Lecorbusier

Tim,

 

Though I'm an atheist, I think his chapel at Ronchamp (is that the correct spelling?) is one of the greatest  ecclesiastical buildings in history, even though it is quite small. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

I couldn't agree more (I was there again this summer) .... interesting that he too was not religious.

 

 

Little Bytham (besides having real railway sounds for company) just 'rejoices' in the sounds the model trains make themselves. I won't tolerate the whirring from a poorly built mechanism, so there's nothing of that kind. The trains make a mechanical noise as they pass by, though the click of the wheels as they pass over rail joints is not that loud (in order to give the clickety-clack of bogies going over 60' rail sections, the gaps have to be unprototypically huge).

 

In fact, though real trains are anything but quiet, I strive to make my locos as quiet as possible. I like the soft sound of a loco just running past, happily in charge of its (often heavy) train.

 

Would those who've visited Little Bytham like to comment, please?  

I have not had the privilege to visit little Bytham ... though I am a huge fan and loved the article in the MRJ. However I do enjoy every now and then playing the various youtube offerings . I was running through these again last night and I would like to make a comment on the strength of these.

Yes the modelling is fantastic, and yes the length and weight of the trains gives a reassuring feeling visually with a real sense of mass and inertia. However, ( on the videos at least) the sound of the trains running at speed over what has to be said is superb track work is quite noticeable and for me adds considerably to the overall impression. I hasten to add the sound is not that of the motor, but rather the sound of many wheels at speed over rails. The sounds certainly aid my imagination as a viewer. I would simply make the point that on a smaller layout where such speeds and length of train are not present the sound of the motor and relative silence of everything else can be a distraction rather than an aid - a negative rather than a positive.

 

I like your 'handle', by the way - 'the builder', France's greatest architect. 

As with locos ... endless are the debates - perhaps to be strictly accurate one should say France's greatest "20th century" Architect? ... come what may an interesting chap - love him or hate him!

The deafening sound of a Semi's four (yes four!) safety valves lifting under the overall roof at Chester. 

 

The roar from GREAT NORTHERN's double chimney as she wore away the rails slipping at Retford trying to get her heavy train back on to the main line from Platform 1.

 

The knowledge that a Deltic was approaching on a Down express minutes before it came into view, as I stood on the overbridge south of Stoke Summit, gazing into the dead-straight distance towards Corby Glen. 

 

The cacophony of sounds as a rebuilt Bulleid Pacific leaned to the curves through Basingstoke, at high speed, non-stop. 

 

The howl of a Western tackling Dainton Bank. 

 

There are many others. 

 

 

I will be forever jealous! My earliest memory of Railway's (apart from the Talyllyn) was of walking the Monsaldale trackbed soon after the track was lifted

The idea, not yet full researched, is to put them at 60' or 45' intervals, but I need to know more about how track was joined in station areas and around pointwork before I actually cut.  Find out 3 times, measure twice, cut once...

I might be wrong but templot appears to position rail cuts based upon both rail length and the complexity of configuration?

You're right, it doesn't sound right. I filmed Llandudno Junction shed when I knew a strike would end at noon and all the locos and DMU's that had been held on every conceivable bit of siding were started up and left running. The sound even from all this lot did not drown out other activities like station announcer (and I wasn't even on the station). Then one by one the Class 31's, 37's and heritage DMU's left to pick up their duties. The modern 156's and 158's would have been the quietest except that their flanges let everyone know they were about!

 

One of those non-repeatable sights...

Scale viewing distance needs to be taken into consideration perhaps. When viewing a model from say 3 ft we are actually viewing from 76.2 yards away if my calcs are correct .... so presumably the sound volume should be as heard from 76 yards away?

We did try, just once, to run Roy Jackson's Retford in time to the recordings that Peter Handford made there. We had the correct rakes of carriages and could tell when an articulated pair was going over the crossing as the rhythm changed.

 

It was beyond the skill of any of us to get the twin set on the crossing in time to the record but it was great fun trying.

 

Apart from anything else, a good sound system and plenty of volume and it sounded as if a real life sized train was coming through the shed.

If nothing else, that must have given real atmosphere to the session.

I have a sneaking feeling that someone with an electronics bent will develop something which will sync things and a whole new level will be attained. Imagine for example a whole series of Bose style speakers dotted invisibly around Retford activated by a gamut of differing chips (based on proximity) over-layering the sound. On top of the locos, you could have different chips in each rake of rolling stock with all the right attendant clanks etc all gauged to the speed of the running. It would take someone/some people obsessed with this kind of technology to achieve, and would probably only be applicable at the top end ... but I think it will happen (though whether it will ever be commercially viable is another question). 

For myself the mark I imagination will suffice for the foreseeable future.

I think that the crux of the matter may be that .... where steam is concerned there are fewer and fewer people who can recall (and therefore imagine) the real thing as it used to work ... including the sounds. Heritage lines give some idea - but of course they don't have proper goods trains, proper shunting, and all the wrong locomotives are pulling the wrong trains etc, etc.

It could be argued that in some ways it is through good, prototypically operated models that we get some kind of window through into aspects of a lost world  and as such sound (even if just as a background) might have a place. Certainly when I was last at Pendon I learnt a lot from the operators when viewing the dartmoor scene ... but for me it would have been enhanced by the addition of sounds! In the end it might  only be suitable for  top end layouts that can tap into specific expertise, but I am still watching developments with interest.

The thought of a realistic backing track to the train movements on Little Bytham would be a mouth watering prospect

There was a small industrial layout, possibly French or Dutch, at York show a few years ago. The layout had speakers arranged under the layout, activated by reed switches buried in the track. Each loco activated the reed switches by way of a small magnet. So the sound moved along with the loco.

 

I think that the operator pressed a button to select a sound appropriate to the loco.

 

The loco sounds were superb. The silent narrow gauge wagons being pulled less so and the lack of clicks over rail joints stuck out too.

 

I am too young to remember much of real steam but there are plenty of recorded sound archives, such as videos and things like the Peter Handford recordings to tell me what the real thing sounded like. Even on a preserved line, the sounds are there apart from goods and loose wagon shunting noises.

 

Next time the advocates of sound are near a real railway, they should listen and estimate how much of what they hear is rail on wheel noise, how much comes from the carriages or wagons and how much is actual loco noise. Those that run past my house, I reckon the loco noise is less than 25%. Yet on a DCC sound fitted layouts, the loco noise is usually 100% of what you hear. Silent carriages and wagons, no recreation of tons of metal hitting real joints, no creaks or groans as the track dips.

 

So much is missing that I would rather have none provided and imagine it all.

 

But that is just my view and I am happy to accept that some folk think it adds to the realism.

Not trying to persuade ... not convinced myself .... just watching developments with interest.

I read somewhere that there is some experimentation underway where the chip in the loco talks to speakers set in the surrounding layout and in some way the proximity is read. This means that the speakers can be of a much higher spec and they are activated as the train passes. I understand that you can play multiple sounds through the same speaker (a little like having music playing on your computer at the same time as watching i-player etc etc). So the idea is that you can overlay the sound of the rolling stock on that of the loco and perhaps the background noises of the countryside. I have no idea how advanced any of this is or how convincing ... but for those who can be bothered it does sound interesting.

Of course I may have got all this completely wrong ... the dangers of remembering having read something somewhere! ....Chinese whispers and all that

 

We have to imagine plenty on our models. The movement of people and animals. Carriage doors opening and passengers pouring out onto the platform in the rush hour. The crew swinging the water crane out over the tender while they chat about the weather. So I imagine the sounds too.

 

 

The danger comes of course when someone (not a model rail enthusiast) gently points out that you are not just imagining but actually quietly making a rough impression of the said sounds

Hi everyone,

Never posted here before but have enjoyed reading the discussions.

Probably a bit left centre and I know only really possible because I am starting out from scratch with no layout and no locos .... but

I am currently dipping the toe in the protocab radio control set up. Needs a bit of ingenuity to house the battery and logic board, but in this set up you really do drive the engine. The track is prototypically dead (of course we are talking steam/deisel here), and shorting or cleaning becomes irrelevant.

All very interesting ... just have to keep fingers crossed that the system lasts and doesn't go under in the next decade or so!

Tim

Just from Curiosity,

I was following the build of the Keyser Dean Goods 'outside frames' with some interest earlier on in the thread. I wondered what might have been the final result of this build? I currently have an old 'K's iteration of the kit built in the late 70s and I am currently considering disassembling and stripping it down to re-build (hence the interest).

Tim

might be of interest .... I just received a reply to an e-mail from Dave at Craftsman

On 6 Feb 2016, at 18:43, David Jones <davidjones5676@outlook.com> wrote: