orcadian Posted January 16, 2010 Share Posted January 16, 2010 Although I'm still developing an N gauge layout, when funds allow, I'm also starting to collect stock for a future 00 Kent Coast very late 1950's project. I've got the chance to buy an all-green Bachmann Class 24 with sound at a fair price, with the factory-fitted sound chip, or for an extra tenner, the same with the Howes chip. As I can't get an opportunity to try before I buy, I'd like to hear your opinions, please! Basic Bachy or worth the extra for Howes? Perhaps the extra would be better spent on a speaker upgrade? Users opinions most welcome! Richard (sorry - should have previewed and found spelling errors before posting!) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevpeo Posted January 16, 2010 Share Posted January 16, 2010 I know its a blatant plug! But theres a review page on our club layouts website where you can compare all the soundchips we've tried, including those two. The address is ????? http://coppellfmrc.webs.com/ DCC stuff page, hope it helps. Kev. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Oldddudders Posted January 16, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 16, 2010 I know its a blatant plug! But theres a review page on our club layouts website where you can compare all the soundchips we've tried, including those two. The address is ????? http://coppellfmrc.webs.com/ DCC stuff page, hope it helps. Kev. Surely no-one objects to club websites being plugged? I found your sound reviews useful, and I bet others would, too. Thanks for posting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Davies Posted January 16, 2010 Share Posted January 16, 2010 Stick with the factory 24 chip it sounds (!) just right - or as right as a 24 ever sounded.... (bag, spanners, washing machine....) It could do with a better speaker, or make sure the factory speaker enclosure is properly sealed. -Rob edit: just checked out the Furness clubs sound section, I've got to say I agree with all their findings - a very useful resource! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigelcliffe Posted January 16, 2010 Share Posted January 16, 2010 I know its a blatant plug! But theres a review page on our club layouts website where you can compare all the soundchips we've tried, including those two. The address is ????? http://coppellfmrc.webs.com/ DCC stuff page, hope it helps. Kev. Thank you for the link, very useful reviews. Just one pedantic point about the page, it says "the tendency for the different programmers to assign different sounds to the function buttons. This is improving, but the only way to standardise them fully is to buy an ESU Lokprogrammer." I think this is incorrect. As far as I am aware, with an existing sound project loaded into a LokSound, the changes available to the end user are all CV changes. The LokProgrammer and its software might make these easier for an end user, but it is just CV changes. Thus, any command station capable of reading back and writing CV's can make the changes. If someone can point me at a specific change which cannot be done with CV changes, then I will retract the comment. (This is completely different to changing the audio project which requires a full set of audio files and the structure of the sound set; something which no commercial sound chip supplier is likely to pass onto an end-user). I have made extensive changes to the mapping of functions/behaviours/etc. in my locos and I don't own a LokProgrammer (but I do have JMRI/DecoderPro and a decent idea of how that tool works). - Nigel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
orcadian Posted January 16, 2010 Author Share Posted January 16, 2010 Many thanks, especially Kevpeo and Rob. Wow, what a useful review page! This sort of fast open sharing of info is exactly why I chose to join RM Web. Richard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevpeo Posted January 17, 2010 Share Posted January 17, 2010 Thanks nigel, I'll get that wording altered! I've never tried using the cv's to move the functions but the lokprogramer does make it a doddle. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRman Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 Elsewhere in the DCC Sound forums you'll find a thread I started for DCC sound videos to be posted. You will find two of mine which showcase the class 24 sounds as they came from Bachmann and after reblowing with Howes sounds. My own opinion: the Bachmann sounds are very good but let down by a lack of controllability / synchronisation. The Howes sounds are equally as good but much more "drivable". Both benefit from fitting a bass-enhanced speaker (which can sit in the same space as the Bachmann/ESU original). The Bachmann one has notching up/down functions but these are almost useless due to the lack of responsiveness. I hope this helps without muddying the waters for you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Oldddudders Posted January 18, 2010 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 18, 2010 Thank you for the link, very useful reviews. Just one pedantic point about the page, it says "the tendency for the different programmers to assign different sounds to the function buttons. This is improving, but the only way to standardise them fully is to buy an ESU Lokprogrammer." I think this is incorrect. As far as I am aware, with an existing sound project loaded into a LokSound, the changes available to the end user are all CV changes. The LokProgrammer and its software might make these easier for an end user, but it is just CV changes. Thus, any command station capable of reading back and writing CV's can make the changes. If someone can point me at a specific change which cannot be done with CV changes, then I will retract the comment. (This is completely different to changing the audio project which requires a full set of audio files and the structure of the sound set; something which no commercial sound chip supplier is likely to pass onto an end-user). I have made extensive changes to the mapping of functions/behaviours/etc. in my locos and I don't own a LokProgrammer (but I do have JMRI/DecoderPro and a decent idea of how that tool works). - Nigel Not sure I'm really meeting your challenge, Nigel, and it certainly isn't of much interest to the average UK modeller, but there is one aspect of Loksound steam decoders that I have found annoyingly unchangeable - the ring rate on the bell. I have one - it will be the only one for the foreseeable future - Loksound steam decoder, and while it has lots of functions I can mess about with, the ring rate, i.e. beats per minute, isn't among them, not being listed in the extensive ESU manuals. Since ESU have set it to sound more like a level crossing bell than a loco bell, this is a bit annoying for a US prototype! Several diesel Loksounds have a much more acceptable ring rate that I don't feel the need to change. Odd. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 Elsewhere in the DCC Sound forums you'll find a thread I started for DCC sound videos to be posted. You will find two of mine which showcase the class 24 sounds as they came from Bachmann and after reblowing with Howes sounds. My own opinion: the Bachmann sounds are very good but let down by a lack of controllability / synchronisation. The Howes sounds are equally as good but much more "drivable". Both benefit from fitting a bass-enhanced speaker (which can sit in the same space as the Bachmann/ESU original). The Bachmann one has notching up/down functions but these are almost useless due to the lack of responsiveness. I hope this helps without muddying the waters for you. Hi, I absolutley agree with SRman, I have had all my Bachman locos re-blown with Howes sound. The way the Howes sound works with the throttle is almost perfect, the baccie sounds on some models sound beter quality but all suffer from too much delay, moving enginges around with the Howes sound just makes me smile! I have just bought from "Trainsontime" an all-green (no yellow pannels) 24 fitted with Howes sound, the Howes 24 idle sound is lovely. Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cassey jones Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Hi, I absolutley agree with SRman, I have had all my Bachman locos re-blown with Howes sound. The way the Howes sound works with the throttle is almost perfect, the baccie sounds on some models sound beter quality but all suffer from too much delay, moving enginges around with the Howes sound just makes me smile! Jim Thats because to get the best out of the Bachmann DS models you need to alter the CV values to suit your layout, I have found Howes thrash alot, but have very limited functions on there chips. I maybe wrong but they seem to be set up to run on short end to end type of layouts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevpeo Posted January 26, 2010 Share Posted January 26, 2010 H'mm, Jim and Casey Jones are both right! And I'm going to generalize a lot here! The reason that Howes chips are so controllable appears to be that they have very short sound clips repeating in the 'running' slots. This allows almost 'instant' response to commands to open up and run down. Great fun! The downside of course being the very obvious repeat of sounds whilst thrashing (remember I'm generalizing!) The SWD/Bachman sound clips appear to be longer and thus more varied? But less responsive. Different programing philosophy's produce very different results! Personally I like both, It adds variety to your fleet. It must be said though that when doing my own projects I try for the middle ground! Kev Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
muddys-blues Posted February 14, 2010 Share Posted February 14, 2010 Daft Question, but is the Bachmann 24 sound the same as the Bachmann 25 sound ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Davies Posted February 14, 2010 Share Posted February 14, 2010 The only similarity is that they are both of Sulzer engines... Apart from that... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
muddys-blues Posted February 14, 2010 Share Posted February 14, 2010 The only similarity is that they are both of Sulzer engines... Apart from that... Thanks for the reply. I knew they were both Sulzers, but having not heard the CL25 decoder, you know how some people bang on about "ooohhh there is a difference you" when there isn't Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Davies Posted February 14, 2010 Share Posted February 14, 2010 Very different Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.