Howes Re-furbished Class 37 Sounds

[SRman]

I must say, I do like the sounds on that 37 but I'm not convinced of the drivability. It seems to accelerate well before the engine sounds spool up ... rather like the SWD/Bachmann sounds.

 

I have both Howes unrefurbished and refurbished sounds in 37s, as well as one still with its original Bachmann sounds. I much prefer the drivability of the Howes ones. The refurbished one has a much nicer top end for continuous running but the unrefurbished is more fun for short bursts, as it displays different behaviours according to the throttle setting used - open it wide and it thrashes then spools down slightly before thrashing again; open the throttle more gently and it spools up in a more controlled way.

 

Don't get me wrong; I do like the Bachmann/SWD sounds but they aren't fun to "drive". They force you to drive according to the sounds, rather than Bryan's (Howes) method, which is to get the sounds to follow the driving technique.

 

Just from those videos, the Zimo seems to be more of the latter, although I think the sound quality is superb, even on YouTube, which we know degrades sound recordings.

 

That's my take on things so far. Please don't feel obliged to agree with me, these are purely my own opinions.

[pauliebanger]

God! with all these questions I'd like to know whether you have a vested interest in Digitrains?

 

Look, it is a fact of life that both ESU AND ZIMO followed the path of mapping sound directly to power output and not power following sound, therefore both these manufacturers have an inherent weakness when applying sound schemes for engine note transitions. More so with ZIMO than ESU's Loksound decoder. Even worse with ALL of the US sound decoder manufacturers.

 

Talking of paths, the Loksound product has multiple paths which can be taken in the sound scheme and different engine note cycles applied for the relevant path taken. ZIMO has no second path, it is stepped up and stepped down through a sequence of what I would term to be 'holding positions' where the engine note is looped at each holding position. Loksound decoders allow a greater variance in which of two paths each transition can take between these holding points and aids Bryans editing to allow more "drivability".

 

These are issues identified by almost anybody who has tried using ZIMO's sound decoders and many do not have the time and patience to overcome these problems by careful and creative editing of the sound project to get "drivability". In fact the point has been laboured by members of ukdccsound indirectly to ZIMO via Hr Zieglers UK appointed man on the ground to no avail.

 

It is ZIMO's software architecture that will limit Digitrains decoders being perceived as having a high "sound quality" when in fact what that poster probably means is that the way the sound scheme is designed and operated is very limited compared with a sound project running on a Loksound platform. Despite the higher 22K sample rate used.

 

Digitrains Sounds....

 

 

ZIMO 642D Decoder

 

 

 

I am quite happy to explain why I asked those questions.

I believe that one of the objectives of this forum is the transfer of knowledge and information. A simple statement that something is not good enough is sufficient to convey a poster's personal view, which I have already said I respect, but it does not convey any reasoning why I should accept it, or give anyone any useful information which will help form an opinion.

Since no expansion was forthcoming, and some 'evidence' had been posted for us to consider, I thought that to ask some specific questions might help bring out the reasons why it is thought that Zimo sounds do not come up to the mark.

You have set out the facts as you see them, made a cogent argument and given specific illustrations to support your views. Thank you, I have found that most enlightening.

Although I have been working with Zimo decoders for some time now, it has been restricted to steam projects, where of course, this issue of separate paths has less relevance since steam driving sounds and speed are more closely tied than with D-E, so this is a somewhat new issue for me .

Would it be a fair summation of your post to say the quality of the sounds themselves are of the required standard, but the way in which they are handled by Zimo's software limits their operation in the ways you have described?

It does seem to me that the loksound architechture, which inextricably links driving sounds and random sounds, yet does not allow the changing of soundfiles and their relative volumes without recourse to reprogramming and reblowing imposes limitations on the operations which Zimo decoders can easily overcome.

I would like to ask a question about your point on power following sound (which I infer that you consider would be preferable). Would it be possible to simulate a heavy train slowing down on an upward gradient, say, when the driver would be calling for more power? i.e. sound up, speed down? This is a question, not a challenge.

 

Kind regards,

 

Paul

[kevpeo]

 

It does seem to me that the loksound architechture, which inextricably links driving sounds and random sounds, yet does not allow the changing of soundfiles and their relative volumes without recourse to reprogramming and reblowing imposes limitations on the operations which Zimo decoders can easily overcome.

 

Paul

 

Not strictly true on that point Paul! The Loksound does allow for altering the frequency and volume of random sounds on separate cv's to the rest of the sounds on the program, but only if the programmer puts it in! Kev.

 

Ps, Savoyard was the original poster elsewhere of the 37 vid, I just drew attention to it!

[pauliebanger]

Not strictly true on that point Paul! The Loksound does allow for altering the frequency and volume of random sounds on separate cv's to the rest of the sounds on the program, but only if the programmer puts it in! Kev.

 

Ps, Savoyard was the original poster elsewhere of the 37 vid, I just drew attention to it!

 

Kev (?)

Ah good, some progress on facts!

 

I can see from the ESU manual that what you say is true. But, can you tell me the where it explains how to, for example, turn up the volume of one random sound whithout affecting all other random sounds equally too? I know the loksound manual is poorly written and has not been updated since 2005, but I get the distinct impression that it's all or nothing. Random sounds are treated as a block. Am I correct or deluded?

 

I hope you are not suggesting a deficiency in someone's sound programming! (That's just a tiny joke - please don't flame me ).

 

I gathered, a bit late in the day, that you were simply refering to the vid rather than being it's poster. That's a minus mark for me, but I did once win a prize at the 'international getting the wrong end of the stick' competition, so I have form!! Ha Ha.

 

Kind regards,

 

Paul

[cassey jones]

Kev (?)

Ah good, some progress on facts!

 

I can see from the ESU manual that what you say is true. But, can you tell me the where it explains how to, for example, turn up the volume of one random sound whithout affecting all other random sounds equally too? I know the loksound manual is poorly written and has not been updated since 2005, but I get the distinct impression that it's all or nothing. Random sounds are treated as a block.

 

Kind regards,

 

Paul

 

Yes you are correct Paul, very limited controlling [individual volume controls] on random sounds, all or nothing, yep!

I have an issue with a Howes 47 horns being too loud and it really needs turning down slightly, but spoke with Howes and it seems no it cannot be done, without sending the chip back to Howes.

So it sounds as though the Zimo is more user friendly.

 

To my earlier issue with a Zimo 37 sounding distorted, yes it was a Digitrains sound chip, which one? no idea -is was poor- I will say the chap selling it had I believed set it up himself, loose speaker wire - no idea.

 

What it did do, is put me off Digitrains sounds, - as I think you really need to hear a DS model in the flesh to hear it properly.

 

As I said earlier in this thread, I have since heard a class 20 on youtube and even with the limitations of video,- I think it sounded very good, so maybe I need to get one direct from them [digitrains] already set up.

The 37 on the rolling road video - I must admit does sound very good, so much better than my first experience with a digitrains 37!

Now Paul will you do a video of a 37 being driven?

So we can hear and see what it drives like?

[big jim]

Not strictly true on that point Paul! The Loksound does allow for altering the frequency and volume of random sounds on separate cv's to the rest of the sounds on the program, but only if the programmer puts it in! Kev.

 

Ps, Savoyard was the original poster elsewhere of the 37 vid, I just drew attention to it!

 

reply from bryan in response to this post:

 

Loksound decoders are a bit more versatile than they are given credit for. The ability to use function keys to mute or change overall sound settings through 4 stages can be employed and in fact enabled with CVs by users without having to resort to having the decoder reblown, this is also true of the Notching facility if people so desire it, As for the different level settings for subsets of sounds, this can be done by allocating the sets to CV121 122 and 123,. but this feature has to be written into the spound profile when being programmed.

 

What I will say is that I have never used these 3 CV settings in the last 5 years as I felt the sound level settings were pretty much balanced on my projects, I dont think ESU have ever used it on any of their European sound files though I stand to be corrected on that.

 

The only time the use of such measures as been called into question is on this thread. there are 2 issues here, firstly, if the random time between playing the sound was longer than the maximum of the built in 1 minute it would probably not be so noticeable, secondly it is back to the subjective test of sound. I love 37 Compressor sound and the sound level is based on a friends evocative footage he took of a 37 having just arrived in a snow storm at Meldon quarry in the late 80s, the engine idle is almost but not quite drowned out when the compressor cuts in. the sound level on my project is about the same as I have done on the 45 and 50 when the fan cuts in. I try to create something which is prototypical, a problem also is if I make the compressor repeat time 40 seconds , the thing could start up again 15 seconds after is stops, this is where it is limited. if you listen to an ESU sound decoder the the random sounds sometimes only last a few seconds, not ptototypical at all.

 

I will try out CV121 to enable the random compressor sound level to be user controllable, this sound is the only one I have had any feedback on in 5 years so apart from the odd comment I felt the level was right. If ESU could modify their random time from 1 to say 3 minutes it would be far better. I am aware of the random sounds on steam projects being too regularly played, but I, like everyone else producing UK sound projects can only work within the parameters of the decoder design.

 

Whilst writing this I have had another possible eurika moment, I may be able to confuse the decoder into spacing the sound out. I will report back via Jim when I have tried it out.shame i have to go out now, I want to try it!!.

 

If Michaelp wants to send his loco or decoder back to Howes with a note referring to the sound I will redo it FOC as part of my experiment, that is the best I can offer, I cant do anything about the postage cost though.

 

By the way, the 37 compressor sound comes out far better on a 20x40 speaker sealed properly in bluetak or blaktak and not in the locating tray used in the Bachmann locos, unless you seal the edges of the tray to make it airtight which will boost the overall sound as well as giving it more bass, or alternatively shoehorn in a bass reflex speaker. Probably preaching to the converted but hey ho someone may not have tried it.

 

Hope this is of some use, oh and by the way Paup is right re the quality of sound, the Specs speak for themselves, but as for ESU products Nuremburg is on in 2 weeks!

[pauliebanger]

 

 

A: With steam there is one glaring omission from the ZIMO Steam sound architecture, and that is the facility to have coasting sounds, and therefore another point for Loksound.

 

A: Your point on being able to change sound files and relative sound levels without reprogramming is very relevant, I see all manner of commercial opportunities on that one, and I thank you for exposing this feature - I did not look into ZIMO enough to have realised that was there.

 

 

A: I will respond to both the question and the challenge.

 

1: I would like to ask a question about your point on power following sound (which I infer that you consider would be preferable).

 

A: YES infinitely. You yourself have been on moving locomotives - just close your eyes and be aware of what the loco is doing in relation to sound and movement - do commercial decoders work the same way with our models - No! unfortunately they do not!

 

2: Would it be possible to simulate a heavy train slowing down on an upward gradient, say, when the driver would be calling for more power? i.e. sound up, speed down?

 

A: YES

 

As a bit of background, I am currently working with several partners in the areas of specialised locomotive sound recording, next generation sound decoder development and layout sound systems. The architecture of all these development programs has removed the restriction in the number of sound paths found in both Loksound and Zimo sound chips, decoupled the reliance of a particular sound equating to a particular motor output voltage, has dynamic braking based upon setting the characteristics of the trains performance (i.e. acceleration and de-acceleration) for different train types. And I can dynamically alter the train brake force whilst the loco is in motion with all the correct train sounds from the locomotive AND the associated coaching/rolling stock.

By removing these restrictions, I can now have a fully operable locomotive power controller, where I can alter the sound of the locomotives engine speed and the dynamics of whether it is small blip on the controller or a full blown thrash from the engine, and characteristically I do not need to 'return to centre' or idle the engine as I can return the engines speed to a lower one then that of full thrash and then pick up the difference again when hitting that hill.

I also have fully operational braking and the sounds come from multiple decoders (i.e. a loco and coach in the most basic configuration) where the braking sound comes from the rolling stock, just as they would in real life. I also have the ability to change the braking force by profile of the train type AND dynamically whilst the engine is slowing down thereby having greater control over where the loco stops rather than relying on a CV value to set a specific and unchangeable brake force.

 

Couple that with additional memory capacity and you can have a fully featured class 60 startup of over two and a half minutes, and that complete class 25 spooldown of over half a minute, plus all the brake tests and a multitude of other features you could not even begin to think about using current decoder technology.

 

Doddy,

 

Thanks for your very detailed response, and thanks for understanding the relevance of what was the basis of my first respose to the original poster.

 

We may have a different view on what constitutes coasting steam locomotive. It's perfectly possible to put rod clank and steam hissing to replace exhaust beats (chuffs), simulating 'regulator off' with the existing Zimo software.

 

Here's one I made earlier! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1j_2Ap_8zs

 

If you have not seen this before, you might find all of it interesting and Zimo's (in my personal view, superior) capabilities are revealed. If you just want to listen to my take on 'drifting', it's at about 5.20 ish.

 

Regarding what you are working on, this sounds great. When can we get one?

 

In the meantime, I think you will be surprised at what can be achieved with Zimo, despite the limitations you have pointed out.

 

I don't want to pre-empt what you will will see from my Class 37 vid, but much of what you are aiming for I think I have a way of achieving now, using a single Zimo decoder. (I could be setting myself up for a big fall here!).

 

I do not yet have a way to simulate dynamic braking, but then I am new to diesel sound projects and I haven't even begun to consider that feature!

 

I understand that 2min 30 sec is quite a normal time for a real loco's start routine, and I applaud that attention to detail. But can you see many people hanging around waiting for that to play out, especially as a large part, I am guessing, is taken up with relatively quiet priming pump sounds? I am not criticising you at all just a comment on human nature, particularly non-involved spectators!

 

I have one that sounds like this :

Ha Ha! (I have a separate digital recording of this which is much better than the camcorder sounds. It also incorporates the 2 minutes of triple-pump sounds beforehand).

 

Everyone,

 

Is there anything else you would like me to feature in this video? (Keep it clean, please!)

 

Here's hoping to move the debate and sound projects forward,

 

Kind regards,

 

Paul

[Marty Mc]

Hi

 

I have never heard a class 37 in real life only what I have seen on youtube. Now all sound good in my opinion and if I was right into 37s I would purchase a couple from each supplier just so I have different sounding 37's.

 

Now Paul will you do a video of a 37 being driven?

 

I'm sure Paul will produce something good here if he is up for the challenge. Well how about it?

 

Well it seems it has rolled into Zimo/lok discussion I would like to add my 2 cents.

 

I have always being very happy with loksound decoders and turned my back an Zimo which I believe was a huge error. Let me explain. I enjoyed programming the loks, the sounds generated plus the lok is hardy and has a very stable well proven architecture. The 6 functions are easy to set up, programming is straight forward once you get the hang of it. All in all I thought I had the complete package.

 

I refused to look at Zimo as an option for 3 major reasons, no sound decoder small enough to go into n, terrible terrible manuals plus I had a fair few loks....why change? It was all the limiting factors I started finding with the lok. I started to research other decoders and about that time Zimo had updated their manuals form chinlish to English. I spent nearly a week studying them and my conclusion if it was all true "unbelievable" this is what I am looking for.

 

I purchased a Zimo programmer and 6 Zimo sound decoders.

 

I found the lok limiting in 4 key areas.

 

1 Limited functions the lok 3.5 has 6 and the micro 4 I needed and use a lot more.

 

2 I dreaded every time I added a "stay alive" cap to my loks soldering onto the diodes on the actual loksound, 1 slip 100 GBP up in the air.

 

3 For steam/diesel if I wanted syncro smoke it basically had to have a mechanical input,(magnets and hall sensors) plus I had build a timing circuit for the fan.

 

4 Speakers especially the small ones so much more available in the 4-8 ohm range, but what is available in the lok range is outstanding.

 

The Zimo besides the bigger memory, fantastic motor control and the 3W amp, has 4 more functions, solder pads for the stay alive and solder pads for a 5v motor (secondary motor to drive your smoke) Add to that about 16 special CVs for syncro smoke for steam or diesel. How many does the lok have? 4 and that will not get you syncro unless you add some mechanical aids. The Zimo decoder can take a huge range of speakers with the power to drive them.

 

As I said I hit my limits with the lok about a year ago....I still programme and use loks but Zimo is the new challenge for me, as I see it it offers me everything a lok has plus more.

 

Dont get me wrong I still think programming a Zimo is a pain compared to the lok, I dislike jumping onto the web to translate the odd German word that they have forgotten to take out. Its minor I know but the thickness of the Zimo decoder wire really annoys me, petty I know but when you are used to insulation with a certain MFI. I just really like the lok wire.

 

I think the big benefit for the general modeler will come in the near future as you will get better sound files for the Zimo. In other words far more bang for your buck.

 

Price example and I checked out these prices on 3 public sites tonight.

 

Howes class 37.......117.50 GBP for a lok3.5 programmed with a 23mm speaker and housing

 

SWD class 37.........98.50 GBP for a lok3.5 programmed with a 23mm speaker and housing

 

Digitrains class 37...74.94 GBP programmed but no speaker included with the decoder.

 

Finally I am still keeping the the flames alive for the lok because I am waiting for a special announcement and release to be made at Numemburg toy fair in 2011.

Before you ask, I am speculating and thats all I want to say on that one.

 

Back to the 37 it has a lovely sound and it has to be in my opinion the most popular Diesel. I would really like to see what Paul can do with a 37.

 

Cheers

 

Martin

[pauliebanger]

Thanks for Bryan's response.

 

I would like to make it absolutely clear that I am not criticising anyone's, especially Bryan's work or expertice.

 

I hope this debate will reveal the facts, not stir emotions. This is not personal. (despite the fact that I have been attacked twice in other threads on this forum).

 

I think Bryan has revealed that his projects are as good as they are, DESPITE the decoder, not because of it!

 

Loksound decoders are a bit more versatile than they are given credit for. The ability to use function keys to mute or change overall sound settings through 4 stages can be employed and in fact enabled with CVs by users without having to resort to having the decoder reblown, this is also true of the Notching facility if people so desire it, As for the different level settings for subsets of sounds, this can be done by allocating the sets to CV121 122 and 123,. but this feature has to be written into the spound profile when being programmed.

CV121 sets parameters for Horn, CV122 Bell, (maybe you could substitute another sound) and CV123 controls 'random sounds'. ie, ALL random sounds in the same way, no individual control.

 

What I will say is that I have never used these 3 CV settings in the last 5 years as I felt the sound level settings were pretty much balanced on my projects, I dont think ESU have ever used it on any of their European sound files though I stand to be corrected on that.

 

What the end user hears will partly depend on the seaker set-up, totally beyond the authors' direct control. With the user able to make these changes, the authors' job becomes easier. Stick the relevant sounds onto the decoder, tuned to some standard pattern, and the purchaser can get the balance that suits their set-up and taste. Classic win-win.

 

The only time the use of such measures as been called into question is on this thread.

 

I gave a talk on fitting[ sound to loco's where an audience member 'forcefully expressed his displeasure' at the sound level of coal shovelling on his 'mainstream supplier' loksound chip. He was less than amused at the prospect of putting up with what he viewed as a ridiculous annoyance, or lose all the other random sounds which he did like and were essential for his enjoyment.

 

there are 2 issues here, firstly, if the random time between playing the sound was longer than the maximum of the built in 1 minute it would probably not be so noticeable,

 

1 minute? I see the problem.

By comparison, poor old Zimo can only manage to space out (any individual) random sound by 4min 25 secs. And set the play length from zero to 4 min 25 secs, set individually for each sound.

 

 

secondly it is back to the subjective test of sound. I love 37 Compressor sound and the sound level is based on a friends evocative footage he took of a 37 having just arrived in a snow storm at Meldon quarry in the late 80s, the engine idle is almost but not quite drowned out when the compressor cuts in.

 

My Edit: I've removed a response that, on reflection, could have been misconstrued. I am sorry.

 

 

the sound level on my project is about the same as I have done on the 45 and 50 when the fan cuts in. I try to create something which is prototypical, a problem also is if I make the compressor repeat time 40 seconds , the thing could start up again 15 seconds after is stops, this is where it is limited. if you listen to an ESU sound decoder the the random sounds sometimes only last a few seconds, not ptototypical at all.

 

So, the decoder and the much vaunted lokprogrammer sofware puts undue constraints on authors' ability to create prototypical sound and operation. Don't usually hear that admitted to, do we? Thanks, Bryan, for being so candid.

 

I will try out CV121 to enable the random compressor sound level to be user controllable, this sound is the only one I have had any feedback on in 5 years so apart from the odd comment I felt the level was right. If ESU could modify their random time from 1 to say 3 minutes it would be far better.

 

Ahem, why not 4min 25secs?

 

 

I am aware of the random sounds on steam projects being too regularly played, but I, like everyone else producing UK sound projects can only work within the parameters of the decoder design.

 

Ta da! Then why not use one that gives more and costs 1/3rd less?

 

Whilst writing this I have had another possible eurika moment, I may be able to confuse the decoder into spacing the sound out. I will report back via Jim when I have tried it out.shame i have to go out now, I want to try it!!.

 

If Michaelp wants to send his loco or decoder back to Howes with a note referring to the sound I will redo it FOC as part of my experiment, that is the best I can offer, I cant do anything about the postage cost though.

 

So, continuing the discussion has had a positive outcome for the OP. Good man, Bryan!

 

By the way, the 37 compressor sound comes out far better on a 20x40 speaker sealed properly in bluetak or blaktak and not in the locating tray used in the Bachmann locos, unless you seal the edges of the tray to make it airtight which will boost the overall sound as well as giving it more bass, or alternatively shoehorn in a bass reflex speaker. Probably preaching to the converted but hey ho someone may not have tried it.

 

Absolutely correct, and well worth repeating.

 

Hope this is of some use, oh and by the way Paup is right re the quality of sound, the Specs speak for themselves,

Phew, we got there in the end!

 

but as for ESU products Nuremburg is on in 2 weeks! 

 

Ah, the loksound V4.0, perhaps? Great for future purchasers but of no use to those 'stuck with' V3.5.

 

Kind regards,

 

Paul

[michaelp]

If Michaelp wants to send his loco or decoder back to Howes with a note referring to the sound I will redo it FOC as part of my experiment, that is the best I can offer, I cant do anything about the postage cost though.

 

First of all, I want to say a big thank you to Bryan for his very kind offer to redo my sound chip for me, when I started this thread it was because I had fitted bass reflex speakers in the tanks of my 37s, before I fitted them I had never noticed the compressor sound before so I automatically thought there was a problem when I heard it.

 

Being a relative newcomer to DCC Sound I thought that I had gone wrong somewhere with the speaker installations but after a phone call to DCC Supplies and numerous posts of help and advice and much checking and re-checking of wires and connections I realised all was well with the speakers.

 

It wasn't until I watched a video on Youtube that I realised that there might not be a problem after all and a PM from the guy who posted the video confirmed this.

 

I am very happy with my Howes Class 37 sounds so much so that I have re-enabled the compressor sound on my 37s.

I couldn't get on with SWD sounds at all and was particularly disappointed with the start up sequence, also when moving off all I heard was brake release, the loco had moved and stopped before there was any spool up in engine tone, then it carried on for a good few seconds even with the loco stationary!

 

Maybe with experimentation I could have got it work better but after watching Howes Class 37 locos on Youtube I decided to get my decoders reblown by Howes and I'm pleased I did, so it's Howes sounds for me from now on.

 

Once again, thank you very much to all that replied to my OP and many thanks to Bryan.

 

Kind Regards

Michael

 

 

 

[Melly]

Hi all - as one not really up-to-speed with the mechanics behind the sound production so please excuse 'the big feet'; but a few comments from, shall we say, the 'punters' perspective. Sorry if I wander off thread for a little:

 

I've been lucky enough to have experienced driver courses on 37, 47 & 56 and when returning to the toy trains afterward the most obvious limitation that stood out is that sound=speed & speed=sound. In reality you can be max thrash at speed X and then coast at speed X in idle power; potentially for some considerable time (depending upon gradient / load). See below - my bold

 

 

God! with all these questions I'd like to know whether you have a vested interest in Digitrains?

 

Look, it is a fact of life that both ESU AND ZIMO followed the path of mapping sound directly to power output and not power following sound, therefore both these manufacturers have an inherent weakness when applying sound schemes for engine note transitions. More so with ZIMO than ESU's Loksound decoder. Even worse with ALL of the US sound decoder manufacturers.

 

 

Further - when comparing the two youtube clips in this thread the Howes recording would appear to have used a loco at idle that had just been started because it has the characteristic 'surging' / 'lumpy' tick over. Great when starting on shed but a little unrealistic when idling between station stops. The Zimo idle sound is one that IMHO caters for a greater number 'idling scenarios'

 

 

 

Doddy,

 

I understand that 2min 30 sec is quite a normal time for a real loco's start routine, and I applaud that attention to detail. But can you see many people hanging around waiting for that to play out, especially as a large part, I am guessing, is taken up with relatively quiet priming pump sounds? I am not criticising you at all just a comment on human nature, particularly non-involved spectators!

 

I have one that sounds like this :

Ha Ha! (I have a separate digital recording of this which is much better than the camcorder sounds. It also incorporates the 2 minutes of triple-pump sounds beforehand).

 

Kind regards,

 

Paul

 

Finally - Doddy I refer to your quote below and am excited by the development you have outlined.

 

 

 

As a bit of background, I am currently working with several partners in the areas of specialised locomotive sound recording, next generation sound decoder development and layout sound systems. The architecture of all these development programs has removed the restriction in the number of sound paths found in both Loksound and Zimo sound chips, decoupled the reliance of a particular sound equating to a particular motor output voltage, has dynamic braking based upon setting the characteristics of the trains performance (i.e. acceleration and de-acceleration) for different train types. And I can dynamically alter the train brake force whilst the loco is in motion with all the correct train sounds from the locomotive AND the associated coaching/rolling stock.

 

By removing these restrictions, I can now have a fully operable locomotive power controller, where I can alter the sound of the locomotives engine speed and the dynamics of whether it is small blip on the controller or a full blown thrash from the engine, and characteristically I do not need to 'return to centre' or idle the engine as I can return the engines speed to a lower one then that of full thrash and then pick up the difference again when hitting that hill.

 

I also have fully operational braking and the sounds come from multiple decoders (i.e. a loco and coach in the most basic configuration) where the braking sound comes from the rolling stock, just as they would in real life. I also have the ability to change the braking force by profile of the train type AND dynamically whilst the engine is slowing down thereby having greater control over where the loco stops rather than relying on a CV value to set a specific and unchangeable brake force.

 

Couple that with additional memory capacity and you can have a fully featured class 60 startup of over two and a half minutes, and that complete class 25 spooldown of over half a minute, plus all the brake tests and a multitude of other features you could not even begin to think about using current decoder technology.

 

 

 

Personally I consider (despite having 6 or so sound loco's) sound to still be in it's infancy stage and a degree of further maturity is required before I embrace in toto the concept. I'm sure the technology exists (or will exist soon) for a DCC sound package to include a controller with separate acceleration and brake control functions. Acceleration, (simulated) inertia and brakes would dictate speed with sound dictated by the acceleration only function. Yes I'm a dreamer but if sound is really going to have a degree of longevity, functionality similar to that that I have described has got to be the long-term goal.

 

Sorry to have dumbed down/interfered with your technical debate but your train of thought just struck a chord with my thoughts on the topic.

 

Regards

 

melly

[pauliebanger]

Now Paul will you do a video of a 37 being driven?

So we can hear and see what it drives like?

 

Yes, of course. What do you want to see/hear happening in the vid?

 

If I know how to do it, I'll put it in. If not, I'll tell you and explain why not.

 

That would be a fair (but tough!) challenge, wouldn't it?

 

And if anyone has a usable (most lineside recordings are not suitable) digital recording of their favourite loco, steam or diesel, you can send it to me and I'll create a Zimo sound file for you from it.

 

Kind regards,

 

Paul

[kevpeo]

reply from bryan in response to this post:

 

As for the different level settings for subsets of sounds, this can be done by allocating the sets to CV121 122 and 123,. but this feature has to be written into the spound profile when being programmed.

 

What I will say is that I have never used these 3 CV settings in the last 5 years as I felt the sound level settings were pretty much balanced on my projects, I dont think ESU have ever used it on any of their European sound files though I stand to be corrected on that.

 

 

Cheers for the reply Jim/Bryan! For such a small change to the program it would give a lot more versatility to the end user, inc me! I just got into the habit of doing 121 & 123 that way with mine, even though I don't need it cos I've got the originals! Look forward to seeing what you can do with the 'one minute.' kev.

[big jim]

i think ill leave it to bryan to reply to paulies thread if if feels the need to.

 

Bryan has given a pretty comprehensive answer to why if is not using zimo at present and has listed what he believes is the shortcomings as he has done with loksound yet you are still saying words to the effect of why not use zimo. Despite the interesting points raised by everyone i feel this thread is just going round in circles now!

 

Melly: ive driven a few 37 that have still had lumpy tickover even after a few hours thrash!!

[pauliebanger]

<br />i think ill leave it to bryan to reply to paulies thread if if feels the need to. <br /><br />Bryan has given a pretty comprehensive answer to why if is not using zimo at present and has listed what he believes is the shortcomings as he has done with loksound yet you are still saying words to the effect of why not use zimo. Despite the interesting points raised by everyone i feel this thread is just going round in circles now! <br /><br />Melly: ive driven a few 37 that have still had lumpy tickover even after a few hours thrash!!<br />

<br /><br /><br />

 

big jim,

 

I don't want to make enemies here, this is a hobby after all. Yes, you did mention earlier that having looked at Zimo, Bryan had decided not to use them.

 

However, I have read Bryan's later post several times and I cannot see where he gives any reason why he is not using Zimo as you have suggested. Indeed he said nothing about Zimo at all. But he was very frank about the limitations of the loksound.

 

It therefore seemed a pertinent question to me. I am sorry if anyone has been offended.

 

I don't agree that we are going round in circles at all, and no one else has suggested that. It all seems to be moving along in a nice logical progression, with everyone learning something new.

 

Kind regards,

 

Paul

[clickertyclack]

Being someone with feet in both camps using both Zimo and Loksound, I have followed this topic with interest, or should that be , followed this argument?!

 

The news that the latest Loksound version ( not the Select) now has a bigger memory capacity is of interest, namely 4mins at 16khz sample rate. Is this a plus point for Loksound? As Paul rightly points out, it is still 2 mins less than its main rival. However I believe what's not been conveyed to readers is that to utilise 6mins of memory on the Zimo chip, it has to be loaded with a somewhat inferior audio at 11kz sample rate. Again to make the statement that the Zimo chip has twice the memory of the Loksound can imply that the former has twice the capacity time wise, for audio data storage. At a sample rate of 22khz for the Zimo 32 meg, this equates to 3mins.

 

As author of the sound files for Howes,and knowing of Bryan’s 5 yr' s experience in this field, I am sure many of us will be quite excited at how he utilises his greater freedom in sound allocation now he has a bigger memory size to play with as well!

 

This may appear biased so I should also state that I am equally excited by Paul's revelations.

Indeed last August I was quite interested to read that Zimo had begun software development of a means of allowing prototypical DE operation which I understand will allow users to simulate the rise and fall of PM sounds independent of track speed. I imagine this to be a form of notching and hope that after 6mths, Paul can demonstrate this function upgrade to us on his forthcoming Class 37 video.

Also, Paul has brought to our attention the increased power output of the new Zimo chips which he states, 'drives more bass'. Are we to believe then that a Zimo is better and reproducing lower frequencies? This would be a major plus for it. However I do not understand how higher sound output equates to more bass and I am sure other interested readers would join me in asking Paul how this is achieved.

 

 

CC.

[Guest 838rapid]

I have read this thread from start to finish.

 

Some good ground has been covered to that there is no doubt.

 

However it does read as being argumentative now I don't feel a recent comment being constructive instead it seems to be just wishing to inflame things.

[pauliebanger]

Clickertyclack wrote:

 

Being someone with feet in both camps using both Zimo and Loksound, I have followed this topic with interest, or should that be , followed this argument?!

 

I would categorise it as a discussion, why try to raise the temperature?

 

The news that the latest Loksound version ( not the Select) now has a bigger memory capacity is of interest, namely 4mins at 16khz sample rate. Is this a plus point for Loksound? As Paul rightly points out, it is still 2 mins less than its main rival. However I believe what's not been conveyed to readers is that to utilise 6mins of memory on the Zimo chip, it has to be loaded with a somewhat inferior audio at 11kz sample rate.Again to make the statement that the Zimo chip has twice the memory of the Loksound can imply that the former has twice the capacity time wise, for audio data storage. At a sample rate of 22khz for the Zimo 32 meg, this equates to 3mins.

 

You seen to be confused. I have not stated that Zimo has twice the capacity time wise. Please don't attribute that to me.

 

Here are the plain facts:

 

Memory on Zimo sound decoders has always been 32Mbit; any of their decoders you have has that capacity. So all Zimo sound projects will fit on any Zimo decoder.

 

Loksound started with 8Mbit (and is still that, according to ESU website) and later increased to 16Mbit.

 

32 =16x2, or twice as much.

 

Whatever the merits of the new version, all Zimo sound decoders sold to date will have either 4 times the memory, or twice the memory of loksound decoders to date. That will not alter.

 

As author of the sound files for Howes,and knowing of Bryan’s 5 yr' s experience in this field,

 

I confess that now I am confused. Are you, clickertyclack, the author of Howes sound projects, or is Bryan the author of Howes sound projects?

 

I am sure many of us will be quite excited at how he utilises his greater freedom in sound allocation now he has a bigger memory size to play with as well!

I sure you will be, quite right too.

 

Unfortunately, if the full loksound memory capacity is used in new sound projects, they will not be available to users of 8Mbit or 16Mbit versions.

 

This may appear biased so I should also state that I am equally excited by Paul's revelations.

Indeed last August I was quite interested to read that Zimo had begun software development of a means of allowing prototypical DE operation which I understand will allow users to simulate the rise and fall of PM sounds independent of track speed. I imagine this to be a form of notching and hope that after 6mths, Paul can demonstrate this function upgrade to us on his forthcoming Class 37 video.

 

Sadly not, Zimo have been so busy designing and building new decoders that they have not had the resources to continue development of the proposed scheme yet.

 

But, when it does appear, all Zimo decoders will be able to be upgraded to utilise this feature.

[Also, Paul has brought to our attention the increased power output of the new Zimo chips which he states, 'drives more bass'.]

 

Are we to believe then that a Zimo is better and reproducing lower frequencies?

Why would you believe that? What I meant is what I said. 3.0 Watts is five times 0.6 Watts.

 

This would be a major plus for it. However I do not understand how higher sound output equates to more bass and I am sure other interested readers would join me in asking Paul how this is achieved.

 

It doesn't. But that is not what I said either. There are more ways to utilise extra power than simply turning up the volume.

 

I have had a PM request from one of the contributors to this thread that I feature a 37/0 in the video. Unfortunately my sound file features a 37/4. However, not wishing to disappoint, I will obtain a 37/0 decoder and video that. (but not in a 37/0 loco!).

 

Sorry, this does mean a further short delay. Still time to get your requests in, though.

 

Kind regards,

 

Paul

[Mod2]

Gents, just a general appeal for calm please whilst further information is elicited.

 

Thanks.

[big jim]

Clickertyclack wrote:

 

As author of the sound files for Howes,and knowing of Bryan’s 5 yr' s experience in this field,

 

 

must admit that confused me too when i first read it, however bryan is the only aythor of howes chips!!

[pauliebanger]

Agreed.

 

With 1200 plus views in a few days, it would seem that many people are interested in both sides of this discussion. It would be a pity if it were to be locked over any issues not relating to the facts.

 

If the way in which I have expressed myself in my posts has offended, I apologise to everyone.

 

Anyone who feels personally offended can PM me and I will give an individual apology.

 

Kind regards

 

Paul

[Marty Mc]

Hi

 

 

As author of the sound files for Howes,and knowing of Bryan’s 5 yr' s experience in this field, I am sure many of us will be quite excited at how he utilises his greater freedom in sound allocation now he has a bigger memory size to play with as well!

 

I too was initially confused with the way it has being worded but I read on one of the dcc yahoo forums that Howes have a independent person doing their sounds. That may explain why they have to send the locos off site and why their prices are higher.

 

With 1200 plus views in a few days, it would seem that many people are interested in both sides of this discussion. It would be a pity if it were to be locked over any issues not relating to the facts.

 

Agree what I have found interesting the actual extras offered by Zimo more functions better smoke etc dont seem to be really relevant, what is important is the actual sound.

 

Martin

[big jim]

here is a reply from bryan regards the original question and futher esu developments:

 

Reporting on developements as promised , I enabled CVs 121 and 122 as an experiment for Horns and Compressor on one of my sounds locos , this worked as expected, nothing ground breaking there but it is something else that can be incorporated if requested on future orders or reblows via Howes.

 

I am pleased to report that my experiment to outwit the decoder was successful, I have so far been able to extend the time between the playing of random sounds to between 1 and 10 minutes, at that point I got bored and gave up measuring, I am still experimenting to get the variation to between 1 and 5 minutes as I think 10 minutes is probably far too long and 4 minutes 25seconds a tad short!!! besides how many people leave a loco idling for 10 minutes anyway. answers on a postcard!!.

 

Just to make a point, ESU currently supply Loksound decoders to Bachmann, Hornby, Roco, Fleischmann, Brawa and others in Europe, let alone the rest of the world, these companies are all major players in the Model Railway industry, their combined sales of locos fitted with Loksound decoders probably puts ESU far and away above any competition in sound decoder sales.

[pauliebanger]

Sometimes, we all need a little nudge for motivation. Open debate often benefits all parties.

 

I am pleased to report that my experiment to outwit the decoder was successful, I have so far been able to extend the time between the playing of random sounds to between 1 and 10 minutes, at that point I got bored and gave up measuring, I am still experimenting to get the variation to between 1 and 5 minutes as I think 10 minutes is probably far too long and 4 minutes 25seconds a tad short!!!

 

Ouch! Touche!

 

 

 

besides how many people leave a loco idling for 10 minutes anyway. answers on a postcard!!.

 

Just to make a point, ESU currently supply Loksound decoders to Bachmann, Hornby, Roco, Fleischmann, Brawa and others in Europe, let alone the rest of the world, these companies are all major players in the Model Railway industry, their combined sales of locos fitted with Loksound decoders probably puts ESU far and away above any competition in sound decoder sales.

 

This probably accounts for why RTR sound equiped locos are so expensive. Still it should give them loads of money for R&D!

I think Roco are now supplied by Zimo.

 

Kind regards,

 

Paul

[clickertyclack]

OK gents,

I apologise for the grammatical error that exists in my post and also for any embarrassment I may have caused to any parties as a result of it.. The way it should have read is as follows;

 

 

As author of the sound files for Howes and knowing of Bryan’s 5 yr' s experience in this field, etc.

 

 

I have now removed the comma between the words Howes and and! I do believe most people would have understood what I meant but I thank those concerned for bringing this simple mistake to my notice. As a dyslexic It is my spelling which is normally criticised! I should add that my dear wife who normally edits any written words of mine and unfortunately she was not around at the time. As can be appreciated spell check also is of little use. Having been previously taken to task for the manner of a previous post, I tried extremely hard to mitigate any situation whereby my post in this thread would offend in anyway or be misconstrued. I will however say that I am disappointed in the manner in which Marty and Paul replied to it and will mention it later. Indeed I write this inside an editor because what takes the average person 5 mins to write takes myself and people like me considerably longer. I am not looking for a way out or indeed playing the sympathy card but I would like to bring to members notice where indeed basic grammatical or spelling errors exist maybe the person writing it hasn’t the dexterity that you have. Now before my English is corrected yet again, I hope you all appreciate what I am trying to say ,even if not conveyed in a perfect manner. I do believe that the above raises questions in its own right and I will be including this matter in a letter to the mods so that all members may be reminded of albeit unseen disabilities

and make due allowance. We are railway modellers as well and I do not wish others with similar difficulties to feel how I have done with respect to these postings.

 

Being one of the very few who's skills with an audio editor I do respect, I am very flattered by the inference that I may be Bryan! Howes many satisfied customers are proof of Bryan’s skills in this field irrespective of any price differences between Zimo and Loksound. Also I am aware of how approachable and helpful he is to us all via these pages which deserves not only credit but acknowledgement and thank him on behalf of us all. His guidance on loksound matters not directly connected with Howes products is also noted which I am sure many of us also appreciate. I look forward to the day we can enjoy a similar relationship with a representative from Zimo. I would be very disappointed if as a result of this thread or indeed my posting this did not continue.

I apologise to Bryan for any embarrassment this episode may have caused him.

 

Because of the nature of Paul's response to my post I am not prepared to comment further on its contents for reasons I am sure readers understand. I am sorry to say that yes, I was indeed upset

by the nature of his response. May I therefore second Big Jim's proposal that this thread be locked for due deliberation.

 

CC