N Scale sound in locos sound terrible to me

[peteski]

I’ve read a lot of threads on this board, have lurked for a long time and have not noticed any adversion to discussing controversial subjects, much less something as innocuous as sound. Given the  moniker in regular use on the board, it would appear stirring things up is a regular occurrence.

Yeah, you fit right in.   

[DKS]

This is getting as bad as the "which is the best track cleaning method".   
I know what I like, and I'm sticking with it.

At least track cleaning methods produce quantifiable results: is the track clean? And there are many perfectly viable ways to do so.

Model sound, however, depends on the opinion of the listener, and is thus not as quantifiable, so it's a false equivalence.

At least (so far) the discussion has been civil. I don't perceive anyone insisting they are unequivocally right; it's down to how the modeler feels about model sound.

Face it, all of us here play with toy trains. I confess that, in addition to annoyingly poor sound quality, model sound makes the models seem even more toylike to me, not far removed from the chuff-chuff of old tinplate stuff (or, far worse, "smoke"). My preference is to enjoy the sight alone, and allow my imagination to supply the sound, which consequently has perfect acoustics every time.

Not to mention that there is still no attention paid to all of the other sound sources of trains (barring the silly "moo-moo" of some cattle cars and the like). Why are not all cars equipped with sound generators to simulate the click-clack and squeal of wheels, the hiss of air brakes, and the clunk of coupler slack changing? Or any of the other myriad sounds produced by real trains? Why is it that all of our attention is focused on the the locomotive? As one who is enthralled by the "complete experience" of real trains, I supply all of these sounds in my head as well, so they're not missed.

But this is not to say those who enjoy model sound are wrong; they simply have different preferences and expectations. I'm not about to deny them this enjoyment. But those who insist it's "great" should bear in mind their position is not universally shared; it's "great" to them. And that's OK. So far, any locomotive I've wanted has been available without sound; I'd be rather irked if a manufacturer didn't offer me an option for the economy of silence.

You know, you could edit the initial post anytime and change the title of your topic to something less controversial.  So instead of apologizing, you can do something about it.  Or maybe you have to get to a 25-post-count to be able to do that?  Man, you started stirring things around here, with less than 25 posts?  You're good! 

@peteski that was unkind (even given the smilie). Admonishing a newcomer over things they justifiably had no knowledge of is kinda cold. Anyway, the original subject line perfectly expresses my sentiment...

 

[Point353]

Not to mention that there is still no attention paid to all of the other sound sources of trains (barring the silly "moo-moo" of some cattle cars and the like). Why are not all cars equipped with sound generators to simulate the click-clack and squeal of wheels, the hiss of air brakes, and the clunk of coupler slack changing? Or any of the other myriad sounds produced by real trains? Why is it that all of our attention is focused on the the locomotive?

See several of the replies following post #93.

[peteski]

Man, you started stirring things around here, with less than 25 posts?  You're good! 

@peteski that was unkind (even given the smilie). Admonishing a newcomer over things they justifiably had no knowledge of is kinda cold. Anyway, the original subject line perfectly expresses my sentiment...

No ill intentions there - I was pleasantly surprised. The smilie was also genuine. He *IS* good!  In response the his next reply to my post I said that he fits right in.  Besides, he is not a newcomer - just a long time lurker.

[DKS]

See several of the replies following post #93.

Thanks, missed those. With one (somewhat trivial) exception, the question still seems open.

And for those who dig the sound as an "engineer's" perspective, the sound in a cab is different from the trackside sound, which (nearly?) all sound devices produce. (Yes, I know some devices make the sound of shoveling coal... still...)

Just sayin'...

...In response the his next reply to my post I said that he fits right in...

Yes, I read all of the posts. I know I'm old, but there's no need to repeat them.

 

[Mark5]

Interesting. I have no interest in cab sounds - I am interested in the sounds I heard trackside.

Mark

[peteski]

Yes, I read all of the posts. I know I'm old, but there's no need to repeat them.

Well then, Mr. DKS, I don't  know why you're chewing me out. 

[CRL]

I forgot to list one other issue I have with sound equipped locos... it seems to generate an awful lot of additional problems as evidenced by the DCC / Electronics Sub Board in this forum. Since I highly value reliability of track work and equipment, adding sound to the equation is just one too many levels of complexity than I care to deal with. I’m still trying to come to grips with converting all my locos from DC to DCC.

Thanks for all the comments on both sides of the issue. It’s nice to know I’m not alone.

[DKS]

Well then, Mr. DKS, I don't  know why you're chewing me out. 

Dunno. Maybe I was feeling kinda snarky. 

[jdcolombo]

I forgot to list one other issue I have with sound equipped locos... it seems to generate an awful lot of additional problems as evidenced by the DCC / Electronics Sub Board in this forum. Since I highly value reliability of track work and equipment, adding sound to the equation is just one too many levels of complexity than I care to deal with. I’m still trying to come to grips with converting all my locos from DC to DCC.

Thanks for all the comments on both sides of the issue. It’s nice to know I’m not alone.

Adding sound certainly adds installation complexity (if you do it yourself) and operational complexity (if you want to blow the horn, you press F2; turn on the bell, F1; turn sound on/off, F8 - etc., none of which you would do with silent engines).  However, a well-done sound installation does NOT reduce reliability on the track any more than any DCC decoder.  In fact, if done correctly, a sound install will actually help with on-track reliability, because you'll use some kind of keep alive with a sound decoder.  The keep alive will not only help keep the sound from "stuttering," but if done correctly, can help with momentary electrical dropouts (I do mean "momentary" for N scale; in HO, a keep alive can keep an engine running for 2-5 seconds over dirty track; in N, we're talking micro-seconds, but that is often enough to be noticeable, or at least it has been for me).

I'm not trying to sell sound to people who prefer silence.  The great thing about model railroading is "to each his/her own."  It's your layout - build it and run it as you please, because the whole idea is for it to be fun!

John C.

[sd45elect2000]

I've spent my entire life on the RR. i won't soon get the sounds out of my head. I have some hearing issues now..

I do want an SW9 or an FM H-10-44 that can pull 80 cars through the yard though.

I guess I don't really care as long as the performance of the engine isn't compromised by removing weight. I also don't like paying the high prices for all the goodies...

I have some recordings of train sounds I can use for background noise if i wish. 

[CRL]

Seems if keep alive was desired, a larger capacitor could be installed instead of a speaker.

I have an old Arnold S2 that will drag 80 cars through the yard, but not in one trip. That’s what you meant, right? 

[C855B]

Seems if keep alive was desired, a larger capacitor could be installed instead of a speaker. ...

Downside of too much keep-alive is potential loss of control. 3-5 seconds is a lifetime when the objective is avoiding a turnout lined against you or other disasters such as careening off the benchwork.

[Point353]

In fact, if done correctly, a sound install will actually help with on-track reliability, because you'll use some kind of keep alive with a sound decoder.  The keep alive will not only help keep the sound from "stuttering," but if done correctly, can help with momentary electrical dropouts (I do mean "momentary" for N scale; in HO, a keep alive can keep an engine running for 2-5 seconds over dirty track; in N, we're talking micro-seconds, but that is often enough to be noticeable, or at least it has been for me).

Given the limitations of the keep-alive capacitors (for N scale), would it be better if the decoder and keep-alive were designed such that the keep-alive supplied power only to the processor portion of the decoder, but not to the bridge transistors that drive the motor? In that way the decoder would be prevented from resetting/rebooting, while the loco would still coast until contact with track power was restored. If someone really needs 2-5 seconds of "hang time" to compensate for dirty track, then the track is beyond due for a cleaning.

[davefoxx]

Downside of too much keep-alive is potential loss of control. 3-5 seconds is a lifetime when the objective is avoiding a turnout lined against you or other disasters such as careening off the benchwork.

I've got two locomotives with Keep-Alives that will run the locos for that three to five seconds after a loss of power.  I haven't had any issue with a loss of control yet and would say that momentum is the bigger concern, even if there is no loss of control.  Slamming the throttle to zero will stop a locomotive, even if it has a Keep Alive, but the momentum may carry it into the abyss! 

By the way, I love this video, which shows what a Keep-Alive can do for you (in HO, of course):

/>
DFF