum, there have been newbies and modelers, not familiar with sound, that have become interested in prototype sound. Point, again, is that modelers were interested in accuracy.
Of course, referring to your experience with stereo in the past, we do have the option of "Surroundtraxx" to get that "true to life" depth and volume you refer to. It is expensive, but at least the technology is available. Stands to reason that we will see more systems like this as time progresses.
STEVE - Good point emphasizing Digitrax's option.
"I like my Pullman Standards & Budds in Stainless Steel flavors, thank you!"
Well teh Digitrax Soundbugs are $38 each from Ulrich. And they program WITHOUT silly boosters and they do not have issues recovering from short circuits no matter what sort of power manager you use. Yes they only have 8 bit sounds so they suffer a bit with respect to the higher end 16 bit decoders bit - it's $38 and it's NOT MRC. And you can program in your own sounds. I'm a bit disappointed that there aren't more sound files available, some people started a group on Yahoo for Digitrax sound projects but there's almost nothign there that isn't already on the Digitrax site. I was sort of hoping for some GP-7 or RS3 sounds. I'll probably still pick one up to play with. Oh yeah, the $38 includes a speaker - you have to supply your own enclosure though. And they can easily be used with other decoders - the terminals that are used to screw it down to a Digitrax 165 series decoder are the track power temrinals, just hook them to the track pickups and you're all set.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
rrinkerI was sort of hoping for some GP-7 or RS3 sounds.
I believe there are CDs of these albums currently available from Daylight Sales.
Texas Zepher rrinkerI was sort of hoping for some GP-7 or RS3 sounds.There are three cuts of GP7s on the album First Generation Diesels: 1939-1959 by Arkay Records. The album First Generation Diesels Volume 2 has another cut of GP7 and one of an RS-3. I doubt the RS-3 track has enough information to program everything, but between the four GP7 cuts there should be enough to get a pretty good set put together.
I've got 2 Soundbugs. I'm disappointed by the low volume level available. Even cranked up to their maximum level, they are barely audible over the ambient sound level of the trains. I've re-programmed both of these myself, using "sound projects" from the Digitrax site. One ended up in a Bachmann Peter Witt trolley, and the other in a dummy F7B.
The speaker supplied with the Soundbug is a 1-inch round one. I was able to get that into the empty F7B shell with ease, of course, but in general a 1-inch round speaker will not fit in too many locomotives. So, most of the time you're going to be buying another speaker anyway. Since the speaker just adds to the cost of the Soundbug, I'd rather see the Soundbug a few dollars cheaper and do without a speaker I might not be able to use.
The sound project I put into the F7B is actually for an E8. The E8 uses the same 567 prime mover as the F7, although there are 2 of them in the E8. I figured it was a reasonable substitution.
A couple of weeks ago, I put a diesel Tsunami into a GP-9. Again, it's a 567 prime mover. When I compare the two sound units, though, it's like a GTO against a Yugo. No contest. You get what you pay for in this case.
Still, if Digitrax could double the volume coming out of the Soundbugs, I'd probably buy a few more for the engines still without sound. As it is, I'm happy to run those in consists with sound-equipped locos.
It takes an iron man to play with a toy iron horse.
See this is why I need to get one and play. Everyone says the sound level in the Kato and Tower55 units with the first Digitrax sound decoders was too low. I fidn this hard to believe, as I first heard one at the National Train SHow in Philly a few years ago, and it was plenty loud even in the noisy show room. Louder than the Tsunami steam sample they were running at the Sountraxx booth for darn sure - I had to lean over the loco to hear the whistle at all, and it was an On3 model, no excuse for a micro speaker or poor enclosure. I don;t need to hear my loco across the room, and the lack of programming and inrush problems makes up a lot of ground - although I've NEVER had a problem with multipel WSI and Loksound locos on the track at the same time - even when I deliberately shorted the track so I could witness this inrush problem. I also had an old Soundtraxx LC - you want quiet... With no enclosure you could barely hear anything. The speaker with the Soundbug also has no enclosure supplied. A proper enclosure is a MUST, especially with the small speaker size and low power. There's a nice PDF in the Digitrax Sound Yahoo Group with some interesting enclosure experiments - noting mainly that the cheap plastic ones many places sell areu simply too flimsy to actually do the job. Yes they seal the front from the back, but the sides of the enclosures themselves flex too much to truly seal in the sound. The writer of that document found a new use for Woodland Scenics roadbed - sealing up speaker enclosures.
As for the other poster about the GP-7, yes, there are OTHER decoders with GP-7 sounds. No sound projects for the Digitrax decoders with a GP-7 though.
And according to the Digitrax web site and Soundbug documentation, they still come with 32 ohm speakers. Using an 8 ohm speaker should make it a lot louder, but also would risk overheating the amp. Using a 32 ohm speaker on a circuit designed for an 8 ohm impedence would make it a lot quieter. The SFX04216 is listed as coming with an 8 ohm speaker, but the other two, as well as the Kato PnP versions, all say 32.
Hi,
I sure agree that there is a market for low priced sound systems. However, "cheaply made" ones are not what I believe the model RR community would support (for very long anyway).
Like TVs, stereos, computers, etc., as the market for sound system increases (and a few more competitors enter the marketplace), prices will fall over time.
For now, I would be really happy with just horn/whistle/motor/steam chuff sounds, but I suspect the number of different sounds in a system does not have a major affect upon pricing (I could be very wrong on this).
Mobilman44
ENJOY !
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
rrinker And according to the Digitrax web site and Soundbug documentation, they still come with 32 ohm speakers. Using an 8 ohm speaker should make it a lot louder, but also would risk overheating the amp. Using a 32 ohm speaker on a circuit designed for an 8 ohm impedence would make it a lot quieter. The SFX04216 is listed as coming with an 8 ohm speaker, but the other two, as well as the Kato PnP versions, all say 32. --Randy
The Digitrax Soundbug comes with an 8 ohm speaker, even though they say 32. I've pretty well settled on Digitrax 165 series decoders (about $22) and Soundbugs (about $40). I've yet to use the supplied speaker and have had to use smaller, rectangular 8 ohm speakers. It seems volume depends a lot on the installation. Most of mine have execellent volume but one or two are a bit quiet, but I think that is due to my installation.
I just wish Digitrax would get more sound option available for download. I have just one Loksound and for me it's not worth the added cost. I've not used MRC Sounders and I don't think they include a capacitor, which would be a problem on my insulated frogs. The Soundbug does include a capacitor.
All in all I think Digitrax has a good offering at a reasonable cost. For economy, you can start with just a 165 and add a Soundbug later. And, there is no conflict with the dual decoders as Digitrax makes them compatible with each other for programming.
Jerry
Rio Grande vs. Santa Fe.....the battle is over but the glory remains!
I've used several Soundtraxx LC "low cost" decoders and been happy with the result, they run around $50 or less if you shop around. I recently installed a Tsunami sound decoder in an FM diesel, the one designed as an Atlas board replacement. It sounds great and cost just under $60 as I recall. Programming it can be a little annoying, there are a lot of options and it's not always clear what CV gives you which result, but in time I got it worked out.
I'm OK with a speaker not being included, since decoders with speakers often use a 1" round one that can't fit in many diesels. I've been using 1/2" by 1" oval speakers with good results in my last installations.
jwils1And, there is no conflict with the dual decoders as Digitrax makes them compatible with each other for programming.
Jerry makes a good point about add-on sound. My Peter Witt trolley has a Bachmann decoder for motor and light control. To program either of them, I need to disconnect the other, and for some reason Bachmann chose to use F1, which everyone uses for the bell, to dim the interior lights instead. Well, when the motorman rings the bell, the lights go down. That's just the way it is. Looking forward, though, add-on sound would be easier if the decoders didn't conflict with each other.
I have a Soundtraxx LC which is designed for and installed in an Alco RS-3. (It's a Proto 1K model.) This was my first sound installation, and I am very happy with it. I had to lower the volume level after I got it together. Not as fancy as the diesel Tsunami, but the price is a lot more attractive. Also, it's both motor and sound, so it's less stuff to squeeze into an engine shell than going with separate motor and sound decoders.
By the way, I realized that I don't actually use Soundbugs, but rather SFX0416's. Can anyone compare the audio levels between these two Digitrax products? I assumed they were kind of the same, but if Soundbugs are louder they might have been a better choice.
AntonioFP45 quote by ATLANTIC CENTRAL - "but until the model press stops trying to bully the modeling public into the "everything must be prototypically perfect" mentality, don't expect too much "generic" anything from the manufacturers.- end of quote. Atlantic, remember: it's the other way around! The manufacturers are not bullying anyone. They've responded to the input from modelers.
Atlantic, remember: it's the other way around! The manufacturers are not bullying anyone. They've responded to the input from modelers.
I did not say the MANUFACTURERS where bullying anyone, I said the model press was. The most active modelers in the press, and the editorial staffs, all seem to have agreed on an "accepted" form of modeling which they promote. Either they are not offered material that suggests a different view of the hobby or they reject it - I don't know. There is a hand in hand relationship between this group and the manufacturers. The manufacturers make product based on the standards (some are very good standards) this group of modelers and the press put forth. In return, this press gives its blessing to virtually all the products.
True or not, most manufacturers are convinced there is no market for "generic" or freelanced models any more. It may well be true that many modelers are more discriminating, but I stll know many, young and old, that are not so. And I believe the ongoing success of the Athearn Ready to Roll and Blue Box lines support this view.
As for sound and DCC, yes they are here to stay, but how long (if ever) it will take for them to be universal remains to be seen. There is much evidence to suggest they only repersent 1/3 to 1/2 of the market right now.
AntonioFP45 Of course, referring to your experience with stereo in the past, we do have the option of "Surroundtraxx" to get that "true to life" depth and volume you refer to. It is expensive, but at least the technology is available. Stands to reason that we will see more systems like this as time progresses.
Depth yes, dynamic range yes, frequency response yes, volume no. Since the HO or N scale train is so small and effectively very far from me most of the time, the volume needs to be low. Good layout based sound is still the best bet for small scales in my opinion, we will see what developes. Expensive? - Installing sound decoders in my 100 locomotives would be expensive.
Oh yeah, somethign to add after experimenting with the Digitrax Soundloader software. It seems their modern GE sound projects have the 'spitter' sound! The only other one I've seen with this is Ulrich's custom sound set for Loksound (sample on their site). I was waiting for the MR video of the BLI GE with the Paragon2 decoder and hopign it had all the sounds - nope.
Yes, there is a market for cheap DCC sound decoders. There are at least two important issues, the decoders have to work well and be reliable.
Rich
If you ever fall over in public, pick yourself up and say “sorry it’s been a while since I inhabited a body.” And just walk away.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL True or not, most manufacturers are convinced there is no market for "generic" or freelanced models any more. It may well be true that many modelers are more discriminating, but I stll know many, young and old, that are not so. And I believe the ongoing success of the Athearn Ready to Roll and Blue Box lines support this view.
The more you learn about the prototype, the more you want accurate trains; unless you are creating a theme based on the essence of one or more prototypes. Many people are happy with generic models for many reasons; some of which involve not having photo evidence or direct knowledge of the contrary; near models are acceptable by the "discriminating crowd" when that is the best available. In the past, manufacturers offered locomotives and cars in schemes that never existed to sell more product. Many people were happy just to get product that ran. Keep in mind the hobby was and is evolving; Fewer modelers were in the know prototypically speaking. Things are different today. More of us want the models of the trains of our childhood. There are historical societies, books, videos and websites dedicated to preserving the memory of the fallen flags. They provide the foundation for enhanced modeling. The improvements create less of the "toy effect" (to the general public we are playing with toys not models). Also, model manufacturers get lots of grief selling expensive models with generic detail.
If wanting accuracy were not important, periodicals like Railroad Model Craftsman would not exist. People would not submit detailing and superdetailing articles to MR, NMRA magazine, etc.
Another incentive is time and skill; there are modelers buying trains with limited time to detail their models; some are uncomfortable cutting into a brand new loco with sound; others simply feel they do not possess the skill set to achieve satisfactory results.
While generic models are cheaper and appeal to more wallets, the discriminating modelers spend more money per sale. How many generic model consumers plop down $2500 - $5000 for models at one jump? Not many; however, you will find there are resellers with prototype specific customers doing this regularly.
This topic is a hot one; lets simplify things; how many of you would want prototypically accurate trains, as you remember them, if the money was not the deciding factor?
Carl in Florida - - - - - - - - - - We need an HO Amtrak SDP40F and GE U36B oh wait- We GOT THEM!
Wow! This thread has generated more feedback than I thought it would. However, let me restate my original premise.
If the DCC manufacturers were to add a "decent" amplifier with a small selection of generic steam or diesel sound samples and a speaker to a "fleet" decoder of quality similar to say the NCE D13SR, and then price it well below $50, would there be a market?
Obviously, there are several modelers in this forum who would not buy such a decoder due to the availability of more prototype specific sound decoders, even though such decoders can be relatively expensive. My position is that I do not have many opportunities to hear anything but current prototypes in person. As I enjoy modeling the "transition" era, I have almost no opportunities to hear era specific prototypes in person. Thus, how would I know what sounds these prototypes actually produced? As several of you have suggested, I could visit YouTube, buy train sound CD's or watch train related DVD's. However, all of these recordings are only as accurate as the recording and playback equipment used to capture and reproduce these sounds. If Joe's Videos used a typical cassette deck with its built in condenser mike or the microphone built into the front of his VHS video camera to record loco "X" back in 1982, I know that there is considerable wow, flutter and harmonic distortion in the original recording. If Joe's Films shot a steam loco using an old reel-to-reel recorder and a 16mm camera in 1957, the results would be even worse. Add to that the poor frequency response of these older recording units and the original sound sample is already grossly inaccurate. More information was lost converting the original analog sound files to digital formats and the sound sample was further degraded. Post this video on the internet and yet another level of degradation is added. Finally, the playback system will further color the original sound sample, especially if I play the YouTube video through the dinky speakers on my computer. Prototype sound accuracy, how?
Though I too enjoy achieving some level of more prototypical accuracy in my modeling, at some point I have to say "enough." Since I cannot claim to "know" what the prototype sounded like, I am comfortable saying "enough" at generic loco sounds. Its kind of like claiming you know exactly how a Bach concerto sounds because you've heard the Chicago Symphony play it. What recording did they use?
Simply stating that "this hobby is expensive" reminds me of my auto racing days when I marveled at how much money other drivers threw at their cars and went no faster (and surprisingly less reliably) than I did working with a mere fraction of their budgets. Since I've never enjoyed an unlimited budget, I have to look for more bang for my buck in whatever hobby I pursue. I suspect there are many more modelers in the market that share this approach. A low price full function sound decoder would benefit a lot of us.
Hornblower,
It would have to be way below $50 for me as I'm really satisified with what Digitax does with the 165 series plus Soundbug. I can download a variety of sounds, don't need resistors for 1.5V bulbs or LEDs, nice motor control, and can fit them in a lot of different locos. However I usually have to use a different speaker and that adds to my $62 cost. If Digitrax would offer it without a speaker at less cost I'm pretty sure I would stay with the Digitrax present offering because of the download capability.
hornblower Wow! This thread has generated more feedback than I thought it would. However, let me restate my original premise. If the DCC manufacturers were to add a "decent" amplifier with a small selection of generic steam or diesel sound samples and a speaker to a "fleet" decoder of quality similar to say the NCE D13SR, and then price it well below $50, would there be a market? Obviously, there are several modelers in this forum who would not buy such a decoder due to the availability of more prototype specific sound decoders, even though such decoders can be relatively expensive. My position is that I do not have many opportunities to hear anything but current prototypes in person. As I enjoy modeling the "transition" era, I have almost no opportunities to hear era specific prototypes in person. Thus, how would I know what sounds these prototypes actually produced? As several of you have suggested, I could visit YouTube, buy train sound CD's or watch train related DVD's. However, all of these recordings are only as accurate as the recording and playback equipment used to capture and reproduce these sounds. If Joe's Videos used a typical cassette deck with its built in condenser mike or the microphone built into the front of his VHS video camera to record loco "X" back in 1982, I know that there is considerable wow, flutter and harmonic distortion in the original recording. If Joe's Films shot a steam loco using an old reel-to-reel recorder and a 16mm camera in 1957, the results would be even worse. Add to that the poor frequency response of these older recording units and the original sound sample is already grossly inaccurate. More information was lost converting the original analog sound files to digital formats and the sound sample was further degraded. Post this video on the internet and yet another level of degradation is added. Finally, the playback system will further color the original sound sample, especially if I play the YouTube video through the dinky speakers on my computer. Prototype sound accuracy, how? Though I too enjoy achieving some level of more prototypical accuracy in my modeling, at some point I have to say "enough." Since I cannot claim to "know" what the prototype sounded like, I am comfortable saying "enough" at generic loco sounds. Its kind of like claiming you know exactly how a Bach concerto sounds because you've heard the Chicago Symphony play it. What recording did they use? Simply stating that "this hobby is expensive" reminds me of my auto racing days when I marveled at how much money other drivers threw at their cars and went no faster (and surprisingly less reliably) than I did working with a mere fraction of their budgets. Since I've never enjoyed an unlimited budget, I have to look for more bang for my buck in whatever hobby I pursue. I suspect there are many more modelers in the market that share this approach. A low price full function sound decoder would benefit a lot of us.
I think you are wrongly declaring a generic decoder to being roughly the equivalent of the loss of fidelity from an early actual recording.
The fact is that a lot of machinery has unique and recognizable sound outputs regardless of the distortions in recording, copying, format conversion, storage, reproduction, and eventual hearing. A motorcycle has a distinctive sound that I can instantly distinguish from a car despite hearing over the stereo and through closed windows.
In our model railroad applications, an EMD prime mover is easily distinguished from an Alco which is equally easily distinguished from an FM - even if its been years since I heard one or the other. Similarly a Roots blower sounds different from an EMD factory turbo. Do I just want a generic diesel sound with some sort of turbo spool up? Not really. I'd rather have a reasonable rendition of the wrong prime mover with a specific blower ramping up correctly than one that is not at all recognizable. Just like Hollywood has often done with planes firing up where they substitute a rotary piston engine startup for the more correct turbine startup, a decent rendition of the wrong sound is less disconcerting than an unrecognizable generic.
On the steam side, even though I've never heard one personally I sure I could pick out the correct sound of a simple articulated vs a conventional 2 cylinder steam engine despite the distortions that take place in the playback chain. And of course, Shays, Heislers, and Climaxes are each going to have distinctive sounds of their own. So again I would want at least a reasonable rendition of the correct steam engine type rather than a generic ill-timed "chuff".
Now I can't recognize a particular whistle or horn, but I can recognize that they are distinctly different. So what direction does a generic sound decoder take? Tsunami offers a light, medium, heavy, and geared steam. Each has its own characteristic modulation of cutoff and exhaust beats, and is available with a cam to properly time everything with wheel revolution. What should be given up to reach the price point of the generic? I would suggest that the latest MRC decoders are exactly what you are asking for, except perhaps the reliability issue. And supposedly the new ones are quite a bit better than the old ones in that regard. If I start adding features back to the MRC, I quickly arrive at a QSI or Tsunami.
If I'm going to spend $50 for a generic decoder, and hours mounting a speaker, wiring the decoder, improving electrical pickup, and quieting the mechanism of my older steamers (what we really mean by fleet conversion to DCC sound), why would I not go the extra $40 and get more customizable sound that properly matches my steam engine in action. The jarring wrongness of sound that doesn't match what my locomotive is doing visually (unsynchronized generic decoder) makes the effort at installation seem less than worthwhile.
my thoughts, yours may differ
Fred W
Fred W.,
I can appreciate what you're saying and I think many modelers would agree with you. However, I also understand what Hornblower is getting at. For us less sophisticated modelers (and I'm not implying that Hornblower is in that category) a generic sound might be quite acceptable unitil we learned the difference, and could afford the difference. I'll bet that there are plenty who are on a very tight budget and would love to get at least some sound that they could afford.
MisterBeasleyBy the way, I realized that I don't actually use Soundbugs, but rather SFX0416's. Can anyone compare the audio levels between these two Digitrax products? I assumed they were kind of the same, but if Soundbugs are louder they might have been a better choice.
Carl,
I understand, way more than you think about all this. I have been in this hobby since 1967 and worked in several hobby shops years ago.
I agree prototype accuracy is important and I appreciate the new great products we have - to a point.
There is still a long list of stuff that will never justify mass production - Example: B&O rebuilt heavyweight passenger cars.
The continued success of Athearn with their Blue Box and Ready to Roll products clearly supports the findings of a poll in MR a few years back which found over 50% of modelers follow a prototype but "loosely" while less than 15% indentified themselves as following a prototype "very closely".
I do both prototype and freelance modeling. For me, and many modelers I know, the hobby is about designing and building a relatively complete and working system that relects our interests in railroading and sharing that with others. Not just "collecting" $5000 shelf queens.
I wouldn't pay that kind of money for any single model train, even if I hit the $300 million jackpot friday night.
Generic models, especially in kit form provide great platforms for kitbashing those items that will never be mass produced, and they fill a basic need for those who just want to run trains and have fun.
cmarchan Another incentive is time and skill; there are modelers buying trains with limited time to detail their models; some are uncomfortable cutting into a brand new loco with sound; others simply feel they do not possess the skill set to achieve satisfactory results. While generic models are cheaper and appeal to more wallets, the discriminating modelers spend more money per sale. How many generic model consumers plop down $2500 - $5000 for models at one jump? Not many; however, you will find there are resellers with prototype specific customers doing this regularly.
I'm not cheap, I spend a lot on this hobby, more than most based on industry surveys I have seen. But I am dishartened by the fact that more and more this hobby is becoming about what you can buy rather than what you can build, create, etc. "discriminating modelers" - sounds like the people who buy BMW's rather than Fords, I'll stick with the Ford crowd. Those "discriminating" collector types are the first ones to stop spending when the economy takes a hit, REAL modelers keep on spending year in, year out, good times and bad. I know, I ran a train department in a full line hobby shop.
cmarchan This topic is a hot one; lets simplify things; how many of you would want prototypically accurate trains, as you remember them, if the money was not the deciding factor?
That's just it, you can't simplify it to that - because - would that mean hiring a staff to build and maintain your own arena sized layout with full scale curves and no selective compression of any kind, etc, etc, etc? We may dream about how wonderful that would be, BUT, the real personal satisfaction of the hobby would be lost, at least for me. My railroad, for good and bad, is MY work, my research, my learned information, my skills, and yes, partly my resources. It is a blend of all of these, not just a statement of how much money I have to indulge myself with.
I was once quite the rivet counter, it became very boring, no fun, sucked all the joy out of the hobby. I quickly returned to freelancing and a more "casual" approach to the prototypes I follow and to my freelanced road. I have a good plausable "frame work" for my modeling, but not every piece needs to be some museum documented "it was exactly this way Tuesday, September 15, 1953 at 3:27PM" showpiece. In fact I find it quite fun to stretch history and/or do a few subtle "what if's" here and there.
Want some real rivet counting obsession? Do you remember the Magnason Models/Walthers resin model of a Checker Cab automobile? - Quess what, it was labeled wrong. The package said it was a 1959, but the model had the big 5mph bumpers that did not apear on Checkers until 1973! Who knew? I did. So that model is really a 1973 to 1982 Checker. Hurry up guys check your 1960's layouts and get those incorrect autos off of there. Then get some of the new Checker model A8's from Athearn!!!!!, they are correct for the late 50's and into the 60's.
Still having lots of fun with: Kits, kitbashing, scratch building, freelancing.
Really enjoy lots of the new great products (but not afraid to "cut into them")
And my fun does not require: DCC, sound, locomotives with 4 digit price tags.
My layout has: dispatcher and walk around wireless control, signaling, long trains, 36"+ radius curves.
But it also has: shorty passenger cars, that are seriously super detailed with working diaphragms, etc.
Its not about what I can buy, its about the fun of building it.
fwright If I'm going to spend $50 for a generic decoder, and hours mounting a speaker, wiring the decoder, improving electrical pickup, and quieting the mechanism of my older steamers (what we really mean by fleet conversion to DCC sound), why would I not go the extra $40 and get more customizable sound that properly matches my steam engine in action. The jarring wrongness of sound that doesn't match what my locomotive is doing visually (unsynchronized generic decoder) makes the effort at installation seem less than worthwhile.
Fred has a great point. In order to meet the low cost, something will have to be a little less. In my personal case, I am not willing to give up great motor control for better sound (Soundtraxx LC series). On the flip, I am not willing to give up good sound for motor control (Digitrax 165 decoder + Soundbug). I have both, I don't particularly like either one. In both cases, cost was between $50 - $60. For $20 OR LESS more than that, I can get QSI or Tsunami. Great motor control, lighting and sound.
I guess it all comes down to what you might be willing to give up. But I think you will give up something.
I am happy that I am don't have the number of locos that some folks do. That might slant my thinking a little more. But being in the hobby for a while, that's one area of difficulty for me, not buying too many locos.
MisterBeasleyThe E8 uses the same 567 prime mover as the F7
A Digitrax Rep told me the reason that the separate Sound Bug decoder was introduced was to skirt the Real Rail patent claims and the NMRA lawsuit against Real Rail.. Seems that they claimed to have invented "integrated sound/motor/special effects control" for DCC.
According to the rep, Digitrax avoided possible infringement by making it a two piece piggyback design instead of integrated. This was also stated as the reason they had not yet done sound for N Scale. N scale needs to be integrated to fit. Digitrax decided to keep their money instead of paying attorneys.
Now that the lawsuit has been settled, I would think that Digitrax and others will move forward on new sound decoder designs. Wouldn't hold my breadth on Digitrax because they can be painfully slow introducing new products.
hornblower,I model the New Haven, and that died 6 years before I was born. In person, I've never heard a DL-109, an RS-3, or an RS-11. But, the prime movers they all used still exist today or at least recordings of them are readily available. As you said, one can go on YouTube and listen to all kinds of loco sounds. One can buy Pentrex or Trains videos and listen to even more. It's fairly easy to tell the difference between a 539T (DL-109), 244 (RS-3) and a 251 (RS-11):
539T:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9vvcl8wl80
244:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXx9Y2zcSKw251:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0ck6RvjMWg
Now, all three of these recordings are not of the highest quality. They weren't recorded in a sound-proof studio with million dollar sound equipment by a sound engineer. As you said, there's a ton of variables that makes these vids inaccurate as compared to actually being there...and we haven't even brought up the point that people hear differently from each other. Some have perfect pitch, while some are tone deaf; some can hear as low as 5dB (like myself when I was recently tested), while others need hearing aids. There's many, many variables.
But (and it's a big but), these vid clips are easily discernable as a 539, 244, or 251. Like our models, the practical representation is what we're after, not 100% fidelity. There's no way even a Proto:87 loco model would stay on the track if everything was 100% HO scale. Brake lines, motor cables, sand lines, track curvature, weight, etc. And certain things don't scale, like friction.
So while my model sounds are not 100% realistic, neither are my models. However, as inaccurate as my models are compared to the real thing, it's obvious that it's a DL109, an RS-3 or an RS-11. Same goes for the sound... As inaccurate as these sound decoders are for each prime mover type, they are equally obvious that they are a 539, 244, or 251.
The Bach comparison really doesn't hold water. It doesn't matter who plays it, it's still Bach. Metallica or Toby Keith could play Bach, but I think you would still be able to recognize it as Bach.
For example (and yes, I'm reaching a bit, but play along with me), take these two versions of the same song "Faith":George Micheal version:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPUNsN-0Lz4Limp Bizkit version:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ei_FJWHXys
Niether really sounds much like the other, but you can still tell it's the same song. Same goes for loco sound files. I can tell if that model sound is a 539, 244 or a 251 or what have you, even if it doesn't sound 100% like standing next to the real thing.
IMHO, those that don't care much about sound accuracy are served by the MRC-type stationary systems that make generic diesel sounds. I think it'll be a tough to find a market for generic on-board sound. Those that care enough to want the sound to come from the loco itself are usually those that want those sounds to be accurate for the model. Those that just want generic sounds are usually satisfied with any sound no matter where it comes from.
Fred W., Yep, that's what I'm trying to say, too.
jwils1,As I said above, generic sound could be accomplished by other means than on-board effects that would be even cheaper still. IMHO, on-board sound is a rather advanced concept. Those that want advanced concepts tend to want accurate renditions for their time and effort (not to mention cash) as Fred said above.
Sheldon,While you can point to the continued success of Athearn BB and RTR models, I can point to new companies like Exactrail and NARC as well as established firms like Kadee, InterMountain, Atlas and Athearn Genesis that are all going after the more accurate model designs. BTW, I don't even think it's that people don't care too much so they buy Athearn, they just don't want to spend the cash. It's that way with me. I have some 300 cars on my layout, and probably 90% of them are Athearn. Why? Because they are the cheapest car that meets my minimum requirements (body mount couplers using Kadee-type boxes that track well). I love accuracy, but I also love not spending a fortune.
Let me put it this way: if your point is that more than half the people don't really care about accuracy, then two models where one is accurate and one isn't that are both priced the same should sell equally well, right? So if you saw a Kadee PS-1 40' box marked at the same price as an Athearn 40' box, would you buy the Kadee or the Athearn? And what do you think more than half the people would choose? IMHO, more folks would buy the Kadee if they could afford it because it's a much better looking car that's a lot more accurate.
Paul A. Cutler III*******************Weather Or No Go New Haven*******************