November Model Railroader

[peteski]

What I find odd is mixed in with all the beginner stuff they often have advanced electronics too 

But often those circuits have errors in the diagrams. Also some circuits (while they will still function) are really oddball designs which do not make sense.  One circuit used 2 separate power transformers and 2 bridge rectifiers as a dual-polarity power supply while the same could have been easily accomplished using a single center-tapped transformer and single bridge rectifier.  Lower parts count means less expensive and more reliable circuit.

Another one had a constant high-current load resistance in the circuit generating lots of heat (with a warning included in that article about the heat ) when the same circuit could have been easily redesigned without that "heater".

I wrote to MR with my suggestions but they weren't taken seriously. It would make sense for them to have someone on the staff with a good dose electrical and electronic design/troubleshooting experience to vet potential articles.

OTOH, the last issue's DCC Corner (by Mike Polsgrove) had an excellent articles on properly powering LEDs.  I even emailed MR with kudos for Mike.  Unfortunately I just read that he is retiring from writing that column. I also read a letter to the editor in the same issue statign that the article was too complicated!  Instead, the reader recommended a constant current device supplying 20mA of current to power the LEDs. Little he knows that many of us find 20mA through an LED producing way too bright of a light. It is nice to be able to customize the LED brightness to a specific application.  I guess you can never please everybody.

[sirenwerks]

As for the repeat topics and beginner articles, remember that every year, a new crop of potential customers picks
up MR for the first time.  It doesn't help them if something they would have liked came out 2 years ago.
MR pretty much has to do a certain amount of "recycling of the basics" to keep appealing to the potential
new modelers (and subscribers).   Remember how you felt when you picked up the first issue of a magazine.
If it didn't have things in it that appealed to you and taught you something, very often that's the last issue you'll try.
So we, yes, have to put up with a certain amount of "repeat of the basics".

Max, I get that but think about it... new readers are likely younger and more web savvy.  MR keeps nailing the beginners stuff in its print vehicle which is, likely, mostly consumed by older, more experienced readers.  Plus, they have a boatload of books in the beginner vein, full of recycled articles.  Point the newbies to web-based paid resources or get them to buy the books or stuff the mags with extras for beginners, but don't make beginner stuff the bread and butter of the vehicle and drown the old hats with puff ball trees and benchwork first-times.

[chuck geiger]

In the new MODEL RAILROAD on newsstands now Pele Soeberg shows you how to weather
your a$$hat.

[Chris333]

Pele Soeberg or just Tom Mann without his hat. 

[OldEastRR]

I wonder if there is any place in the model rail media for a mag/e-zine/forum that mainly explores the experimental and theoretical facets of the hobby? Where  articles and columns bring up or solicit new ideas on layout construction, scenery, track planning concepts, and the like. I mean things that get a conversation started as well as bring up techniques and materials that haven't been explored before. Even discussing philosophies of what constitutes the basic elements of our hobby and how we interpret them.  I don't mean little-known prototypes or specialized construction of certain particular models, which is covered in the MR media already.

[ednadolski]

I wonder if there is any place in the model rail media for a mag/e-zine/forum that mainly explores the experimental and theoretical facets of the hobby? Where  articles and columns bring up or solicit new ideas on layout construction, scenery, track planning concepts, and the like. I mean things that get a conversation started as well as bring up techniques and materials that haven't been explored before. Even discussing philosophies of what constitutes the basic elements of our hobby and how we interpret them.

YES! It's called "The Railwire"!

Ed

[craigolio1]

I chose not to renew my subscription. I think this issue is my last. I'm tired of the same recycled articles. I'm tired of Pelle Soeburg being in almost every issue. As shown by the work posted here every week, there are so many more talented modellers out there certainly enough to create some variety.

I agree. I get more out of this forum then MR.

Craig

[AlkemScaleModels]

That model railroads go to war book is written by our own Bernie Kempenski. He doesn't post as much as he used to, but he's a stand up guy. Buy the book.

I'm still around! I'm not dead yet.    Thanks for the vote of confidence.

For you N Scale purists, there is N Scale material in the book, "Model Railroads Go to War."  But there are also lots of interesting stories, facts, and  world class modeling on display too (not counting my feeble efforts of course). Even if you don't model a war time period, you may find the book both informative and interesting. 

Bernard Kempinski

[CVSNE]

I'm still around! I'm not dead yet.    Thanks for the vote of confidence.

For you N Scale purists, there is N Scale material in the book, "Model Railroads Go to War."  But there are also lots of interesting stories, facts, and  world class modeling on display too (not counting my feeble efforts of course). Even if you don't model a war time period, you may find the book both informative and interesting. 

Bernard Kempinski

And even some Panzertruppen .... looking rather dejected, in New England no less.

You'll have to get the book to see what I'm talking about.

I've had a chance to see this book develop and had the opportunity to review the galley proofs. It's a great read whether you plan to model a wartime setting or not.

Marty

[mcjaco]

Same argument going on in Facebook too.  The same old MR rehash bash.

The beginner MRer typically picks up a magazine before a book.  We used to sell MR to someone just getting into the hobby to show them how to do things, and how far they could go.  If got them hooked, then we'd shuttle them over to the books.  So I don't agree with the "this stuff is all in beginner books, why publish in the mag?"

As for MRH's survey, what's the overall readership of it?  I'm highly doubting the accuracy of an online publication's survey, that probably does not have as large of a following.  I'm on their mailing list, and I can't say I've ever looked at a single issue.  I hate the online publications.  I want something tactile in my hands. And no I do not have a tablet, and have no desire to get one.  I sit in front of a PC all day, I'm not doing it at home too.

I recently went to a NMRA regional group's operations day.  I went to three layouts over the course of a day, and ran.  Two layouts were by guys in their late 70's, one in his early fifties.  The two older gentlemen both remarked how nice it was to have a younger guy there to run, and I needed to join the NMRA because we're lacking in youth.  I wasn't about to open a can of worms, but perhaps the NMRA isn't youthful is that it's totally disconnected from youth.  Guys are online, posting to Facebook, they want quick reads (Forums). 

Meh....I could go on and on.....

[conrail98]

Same argument going on in Facebook too.  The same old MR rehash bash.

The beginner MRer typically picks up a magazine before a book.  We used to sell MR to someone just getting into the hobby to show them how to do things, and how far they could go.  If got them hooked, then we'd shuttle them over to the books.  So I don't agree with the "this stuff is all in beginner books, why publish in the mag?"

As for MRH's survey, what's the overall readership of it?  I'm highly doubting the accuracy of an online publication's survey, that probably does not have as large of a following.  I'm on their mailing list, and I can't say I've ever looked at a single issue.  I hate the online publications.  I want something tactile in my hands. And no I do not have a tablet, and have no desire to get one.  I sit in front of a PC all day, I'm not doing it at home too.

I recently went to a NMRA regional group's operations day.  I went to three layouts over the course of a day, and ran.  Two layouts were by guys in their late 70's, one in his early fifties.  The two older gentlemen both remarked how nice it was to have a younger guy there to run, and I needed to join the NMRA because we're lacking in youth.  I wasn't about to open a can of worms, but perhaps the NMRA isn't youthful is that it's totally disconnected from youth.  Guys are online, posting to Facebook, they want quick reads (Forums). 

Meh....I could go on and on.....

I will say the last few issues of MR have been much better, I think they took a lot of heat from that whole "do this in x seconds". MRH, not so much. Since they went to monthly, I'll be honest, if there isn't an article by Byron Henderson, Marty or Mike Rose, I look at the ToC and most times, just close the browser and don't go back to it. A lot of the bashing of MR has been coming from MRH supporters and those that really liked RMC. Everyone has different tastes in the content they like. Give me 3-4 pages of step-by-step pictures with supporting text over 4-6 pages of text and 2 really graining pictures (or 18 pages online of pictures with no text). I do think forums are becoming a better medium anyways for seeing everyday modeling. As for the NMRA, I will say this from my experience as someone who rejoined in their 30s, the division is what makes it, not the region or national. If you have a great division, like I feel mine is, it's a good experience, if you don't, it will turn you off to the organization for a long time,

Phil

[Scottl]

Strangely, MRH gives me the same reaction.  I was enthused at the beginning, but now I often don't bother downloading.

There is something inspiring about the professional photography of MR, especially finished layouts that are mature with detailing and finish.  I don't subscribe or find the substance of the magazine particularly deep, but it is worth a read when I pick it up.  Like most magazines, I recycle it after reading.  I spend about 20 minutes with an issue, compared to the 3-4 hours I get out of the weekly Economist, for example.

In fairness, most forums don't have a lot of substance either.  There is lots of positive information exchange and I love to see work in progress or finished, but  I would guess there are a dozen threads a week here that are about what I think of as modelling that could be publishable in some form in a conventional magazine. A lot of forum content is discussing products, crew topics, etc.  TRW is substantially better than most, even those with lots of activity.   That is not meant to be negative in any way- forums like TRW serve a valuable need, and I spend lots of time here, and benefit tremendously.  But I don't think forums completely fill the niche of MR or the other magazines.  I think "neutral" is a term I would apply to my feelings about MR and the other magazines.

[jwb]

A good forum has a lot of activity, a lot of posts from guys who taking interesting photos, especially of work in progress, and a friendly atmosphere. I'm not sure if a lot of theoretical stuff is a good idea. Usually the guys who push theory are pretty narrow in their views -- not only do you operate, but you MUST use this kind of car card; not only do you do layout design, but you MUST follow the domino theory and make your layout the Minnesota Commercial Railroad. Some of those guys have their own blogs, and blogs are probably a better place for that kind of thing.

A friendly atmosphere, a wide range of approaches, lots of photos, and lots of activity are the best features in forums.

[Scottl]

I agree and think the dialog mechanism that forums have is highly valuable.  Some modelling threads are not particularly substantial, but reflect the modelling process and thinking.  I find those interesting to follow, even if they lack progress that would be appropriate for a magazine article. 

Knowledge sharing is particularly facilitated by forums, but forums are ephemeral at a certain time scale and I fear much of the knowledge will disappear over time as hosts change, etc.  We have seen this recently on TRW when a prominent and excellent contributor has stepped back for personal reasons, and the pictures and many useful posts have become gapped due to hosting changes. This happens for many good reasons and individuals are not to blame, but what it shows is the underlying weakness of forums as a tool for long term knowledge transfer.  The demise of the Atlas forums is another example, albeit those still appear in some form for the time being.

The advantage of publications is that they are an archive that preserves that knowledge indefinitely.  I see people talking about old MR issues all the time, which is possible because of the medium.

[mmagliaro]

Same argument going on in Facebook too.  The same old MR rehash bash.

The beginner MRer typically picks up a magazine before a book.  We used to sell MR to someone just getting into the hobby to show them how to do things, and how far they could go.  If got them hooked, then we'd shuttle them over to the books.  So I don't agree with the "this stuff is all in beginner books, why publish in the mag?"

...
...

+1  THIS
Beginners and people who find themselves in a hobby store and wonder "what if" will buy a magazine, not a $20 book.
MR's intro/newbie articles and they nice photo presentations are a critical gateway for people to
wonder about the hobby.