Wow...I never expected this kind of response! As the op of this thread, I would like to thank everyone for keeping this thread argument free. I do appreciate the different opinions as it makes for a lively conversation.
Now, on to modeling! I'll be posting a few pics soon of a couple of N scale projects.
Chuck - Modeling in HO scale and anything narrow gauge
MR, and Kalmbach Publishing in general, has very, very good genes. It was founded by Al Kalmbach who, I have always believed, was a "published word" man first, and a model railroader and railroad enthusiast second. In the early magazines, I grew up reading Al, John Page, Paul Larson, David P. Morgan, Linn Westcott et. al. I could see the practical application of what I was being taught at school. Misspellings and poor grammar were never to be found in a Kalmbach publication. You could actually allow yourself to be seen reading a Kalmbach publication in public without fear of being labeled a "train nut", because such literate fare couldn't be produced or understood by nutty people. Other hobby publications (railroad and otherwise) were generally held in lower esteem for good reason.
Kalmbach's high standards have generally been maintained into the present day, although incorrect usages and spellings are sometimes allowed to slip through the built-in cracks in Spell Check. I was a bit put out when Kalmbach editors "remodeled" the text of an article I wrote some years ago. A fellow who worked on the article with me was even more upset because he felt that the editing shifted the emphasis. I recognize that this was done to keep the article in conformance with Kalmbach's general policies and because the editor (rightly or wrongly) thought the changes improved the article. That's life.
Those of us who have been reading the magazine for a long time would love it if every issue could contain exactly the info we need at the moment, and we don't appreciate it when space is "wasted" on something we have known for years, or that we don't care about. But we have to recognize the fact that newbies need a lot of information that is old hat to us, and we have to let some of "our" magazine be tailored for them.
Nowadays, a lot of MR's have very little info that is of great importance to me. But without MR (and RMC and others), we would miss out on reviews of new products, and articles on innovative uses of new products. Would we have DCC at all if some of the pioneers hadn't pushed the envelope in the pages of these magazines many years ago? Would we have ever graduated from the plywood 4x8 to the use of better and better track on better and better roadbed atop better, lighter, and cheaper benchwork? Without MR's publication of John Armstrong's layout design concepts, we'd still be playing the roundy-roundy game.
There are things I'd like to see return. I'd like to see scale drawings come back. Once upon a time, you couldn't pick up an MR without seeing a drawing by George Geissel, but that's sadly gone now.
Yes, there have been changes (including this forum), but overrall Kalmbach in general and MR in particular has served us well over the years and continues to do so. I've never subscribed, but I've got just about every issue since the late 1940's when I was a kid, and I refer to those old mags a lot. So on balance, I don't have many complaints.
I have also found MR magazine become quite stale for me. My biggest complaint are the articles about the layouts. I don't want to read many paragraphs of what code rail is used, what scenery method etc....These are covered in the Layout at a Glance sidebars. I want to read how the railroads are operated. My favorite articles have always been the railfanning articles. There are alot of great layouts in the magazine but they all seemed to be written using the same boilerplate.
Look, that is a nice economic argument for bulk purchasing ($2.64/equivalent price monthly) and I would love to do it, but my CFO wife would not appreciate me purchasing a 3 year renewal of MR at the offered price, and so I must preserve our lovely marriage by renewing annually. Perhaps after I retire in a few years, that multi-year method will be more feasible, but not with other competing expenses right now. For the same reason, I have not yet purchased that $200.00 MR back issue DVD!
As a graduate-degreed instructional technologist, I remember the shock I had realizing that most things are written for the average 6th grade reader- particularly technical training manuals and such, but then- remembering some of the boneheads I worked with in the service, I guess there was a good reason for that.
Today, the lack of reading as a characteristic of the general population is epidemic. MR sells to a segment of the population (older, perhaps better-educated from the 1960s-1980s) that is more comfortable with the written word and can grasp verbal concepts and turn them into images mentally. Such is not the case these days- as per my experience with present-day high school students. Their ability to abstract is improved in some ways, but deficient in other ways. MR must adapt to the best means of delivering concepts and content that will include those less literate than their elders. We are just expressing our frustrations with that process here in these posts, and I really don't think that the hands of time are going to reverse in the near or long term.
The more in-depth and explicit articles we seek do exist out there in the ether- as per my suggestion in an earlier post above that MR look to the "lone wolf" self-published D-I-Y-ers for new and fresh material. Getting them from public domain to a copyrighted print page- or electronic page- is not something I can suggest strategies for.
I also do not know if MR has the profitability wich would sustain paying for new material from such sources- others may be more informed and could speak to that aspect of this thread.
I will still maintain my subscription, as a nostalgist and hands-on modeler, for to abandon the last redoubt of the hobby would be- in some ways- turning my back on the original impetus for me to become a model railroader in the first place.
Just some more thoughts...
Cedarwoodron
galaxyTo me, spending the $52 for MR
The current subscription rate is $31.65 per year if you sign up for three years. That's $2.64 per issue.
How much less than that do you think the magazine should cost?
I have been reading MR for decades, and I find it continues to be interesting to me.
The hobby has evolved, and MR has done a good job of at least keeping up with changes if not actually leading the progress.
I recall the good old days. In partuclar, I remember the "Dollar Car" series. They had articles on how to build a freight car with only a dollar for materials. (I think that excluded cost of trucks and couplers). In those days model railroaders were resourceful, and did as much as they could with scratch building.
Today, of course, we have high tech models which are very highly detailed and have very precise scale measurements. Today's motors and other moving parts are far superior to the early years of this hobby. The modern electronics are light years ahead of the old times, too.
I think we should thank Kalmbach Publishing for keeping up with the times and continuing to provide an interesting magazine as well as providing the leadership to make improvements to our hobby.
GARRY
HEARTLAND DIVISION, CB&Q RR
EVERYWHERE LOST; WE HUSTLE OUR CABOOSE FOR YOU
Hmm,
trwroute: at first I was like Ulrich: I saw the title and until today, this moment, have resisted reading it. WHy? because I thought the same thing: oh, yet another post bashing MR. That and: who would bite the hand that feeds them, as MR is the host of this free forum!. ANd: If you don't like it, TELL MR about it and how you would like to see it improved!
Ok, that off my chest, I also have to agree with those who stated perhaps the obvious though, that is: a thread like this comes along at least once if not twice or thrice a year. It is nothing new.
I hate biting off the hand that feeds me too, but I, too, dropped MR a while ago. For a couple of reasons. One is that with My Other Half unemployed, we HAD to cut expenses, and the, what, $52/year was a bit much.
Another reason is that I also subscribed to TRAINS magazine {an MR mag}, and I actually foudn myself reading it cover to cover about 1:1 trains that was more facinating than whether Rod Stewart had a hobo smoking a bummed ciggy on the back of a flat car on his layout or not.{NO disrespect to Rod if he reads this, and this is a made-up scenario that probably doesn't exist on his layout, but maybe he will put one in there now!}
Another reason is that it WAS getting boring. I got back into the hobby about 2006, and needed info on this new fangled thing called DCC. I found that MR had some articles on it, but fewer than I really needed, {and that could be found in their books on DCC}though, and fewer than I could "use". I didn't want to do EVERY DCC project they did an article about so.....
I also found the monsterous full-basment mrr's a bit much,I will never be that lucky, and,to few pics of the layout itself...only3, 4 or 5 shots of a 442' x 688' layout seemed too few to me..how about MORE pics of it? Maybe something I can see to get an idea of what to do with that odd 5'x8" spot on my small pike?? not necessarily to copy another's work, but the ingenious ideas that lead to space fillers?
Then came a different trend..small layouts "anyone could build"...interesting , maybe they listened? That seemed like a nice idea, but it also seemed to me the articles accompanying such were a bit "condescending"? Really. Maybe just me?
I used to get some issues in the 70s when I was young, along with RMC. I STILL have those mags, and recently favored saving THEM over my recent MR mags. I just last week *GASP* RECYCLED aobut 2.5 years worth of new MR mags.
I also agree that often the recycle or creat new articles on the same old topics that "newbies' need to get started.
I also missed the old 'scratch building" articles and to-scale plans for certain RR stuctures {more than likely better found in RMC}.
Here is what I think MR could do to improve itself, broaden its subscribership and keep all happy:
A} Create Sectional articles targeted for particular participants of the hobby:
1} a Newbie section, with say, and article on "How to join track sections together", for instance
2} a mid-level section, say with an article on "How to kit-bash a structure", for instance
3} an advanced section, say with an article on "How to wire the to-scale electrical and plumbing needs for the scratch-built building architecture plans for the Victorian Era Train Sation on page 54 to current code requirements"
4} a section reserved for DC, say with an article on "how to wire a block"..
5} A DCC section, with, say, an article for "wiriing switch {turnouts} for smooth DCC operations"
B}Create A section just for "any reader contibutions" made up of things like the Trackside photos, Reader-written articles relating to the hobby, and/or "how I did this" articles, written/sent in by the average Joe on here who might be complaining about he mag's content. Everyone likes to see their name in print. This, In addition to pointed themed articles they already buy to print.
C} a "running" section with 'brief reference pointers' for the past 1, 5 and 10 year's mags for certain popular topics
D}Reduce the cost...$52/yr may not seem so bad as the magazine is a "quality mag" in terms of paper quality, photo reproduction quality, etc, BUT MANY other magazines produce a lot too, and have half or 1/3 the cost of MR magazine. If, for example, say, The Kiplinger Report can do it on their subject, Maybe MR can do it too? I realize KR may have a broader audience, and doesn't reproduce photos of layouts, but they include several "illustrative" and "personal photos" of the real people featured in the articles about people on certain of it's topic subjects. The Robb Report, for example is a Luxury/Wealth magazine with topics/subjects/advice/classifieds for the exclusively wealthy among us {NOT ME} with LOTS of glossy high-res photo spreads for it's articles on subjects appropo to the wealthier clients {Rolls Royces, Private Air craft, Personal Jets, $5K watches, Exclusive Vacation @ $10K a week spots, etc} and IT'S price is $65/yr for print magazines.
To me, spending the $52 for MR, and the $30 for Trains, along with the $35 Classic Trains mag {or whatever they are now} amounted to too much at well over $100/yr for when our income was cut in half. Perhaps a lower cost, and I would have continued..but those mags, were first on the chopping block. AND I have yet to recieve an enticing "we want you back" type price that "you can't refuse" from them..just some "Come back" mailers at the regular prices. Note: I DID keep the quality $5/yr for 12 issues special magazine subscription, on another topic, though, renewed at that bargain price through Amazon!
If they have a magazine with sections devoted to EVERY modeler, of ANY skill level, at a reasonable price to fit all budgets, then there MAY be MORE people interested in subscribing. AT ANY type of subscription: Paper, computer, "air" for tablets, I-phones, etc., OR access to ALL of the above!
But, that is all just MY
Enjoy the hobby, it's a HOBBY, not government work!
-G .
Just my thoughts, ideas, opinions and experiences. Others may vary.
HO and N Scale.
After long and careful thought, they have convinced me. I have come to the conclusion that they are right. The aliens did it.
I'm jumping into this discussion fairly late, but I'll add my two cents. In reply to the OP, we will have to agree to disagree. I think MR is as good or better than it has ever been and I've been a regular reader since the late 1970s. My favorite articles are on the layouts, big and small, club or home layout, doesn't matter much to me. I find almost all of them interesting. Next favorite would be the photo section. Lots of inspiration from that. My favorite columns are Tony Koester's Trains of Thought and The Operators. The magazine also keeps me up to date on the new products being offered. I have been an off and on subscriber to RMC but lately I've just been buying it when I'm at the LHS. I don't find as much that interests me in it.
I will also confess that I never throw out any RR magazine. I store them all in those cheap plastic file cabinets and store them under the benchwork. From time to time I will go through old issues and see how much the hobby has changed and also how much it has stayed the same. A lot of those old articles are still relevant to today's modeling.
Colorado_Mac ...Seriously, if the nagazine isn't getting enough content, perhaps they should solicit here on the forum and some other places. ...
...Seriously, if the nagazine isn't getting enough content, perhaps they should solicit here on the forum and some other places. ...
Checking the February thru May issues this year, I see at the bottom of each editorial, FROMTHEEDITOR, a blurb welcoming contributions to MR. It even includes contact information.
Enjoy
Paul
cedarwoodron ... I often come across blogs by model railroaders that appear to be "lone wolves" on the internet, but who publish their work and their techniques as a sort of public service. I greatly enjoy coming across these and I wonder if MR should try to reach out to such writers for new material...
... I often come across blogs by model railroaders that appear to be "lone wolves" on the internet, but who publish their work and their techniques as a sort of public service. I greatly enjoy coming across these and I wonder if MR should try to reach out to such writers for new material...
That is one of the best thoughts I have read here and wish I had been smart enough to wonder the same thing. There are also many threads on this forum where someone explains - an explains well - something they have done or the solution to a problem. Seriously, if the nagazine isn't getting enough content, perhaps they should solicit here on the forum and some other places. I KNOW you editors are reading this thread.
Sean
HO Scale CSX Modeler
I have been buying MR almost every month since 1960. Always in a hobby shop as I prefer to support my local store. I buy RMC and the Gazette as well.
I too find little pizazz in MR for the last 10 or so years. RMC has more articles on my US RR of preference, the SP particularly in the 1940's and 1950's. And the Gazette is the best magazine in the US rivaing UK's Model Railway Journal for detail and interest. Every month I get one or the other.
I got bored with US RR prototype about 20 years ago and started a 4mm (1/76) scale UK model railway. I only can fit a 2X11 plank into my town house but I have an operational version of Padstow in Cornwall UK as it would have been in the summer of 1947 just prior to nationalization. But then I am also working on modules for an SP San Ramon valley branchline Walnut Creek station in the early 1950's.
Note that I am interested in historical rather than contemporary US railroads which are just as boring as the magazine. MR understandably focuses more on the contemporary as it seems they have decided that is their audience. Maybe that goes with age. My demographic has more money to spend right now but we are not the future of Model Railroading. Similar problem in the UK.
Maybe some pioneering work in battery/super cap powered locomotives with blue tooth decoder communication would perk interest.
MR has little other than product news and an occasional historical prototype modelling article that interest me. But as their marketing people will love to know I do check all the ads.
Ken Adams
Walnut Creak California
jeffrey-wimberly Model Railroader Magazine ceased being interesting to me back in the 90's. I don't even glance at it in the store anymore. The forum here is my only exposure to it now.
Model Railroader Magazine ceased being interesting to me back in the 90's. I don't even glance at it in the store anymore. The forum here is my only exposure to it now.
After a few years of subscribing to MR, I dropped my subscription; primarily because I'm unemployed and I had to trim back on expenditures. With that said, I seldomly find anything interesting on the forum anymore. (The one exception being the Prototype information for the modeler forum). Other than that it's generally the same topics, same complaints, sames threads....
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
I'm more interested in the old days like the 70's & 80,s for modeling. To many articles on the modern era.
To try to answer two different thoughts in one post (BTW, so far this topic seems to have stayed thoughtful among everyone.)
a. Surveys. Yes I do try to answer every survey, they won't know if we don't tell them. For example the current project RR seems like it plays to a common survey input of doing a southeastern project, though I'm sure plenty of folks had that opinion as well. Which BTW, perhaps MR should post the current results of each survey on the website.
b. Regarding the opinion above on slick images and various types of learners (visual vs reading, etc). The comments on "slick" publishing isn't a question of different learning types, but of presentation. Having spent several years managing a large training development program, it's not just about learning types but how you present the information to those learning types. An example might be a slick picture that supposedly illustrates a concept along with a short caption which may appear to support visual learners, but actually doesn't capture the key points the visual learner needs. That is, it might be visually appealing from an artist perspective, but has little or even negative training value. The real skill (and this is where a good editor as opposed to a graphic artist comes in) is to combine the artwork, technical drawings, photographs, and written word to create information that works for multiple learning types.
jim
I was wondering about some people saying that some things are lacking in the Mag. and so forth, so I guess my curious question would be if they receive the Free Newsletter that is offered them via E-mail, in some of those News letters, they contain surveys, do any of you take the time to fill them out, noting your likes and dislikes, seems to me, they are asking for input. They are after all in the Publishing business, rated as the number 1, Model Railroading Mag. The Free Forums is secondary in that business.
I know I always fill them out. Likes, dislikes, what I would like to see etc.
Frank
maxman I really appreciate that I am held in such low regard.
I really appreciate that I am held in such low regard.
You said that - not me.
BOB H - Clarion, PA
cmrproductsIt seems that the general population only has the ability to read at a 6th grade level
cmrproductsThey can't seem to stay focused for long paragraphs
cmrproductsIt is amazing that I have to reduce the writing down to such a low level
It's obvious that you don't subscribe to the "a picture is worth 1000 words" theory. And, yes, I know that is a mis-translation so you don't have to tell me.
Is there really any difference between a construction article that says "the front of the loco cab was cut off and a new high hood added. The new headlight was installed and a bell was added to the nose. See figure 1.", and the same figure printed with the same caption included? I can't speak for the rest of you, but in the new digital world that some of you embrace it seems to me that it is very difficult to jump back and forth from a written narrative to a figure/photo that might be located on the next digital page, since you can't easily have both open to you at the same time. Possibly the digital requirements are carrying over to the written page.
It should be pointed out that some assembly instructions require minimal written word. Anyone that has assembled a piece of furniture from Ikea or a kit from Kibri is aware of this.
By the way, since I consider myself as being in the "general population", I really appreciate that I am held in such low regard.
It looks like at least a few of us would like to see both Paint Shop and A Railroad You Can Build make a return. Now if we can just talk MR into it!
It certainly would make it a lot more informative. I do get tired of seeing all the pretty pics with only a few words. I will say that it is hard to spend the money on a magazine that can be read cover to cover in under 15 minutes, when it used to take hours. THOSE were great times.
Back in the mid-80's, Jon Page had a series of articles about his experiences with the hobby. They were humerous and fun to read. I think that MR could occasionally do something like that with Jim Hediger. Not every issue...I realize that he does have the videos (I like them a lot!). This would also add a bit more substance to the magazine.
Uncle_Bob An example of "slick" is articles that aren't really articles -- they're just collages with captions, just as complex public policy topics are now discussed using slogans rather than actual thought and dialogue. Yeah, I know, you don't have time to read a "real" article, and you can get the gist of anything from a few photos. (snip)
An example of "slick" is articles that aren't really articles -- they're just collages with captions, just as complex public policy topics are now discussed using slogans rather than actual thought and dialogue.
Yeah, I know, you don't have time to read a "real" article, and you can get the gist of anything from a few photos.
(snip)
The above statement is quite true!
It seems that the general population only has the ability to read at a 6th grade level which translates into short sentences.
They can't seem to stay focused for long paragraphs - and this situation is only going to get worse as the Smart Phomes become the norm for communicating!
I write a Monthly 10 page plus N/L for our OPs Group and have to keep the paragrahps short so that everyone will stay focused long enough to read each of our stories!
It is amazing that I have to reduce the writing down to such a low level to keep everyone focused!
And how do I know this - I question various members of the group by bringing up topics in the articles to see if they REALLY DID READ the articles!
While most do - quite a number only glossed over the articles and they miss important pieces in the artile and I remind them to take another look!
I try to address 2 separate topics in my Editorials each month to test this theory and if I find that they missed the content will refine the article to address the topic better!
If you have to rely on Pictures on every detail of an article - You miss a lot !
Jimmy_Braum I also like the idea posted above about starting up the "railroad you can model" again. For example, there is a great shortline in SW PA-the Pennsylvania southwestern railroad, or the Wheeling and Lake Erie.
I also like the idea posted above about starting up the "railroad you can model" again. For example, there is a great shortline in SW PA-the Pennsylvania southwestern railroad, or the Wheeling and Lake Erie.
All three Carload Express railroads would make great mid-size layouts. In fact, you could model the entire Camp Chase railroad in a moderate amount of space.
http://www.carloadexpress.com/sub.cfm?cat=railroads&sub=swp
Hi again,
Brakie is correct. Mr. Wescott helped produce some very great years of MR, helping the hobby evolve to what it is today. The hobby is in a very mature stage now, and the basics are all in place.
Today's audience - in my opinion - is much different than the readership of decades ago. We have significantly fewer scratch builders (or even kit bashers) and car builders. Scenery is no longer colored sawdust or coffee grounds. The folks today seem to prefer ready made stuff, with a high degree of interest in electronics.
Yet, MR needs to cater to the entire audience - from the newbie with a limited budget, to the techie, to us old geezers who are steeped in years of experience (and set in our ways). I suspect it was a lot easier to produce MR back in the 60s and 70s, as opposed to today.
As I said earlier, even though a good portion of the mag is of little interest to me, I will continue to subscribe until I can no longer do so............
Kind of like........."you can take my guns when you pry them from my cold dead fingers"!
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
steemtrayn The Westcott years were the best.
The Westcott years were the best.
Only because that was a different era and Linn was a innovator that pushed a lot of the "common standards" we take for granted today like KD couplers,smaller rail size,metal wheels etc.
There will never be another era like Westcott's since we have entered the RTR era and left a lot of the old school modeling behind...
A example.
At one time if I wanted a (say) Ann Arbor boxcar I had to buy a undecorated kit and paint and decal the car.Today I can buy a older Bev-Bel kit that is already to assemble or a RTR car that is layout ready after adding KD couplers(if needed).
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
Uncle_Bob An example of "slick" is articles that aren't really articles -- they're just collages with captions, just as complex public policy topics are now discussed using slogans rather than actual thought and dialogue. Yeah, I know, you don't have time to read a "real" article, and you can get the gist of anything from a few photos.
An example of "slick" is articles that aren't really articles -- they're just collages with captions, just as complex public policy topics are now discussed using slogans rather than actual thought and dialogue. Yeah, I know, you don't have time to read a "real" article, and you can get the gist of anything from a few photos.
That's unneccessary and insulting, to be honest. Not everyone interprets information the same way or learns the same way. Just because some people are better with visual over textual doesn't mean they're lazy.
I agree.
Another example of "slick:" Article titles that are written in MULTIPLE FONTS, in multiple sizes, using several DIFFERENT COLORS. Yes, I know it's a graphic designers' trick to artificially create impact, but that doesn't make it any less cloying. This is Model Railroader, not Vanity Fair, guys.
Dave
Just be glad you don't have to press "2" for English.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQ_ALEdDUB8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hqFS1GZL4s
http://s73.photobucket.com/user/steemtrayn/media/MovingcoalontheDCM.mp4.html?sort=3&o=27
An example of "slick" is articles that aren't really articles -- they're just collages with captions, just as complex public policy topics are now discussed using slogans rather than actual thought and dialogue. Yeah, I know, you don't have time to read a "real" article, and you can get the gist of anything from a few photos. Besides, as one author from a now-defunct mag put it, it's cheaper to buy a $40 boxcar that needs nothing more than light weathering than it is to build and paint a similar car from a competitor's line of kits. Of course, you also don't develop skills or run the risk of getting distracted by studying the prototype if you go with RTR equipment, but it's better because of the time you save. Same deal with airheaded news shows, "reality" tv, and most magazines -- we can't be bothered with long articles that are mostly text, often concerning esoteric subject matter that can't be distilled into a couple pictures and a one-sentence caption. Never mind that our hobby is almost entirely esoterica that really requires lengthy writing most of the time; an awful lot of people just want the highlights.
I bought MRG mainly for Jim Six' s articles, and I subscribe to RMC because they cover a lot of the stuff MR used to. I also subscribe to MR. I just wish there'd be more modelling and more encouragement to try offbeat things like there was in the '70s and '80s. Oh well, I'm just a dinosaur, I guess.