1938 Tube Stock

[andyman7]

2 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

Surely the purpose of a sound file is to reproduce what the prototype sounded like from the platform / lineside?

 

CJI.

As I said, it's quite personal. From the lineside I never heard any EMU sound like the 'sound file' - they are much quieter. And things like the starting bell are totally inaudible of a tube train from the lineside, so if that's the case why is it there?

[andyman7]

I've just found this link on YouTube of 1938 stock in action

 

 

Firstly - as you can see, the starting signal is a single bell and it cannot be heard in the Guards area (unlike SR EMUs).

Secondly, everything I have described - the contactors, the Westinghouse pump etc are audible from outside the train. Thirdly, much of the actual train noise is drowned out by the rattle and clickety-clack of the train itself which drowns out the 'technical' noises.

So for me, the 'sound decoder' effect on tube stock doesn't do it for me. Not a criticism of the developers and I've no issue with others who want to go the sound route. But if @cctransukstates that a sound file should reproduce the sound from the lineside, then for me, well...it doesn't. And I grew up listening to these from the lineside 🙂

[Roy Langridge]

10 minutes ago, andyman7 said:

As I said, it's quite personal. From the lineside I never heard any EMU sound like the 'sound file' - they are much quieter. And things like the starting bell are totally inaudible of a tube train from the lineside, so if that's the case why is it there?

I’ll just leave this link here: 

 

 

[Gwiwer]

2 hours ago, Coppercap said:

I don't think MBs ever normally worked the 81 (we certainly had them when new on the 110 for a short while, before having MBSs on both the 110 and 111). After the RMs, the 81 had SMs then SMSs for several years before LSs took over for a longer period.

I'll agree to settle on the SM then.  Single-door buses have never been common in London so when one found them they felt "different".  Most MBs and all SMs were single-door though the latter were shorter in length.  

[Metropolitan H]

36 minutes ago, Roy Langridge said:

I’ll just leave this link here: 

 

 

All I can hear is the noise of wheel/rail (and joints) interaction - plus the worn single reduction gears from the axle-hung motors to the driven axles.

 

Regards

Chris H

[Roy Langridge]

5 minutes ago, Metropolitan H said:

All I can hear is the noise of wheel/rail (and joints) interaction - plus the worn single reduction gears from the axle-hung motors to the driven axles.

 

Regards

Chris H

And the bells, quite clearly, despite the waves. 
 

Roy

[andyman7]

2 hours ago, Roy Langridge said:

And the bells, quite clearly, despite the waves. 
 

Roy

But remember they Island Line ones operate to National Rail standards. LU had a single starter bell for the driver.

[Roy Langridge]

2 hours ago, andyman7 said:

But remember they Island Line ones operate to National Rail standards. LU had a single starter bell for the driver.

Yes, but the sounds chips cater for both, hence the bells. 

[Erixtar1992]

Can defo hear the guard sounds, just depends where you are sat in the train…

One bell for LT, or 2 beeps after conversion for isle of wight

 

[Erixtar1992]

Clicky click pop.. 

Edited June 6, 2022 by Erixtar1992

[charliepetty]

The sound recordings from the Legomanbiffo Class 68 'are' recorded from a Class 68 hauling the stone train from Mountsorrel on the Midland Mainline.  What people do not quite get is in a model there are contraints on space and your are stuck with the area that Dapol have designed, thus you can squeeze in a speaker roughly 25 X 55 X 8mm, thus its impossible to get those sounds.  As people know the Dapol model is less than 12" long, sadly the Real Loco has far bigger speakers (IE 20Ton Engines), until they create a speaker for a model that can bu used for a concert at Wembly Stadium, we are stuffed.

 

That's the truth,   Charlie.

 

DCKits-Legomanbiffo can machine the chassis of your model and supply a ESU Decoder, Legomanbiffo Sound & the superb EM2 Speaker for £130.00. All we need is your loco !!!

You can contact us to arrange this on: pacercharlie2@gmail.com of ring 01132563415.

 

Charlie

[GoingUnderground]

On 05/06/2022 at 17:55, andyman7 said:

I've just found this link on YouTube of 1938 stock in action

 

 

Firstly - as you can see, the starting signal is a single bell and it cannot be heard in the Guards area (unlike SR EMUs).

Secondly, everything I have described - the contactors, the Westinghouse pump etc are audible from outside the train. Thirdly, much of the actual train noise is drowned out by the rattle and clickety-clack of the train itself which drowns out the 'technical' noises.

So for me, the 'sound decoder' effect on tube stock doesn't do it for me. Not a criticism of the developers and I've no issue with others who want to go the sound route. But if @cctransukstates that a sound file should reproduce the sound from the lineside, then for me, well...it doesn't. And I grew up listening to these from the lineside 🙂

I just love the look on the passengers' faces when the '38 Stock didn't stop in the platform, or the even more mystified looks when it did stop but the doors remained closed. Having been on several of the '38 Stock's outings it's even more fun when you're in the train and looking at the puzzled faces on the platforms.

 

This has opened an interesting debate on what should a sound file sound like. Should it be an "in the cab" or "in the coach" sound which in MU stock is probably the same, or a "lineside" sound?

 

Also what no one has identified is that you need separate sound files for Underground stock, and for it to be possible to switch between them whilst the model is on the move: 

One for above ground running,

One for in tunnel running.

and of course in both cases the "In Cab/In coach" sound will be very different to the "Lineside sound. So should it be a choice of 4 function switchable sound projects all within the same decoder?  

 

I think the videos very clearly show the difference between Above Ground and In Tunnel running, and the difference between "in Cab/In Carriage" and "Lineside".

And incidentally the only time that I can recall hearing the starting bell in '38 or '59/'62 Stock was when I was sitting in the seat immediately next to the cab partition and there was very little background noise to mask the sound of the bell in the cab.

 

[GoingUnderground]

On 05/06/2022 at 17:23, cctransuk said:

 

The view of a model train is that of an observer at a significant distance from it.

 

Why on earth would anyone wish to combine this with the sounds heard within the train?

 

I accept that there are bound to be the one or two exceptions, but I can't believe that serving such a niche market could be commercially viable.

 

CJI.

The view might be that of an observer from a distance, but DCC is all about driving the loco/train. Doesn't that suggest that modellers want to hear the sounds as if they were in the cab driving the loco or MU themselves?

 

If you want sounds as heard from an observer then surely all sound files made to date won't suit you as they tend to be recorded onboard, i.e. in the cab or coach, not standing at the lineside as the loco/train goes past.

[Chris116]

2 hours ago, GoingUnderground said:

I just love the look on the passengers' faces when the '38 Stock didn't stop in the platform, or the even more mystified looks when it did stop but the doors remained closed. Having been on several of the '38 Stock's outings it's even more fun when you're in the train and looking at the puzzled faces on the platforms.

 

I was on one of the trips between Moorgate and Edgware Road for the 150 celebration. Due to a points failure at Edgware Road we had to run to Gloucester Road to reverse which pleased those on board! The funny thing was that while in the platform at Gloucester Road some passengers ran down the stairs and tried to get on a train of teak coloured slam door stock having failed to notice it was not C or D stock!

[Jeff Smith]

Many passengers would be more interested in merely catching a train than identifying the stock.

[cctransuk]

3 hours ago, GoingUnderground said:

The view might be that of an observer from a distance, but DCC is all about driving the loco/train. Doesn't that suggest that modellers want to hear the sounds as if they were in the cab driving the loco or MU themselves?

 

If you want sounds as heard from an observer then surely all sound files made to date won't suit you as they tend to be recorded onboard, i.e. in the cab or coach, not standing at the lineside as the loco/train goes past.

 

I have no interest whatsoever in DCC or sound, but I really wonder why persons whose main interest is driving trains even bother to indulge in actual modelling.

 

Surely the best way to fulfil their interest would be to use one of the many available virtual railway modelling apps?

 

Unless or until real-world models come with in-cab cameras, such that the operator can have a driver's eye view of the track, I can see little point in sound projects based on in-cab recordings.

 

CJI.

[GoingUnderground]

5 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

I have no interest whatsoever in DCC or sound, but I really wonder why persons whose main interest is driving trains even bother to indulge in actual modelling.

 

Surely the best way to fulfil their interest would be to use one of the many available virtual railway modelling apps?

 

Unless or until real-world models come with in-cab cameras, such that the operator can have a driver's eye view of the track, I can see little point in sound projects based on in-cab recordings.

 

CJI.

We're getting rather away from Bachmann EFE '38 Stock but, again you're missing the point. There are two sounds to a train, the noise created by the engine(s) or motor(s) and their related systems, and the noise of the coaches or wagons. I don't think anypone wants to hear the sound of coaches or wagons rolling past which is why no sound files include them as you can't hear really hear them at the same time as you can the sound of the loco. In the case of MU stock you can hear both as either the electric motors or the diesel engines are distributed along the length of the train, or the formation is so short that you can still hear the motive power unit as the unpowered carriages roll past.

 

I think that the Roco Z21 does support the display of a view from an onboard camera with a control desk superimposed below the camera view. Here's a link with more information. https://www.z21.eu/en/products/camera-locomotives 

 

I've tried trainsim apps, fun, but not the same as operating your own layout and watching your own stock on the move whether scratchbuilt, kit bashed or RTR. And who wouldn't want to see their layout from the cab. If you bother to look you'll find a lot of layout cabview videos on YouTube.

[GoingUnderground]

On 02/06/2022 at 23:28, charliepetty said:

This might be of interest to DCC users: 

 

 

Love the coupler, so much better than that glaringly awful hole. Now why couldn't Bachmann, who are supposed to be so good at the detail on models, have provided that as standard, especially as the static Gilbow EFE model had one fitted ? Hardly expensive and it improves the look enormously. The number of folks who will be running 7 or even 8 car sets and need to remove the coupler would be few and far between I would have thought simply because of layout space constraints.

 

By the way, the real thing is on the right, taken during one of the Museum 4 car set's outings some years ago at High Barnet. The other two , left and centre, are the Gilbow EFE models. No nasty hole where the coupling should be on them. and it is very easy to remove the coupling if you did want a 7 or 8 car formation and use the provided coupling bar designed to look like the cable tray coupling bar on the real thing.

Edited June 9, 2022 by GoingUnderground

[Roy Langridge]

8 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

I have no interest whatsoever in DCC or sound, but I really wonder why persons whose main interest is driving trains even bother to indulge in actual modelling.

 

Surely the best way to fulfil their interest would be to use one of the many available virtual railway modelling apps?

 

Unless or until real-world models come with in-cab cameras, such that the operator can have a driver's eye view of the track, I can see little point in sound projects based on in-cab recordings.

 

CJI.

You seem to spend a lot of time worrying about what other people enjoy. This hobby is a broad church with people enjoying different aspects. 
 

Why not just accept some people enjoy aspects that that you don’t and leave it at that?

 

Roy

Edited June 10, 2022 by Roy Langridge

[Michael Hodgson]

17 hours ago, GoingUnderground said:

The view might be that of an observer from a distance, but DCC is all about driving the loco/train. Doesn't that suggest that modellers want to hear the sounds as if they were in the cab driving the loco or MU themselves?

 

DCC is not all about driving the train from inside the cab.  It's about controlling trains and optionally, also other functioning details such as signals and points - but necessarily remotely from it as we're too big to get into the cab of a model.  Rather than take up modelling, I'd volunteer on a heritage line if I wanted to drive a train when I grow up,

 

DCC is a technology which enables us to automate a layout with software, so that for example we can set a route and clear the signals, and the trains will behave accordingly - without needing operators to drive each one.  It also enables us to control tiny sound units, which many modellers want to move about together with their trains.

 

I realise I am probably in a minority among modellers, but I regard sound as a bit of a specialised gimmick, like steam effects or working sliding doors.  We can't model everything that we sense on a train - such as the smell of a coal-fired boiler or diesel fumes, although it has to be said that recent advances in sound are far more realistic than anything I've seen in the form of smoke units.  I see the current fashion for sound chips in locos as one element of a modelling technique which is still developing, but still expensive and something I choose not to spend money on.

 

If I were going to take the sound route myself, I would want noises from far more than just the motive power units.  I would want the clickety clack of trains as they pass the viewer, yodelarms on a modern level crossing, the cattle lowing in the fields etc.  All practicable now, but DCC is just a means of controlling the sounds, not the sound technology itself.  It would take sound units in fixed places on the layout as well as on board the train.

 

[cctransuk]

10 hours ago, GoingUnderground said:

We're getting rather away from Bachmann EFE '38 Stock but, again you're missing the point. There are two sounds to a train, the noise created by the engine(s) or motor(s) and their related systems, and the noise of the coaches or wagons. I don't think anypone wants to hear the sound of coaches or wagons rolling past which is why no sound files include them as you can't hear really hear them at the same time as you can the sound of the loco. In the case of MU stock you can hear both as either the electric motors or the diesel engines are distributed along the length of the train, or the formation is so short that you can still hear the motive power unit as the unpowered carriages roll past.

 

I think that the Roco Z21 does support the display of a view from an onboard camera with a control desk superimposed below the camera view. Here's a link with more information. https://www.z21.eu/en/products/camera-locomotives 

 

I've tried trainsim apps, fun, but not the same as operating your own layout and watching your own stock on the move whether scratchbuilt, kit bashed or RTR. And who wouldn't want to see their layout from the cab. If you bother to look you'll find a lot of layout cabview videos on YouTube.

 

As I have said, my experience of DCC sound is zero, but I had genuinely assumed that its purpose was to add to the ambience of the layout as a whole, by reproducing the sounds that would have been evident to an observer, outside the train, from the operators viewpoint.

 

Clearly I was greatly mistaken, but I am glad that I now have yet another reason for staying true to traditional DC operation. It does annoy me, though, that I have to pay for unwanted electronic gadgetry, and the inconvenient mare's nest of additional wiring, just so that a certain section of the market can pretend that they are in the cab.

 

.... and no - I have no desire whatsoever for a driver's eye view of the layout; I have yet to see one that is remotely convincing!

 

Be that as it may - each to their own - I do feel that there is scope for the development of a sound system which portrays the sounds that would be heard by an outside observer as trains approach, pass and recede, or shunt.

 

CJI.

[Darius43]

Background sound effects

 

The technology for this has been around for over 100 years…

 

Cheers

 

Darius

[GoingUnderground]

5 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

 

DCC is not all about driving the train from inside the cab.  It's about controlling trains and optionally, also other functioning details such as signals and points - but necessarily remotely from it as we're too big to get into the cab of a model.  Rather than take up modelling, I'd volunteer on a heritage line if I wanted to drive a train when I grow up,

 

DCC is a technology which enables us to automate a layout with software, so that for example we can set a route and clear the signals, and the trains will behave accordingly - without needing operators to drive each one.  It also enables us to control tiny sound units, which many modellers want to move about together with their trains.

 

I realise I am probably in a minority among modellers, but I regard sound as a bit of a specialised gimmick, like steam effects or working sliding doors.  We can't model everything that we sense on a train - such as the smell of a coal-fired boiler or diesel fumes, although it has to be said that recent advances in sound are far more realistic than anything I've seen in the form of smoke units.  I see the current fashion for sound chips in locos as one element of a modelling technique which is still developing, but still expensive and something I choose not to spend money on.

 

If I were going to take the sound route myself, I would want noises from far more than just the motive power units.  I would want the clickety clack of trains as they pass the viewer, yodelarms on a modern level crossing, the cattle lowing in the fields etc.  All practicable now, but DCC is just a means of controlling the sounds, not the sound technology itself.  It would take sound units in fixed places on the layout as well as on board the train.

 

I didn't actually say that DCC was all about driving "in the cab". The standard publicity for DCC is "you drive the loco not the layout", and that is to what I was referring.

 

DCC does make automated layout control easier but it was possible before DCC. Even Triang managed it back in the dim and distant 1960s on a very, very, very small scale with their automatic control R406 product using pressure switches, isolating tracks and a relay.  As the vast majority of sound projects to date have been for locos, be they steam, diesel or electric, there isn't really a lot of difference between the sound experienced in the cab or outside when standing next to the loco.

 

None of the sound projects that I know of take into account the effects of moving further away from the loco or the train it's pulling. Not surprising since as soon as you do that you bring in too many variables, notably the effect of the distance of the real-life observer from the real-life locoand the reduction in overall volue and the attenuation of higher frequency sounds with increasing distance. There's also the doppler effect on the frequency of the sound, higher when approaching you, low when going away from you. That is a further difficulty for sound projects if they were meant for lineside hearing. How would the decoder know where you were to know when to apply the doppler effect. There will be a real one but in practice the speed of a model is so low in real phonic terms that the actual doppler effect is far smaller than on the real thing, especially where express/fast running is concerned.

 

On that basis you'd expect the sound projects to be different according to scale as the observer's notional distance from the loco and layout varies with the scale, the smaller the scale the further the real-life observer would need to be from the real-life loco or train to see it at that size. You'd also expect the sound to change from that produced by the loco to that of the wheels on rails of rolling stock as the loco goes away from you and the stock it's pulling rolls past. But again how could the sound project knwo where the observer was at any one point, and how could it cope with multiple observers in different places.

 

As far as I know, no sound project does any of this, and I'm not surprised, it is an impossible task. So we're left with what we've got, the sounds from within the loco or when standing just next to it or flying alongside when it's in motion. Thus the sounds are only valid if you assume that you're in the cab or outside immediately next to the loco. I don't have a problem with this.

 

As he's a producer/supplier of sound projects, I'd love to hear Charlie Petty's take on all this. 

 

I have some sound decoders but they're all installed in locos, a mix of steam, diesel, and electric as it happens.

 

I've tended to steer clear of sound decoders for EMU stock for 2 reasons:

1. I model the London Underground and until recently there seem to have been very few sound project available for them.

2. The need, at least as I see it, for any underground train sound project to be able to offer both above ground and in tunnel sounds and to be able to switch between them on the go using a function key, or trigger the change automatically using occupancy detection to monitor  tunnel entry and exit. As far as I know none of the '38 Stock sound projects have both Above Ground and In Tunnel, never mind being able to switch between them. And if you have 2 sound decoders one in each DM, they'd need to change at different times as ithe entire train doesn't all instantly enter or leave a tunnel.

 

So whilst I like the idea of adding sound to my '38 Stock what's on offer so far doesn't really meet my needs as I currently see them.. 

 

And for the record I use DC for my vintage Tri-ang locos with vintage Tri-ang and H&M controllers ( just wait for the anti-vintage controller brigade to hear that, they'll be down on me like a ton of bricks), and DCC for my London Underground layout with an ESU ECoS. So I hope that I'm rather more open minded than some contributors seem to be on the pros and cons of DC vs DCC and Sound vs Non-Sound.

[Roy Langridge]

5 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

As I have said, my experience of DCC sound is zero, but I had genuinely assumed that its purpose was to add to the ambience of the layout as a whole, by reproducing the sounds that would have been evident to an observer, outside the train, from the operators viewpoint.

 

Clearly I was greatly mistaken, but I am glad that I now have yet another reason for staying true to traditional DC operation. It does annoy me, though, that I have to pay for unwanted electronic gadgetry, and the inconvenient mare's nest of additional wiring, just so that a certain section of the market can pretend that they are in the cab.

 

.... and no - I have no desire whatsoever for a driver's eye view of the layout; I have yet to see one that is remotely convincing!

 

Be that as it may - each to their own - I do feel that there is scope for the development of a sound system which portrays the sounds that would be heard by an outside observer as trains approach, pass and recede, or shunt.

 

CJI.

 

Its horses for courses - I have to strip out a load of electronics for those that are stuck in DC land - I don't need a DCC blanking plug, suppression capacitors and diodes etc.

 

The reality is you are not paying any additional parts, other than a DCC socket - if anything the DCC wiring is simpler. Ok, occasionally there is a speaker - but that is rare. The price difference between a loco equipped for DC, DCC or both is peanuts - probably a few pence.

 

As for sound fading in and out, you can do that with DCC if you wish and configure it that way - push of a button to let the sound ramp up, and turn that button back off when you want it to fade out. And that sound will travel to you /away from you as the loco and stock do.

 

Roy

Edited June 10, 2022 by Roy Langridge

[cctransuk]

4 hours ago, Roy Langridge said:

 

Its horses for courses - I have to strip out a load of electronics for those that are stuck in DC land - I don't need a DCC blanking plug, suppression capacitors and diodes etc.

 

The reality is you are not paying any additional parts, other than a DCC socket - if anything the DCC wiring is simpler. Ok, occasionally there is a speaker - but that is rare. The price difference between a loco equipped for DC, DCC or both is peanuts - probably a few pence.

 

As for sound fading in and out, you can do that with DCC if you wish and configure it that way - push of a button to let the sound ramp up, and turn that button back off when you want it to fade out. And that sound will travel to you /away from you as the loco and stock do.

 

Roy

 

Electronics / wiring for DC - two wires from pick-ups to motor terminals; for additional sophistication, two wires from loco to tender (if such exists). Please explain how DCC wiring is simpler than this.

 

DC blanking plugs - wouldn't exist if it wasn't for DCC provision.

 

Suppression capacitors and diodes - why? None of my kit-built locos have them and I don't have neighbours hammering on my door!

 

Not paying for extra components? What of stay-alives, DCC sockets, lighting, speakers  - all at the expense of space previously available for valuable ballast.

 

Sound fading in and out - yes, but what sound; in-cab sound? Not really the same as what we hear(d) from the station platform or lineside.

 

CJI.

Edited June 10, 2022 by cctransuk