Date   

beating up a the dead(?) horse: CV21/CV22 (and EasyDCC)

Jens Wulf <jens.wulf@...>
 

sorry, to get back to this (all quiet here on this), so I make
it short: I tried advanced consisting with my EasyDCC via
- method a) the station organizing the adv. consist and
- method b) the direct CV19 programming on the main
with following decoders:
- a pair of NCE DA-SR (version 3 EFX series decoder)
- a pair of DigiTrax DH163IP (FX3 series decoder)
- and a single TCS TH150DP decoder
(all these have CV21 and CV22)
and the result is: identical behavior and the same as with
the QSI/BLI GG1 decoders:
method a) only the lead loco reacts to function changes, ignoring
all CV21/CV22 settings
method b) all loco's in the (advanced) consist react to function
changes according to CV21/CV22 settings

and Manfred in the Atlas forum pointed out that such problems
have NOT been reported by DigiTrax station (with current software)
users, UNLESS they had an old Chief which can only control F0f/r,
F1-F4 and "a little bit" F5-F8 as these are being sent as F9-F12
(okay, I do not have a DigiTrax system, so may have described this
wrong. But were are the DigiTrax users complaining? They don't, or?)

cheers/jw
PS: I have not tested the CV19 "coma" issue. I have just powered
down all above mentioned decoders/locos and going to wake them
up (if they do) in about 24 hours.


Re: DCC Power PAX

Jon Miller <atsf@...>
 

>Why is it not accepting CV1.  I can't get past address 3 dcc.<
    I'm guessing it must have something to do with your system.  I have no trouble with the two digit addresses (CV1).  Either the Chief or the Zephyr works fine with the PowerPax.
 
    This is something I would expect if it thought it was programming in Ops Mode.  Is the GG1 the only engine that has this problem?
 
Jon Miller
AT&SF
For me time has stopped in 1941
Digitrax, Chief/Zephyr systems, JMRI user
NMRA Life member #2623
Member SFRH&MS


DCC Power PAX

Dick or Jean Pike <jpike@...>
 

I received my Power Pax from Tony's today, and after carefully hooking it up.  I put my GG1 (who did not want to program with my Uhlenbrock Intellibox)  Some of you may have heard of it and some not.  Anyway all the CV's registered fine except CV1 (address change)  I don't know what I am doing wrong since I put it on the Programming Track which is isolated from the rest of the layout and went to Programming mode to CV1 and it said "Error"  I then went to CV 3 and put in 25, it was happy with that, then CV4 and again it was happy.  Why is it not accepting CV1.  I can't get past address 3 dcc.  This of course is what the locomotive came to me with.  The Uhelenbrock will register up in the thousands normally.  What the heck am I doing wrong?  Help.....!!!  Dick Pike


Re: beating up a the dead(?) horse: CV21/CV22 (and EasyDCC)

ARRJERRY@...
 

In a message dated 2/26/2004 7:18:02 PM Central Standard Time, jens.wulf@... writes:

sorry, to get back to this (all quiet here on this), so I make
it short: I tried advanced consisting with my EasyDCC via
- method a) the station organizing the adv. consist and
- method b) the direct CV19 programming on the main
with following decoders:
- a pair of NCE DA-SR (version 3 EFX series decoder)
- a pair of DigiTrax DH163IP (FX3 series decoder)
- and a single TCS TH150DP decoder
(all these have CV21 and CV22)
and the result is: identical behavior and the same as with
the QSI/BLI GG1 decoders:
method a) only the lead loco reacts to function changes, ignoring
     all CV21/CV22 settings
method b) all loco's in the (advanced) consist react to function
     changes according to CV21/CV22 settings

and Manfred in the Atlas forum pointed out that such problems
have NOT been reported by DigiTrax station (with current software)
users, UNLESS they had an old Chief which can only control F0f/r,
F1-F4 and "a little bit" F5-F8 as these are being sent as F9-F12
(okay, I do not have a DigiTrax system, so may have described this
wrong. But were are the DigiTrax users complaining? They don't, or?)

cheers/jw
PS: I have not tested the CV19 "coma" issue. I have just powered
down all above mentioned decoders/locos and going to wake them
up (if they do) in about 24 hours.


Lets not confuse the QSI problem with other Advanced Consisting. Advanced consisting is commonly used thru out the hobby. I myself have 32 advanced consists, my club has many more and I operated at a friends house last week using Northcoast and advanced consisting. Using the same procedure with QSI decoders does not allow the trailing loco to stay in the consist. I have not tried more than 2 QSI's to see if 2 would work when there was a 3rd. Neither have I tried to advance consist to a non QSI loco. I think it is about time for QSI (BLI) to take 2 of their locomotives with their manual and try it. We need to know if we are doing something wrong, Our systems won't handle QSI, or their is a problem with the decoders. Advanced consisting is basic to DCC and we need to solve this problem.
Jerry S.


New to this group

psloma <p.sloma@...>
 

    Hi.  I am new to this group.  Just heard about it last night at my model train club.  I heard a rumor that QSI might develop a surround sound system for model trains.  Is this true?  Can anyone enlighten me?
 
Thanks
 
Patrick Sloma
Corvallis, Or


Re: New poll for QSIndustries

Mike Davison <mike@...>
 

Hmmm..... how to relate this to QSI?.... Well, if QSI considers a
programmable decoder the lessons learned from Loksound would be helpful.
Yeah, it's a stretch so I'll drop this topic after this note.

Good to hear that the new generation of Loksound decoders will support
more channels. The inability to have engine sound, horn and bell at the
same time was a killer.

It was my understanding that the latest Loksound programmer only worked
with sounds provided/packaged by the manufacturer, that the user could
no longer use his own sounds. Perhaps I misunderstood.

As for the sounds blending nicely, there have been several recent
comments to this group that the Loksound sound quality was lacking so it
appears my suspicion about Loksound sound quality is reasonable. It's
hard for me to understand how you can take a small number of fixed sound
samples and blend them together to, for example, accurately represent an
EMD locomotive. I just don't see how it is possible. There are hundreds
of interesting sound 'points' as an EMD locomotive moves from idle to
high speed. Three or four points blended over that spectrum.... well,
I'm skeptical.

Cost: Yes, $125US is not expensive. Sorry, I got the impression that the
programmer was closer to $500. Perhaps the price I was quoted was for a
decoder and a programmer. Good to hear I was wrong.

Running only on Windows only is just plain silly. DecoderPro has proved
that DCC software need not be tied to a specific OS or platform. It
seems like a step backwards not to build on this success. Perhaps the
Loksound folks will release their programmer specifications so others
can write software for it.

Mike

On Thu, 2004-02-26 at 12:03, Jack TREVES wrote:
You are wrong, ....


Re: New poll for QSIndustries

Jack TREVES <jtreves@...>
 

You are wrong, you can put your own sound in a Loksound decoder. They are not fixed point. The speed of the sound can be synchronised with the throttle position. The current decoders have two channels and you can have engine sound and whistle at the same time but not engine, whistle and bell. The Loksound III was displayed at the toy fair in Nurnberg. It will have 4 channels (so you will have at the same time engine, bell, whistle and dynamic brakes) and a 8 Mb memory to record sound.

The programer is not so expensive around 100 Euros or $125. It will allow you to program your other decoder even from another maker. But you are right the software run only under Windows (95% of the PC).

Jack TREVES
Morop DCC Evangelist
http://morop.org

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Davison" <mike@4trolls.com>
To: <QSIndustries@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 8:31 PM
Subject: RE: [QSIndustries] Re: New poll for QSIndustries


Yeah.... but..... The Loksound decoders have limited 'channels' (you
can't blow the horn, ring the bell, make dynamic brake sounds and make
engine sounds at the same time. Further, while I've not heard these
decoders, it seems unlikely that the full range of sounds can be
presented well from a few fixed points (A SoundTraxx or QSI decoder does
a good job representing the engine sound from idle to full throttle, but
the Loksound decoder allows you to specify a few sounds that somehow get
blended/stepped.) Further, the programming equipment from ESU does not,
evidently, allow arbitrary sound sources, only sound sources that they
provide. Further, the programmer requires Windows and isn't cheap.
and.....

Point being, the ESU implementation hardly seems like a revolution. The
idea is good, but improvements will have to be made before this approach
becomes more popular in the North American market than fixed-sound
decoders from QSI and SoundTraxx.

A programmable sound decoder for which a platform-independent (Java, for
example) programmer and open/free sound library existed would totally
rock. But the Loksound folks don't seem to be headed in this direction.
Too bad, I bet they'd sell more decoders if they did.

regards,
Mike


Re: New Poll & Generic Sound Decoders

Bryan
 

I always support my local hobby shops and for exactly those reasons that Bruce states - unfortunately there is only one really outstanding DCC shop that I am aware of in SoCal (DLA in Ventura) although there are a number of pretenders, but I have two others that I also deal with on a regular basis.  I sometimes purchase a hard-to-get items from Tony's or Litchfields, but I prefer to keep my local hobby shops (Palmdale Hobbies and All Aboard Model Trains) in business even if I have to pay a little more sometimes.  Those local shops by the way, usually give me 10%-15% off of the MSPR and sometimes even 20% and they back up everything they sell.    However, I personally would not want/need for a hobby shop to re-program/upgrade dual function sound decoders for me as I feel that is something that would be no more difficult that using Decoder Pro - for that matter, the Decoder Pro people might be exactly right to develop the after-market re-programming software!!
 
 

----- Original Message -----
Sent: 2/26/2004 11:02:41 AM
Subject: Re: [QSIndustries] New Poll & Generic Sound Decoders

I personally like very much supporting my local hobby shop and even buy from him many times when his price is higher than the discount places.......I never buy at flea mkts because you have no place to go when you have a problem.
 
My hobby shop gives discounts on Walters MSRP, as well as BLI, DIGITRAX, SOUNDTRAXX, and Others......Most of the time I call him on Mon or Tuesday and I have my product by the end of the week........Phone call or e-mail.......yes I do support him and I tell him and he knows I do.....if we don't support our hobby shops (the good ones)  we will end up with no hobby shops and we all will have to order out of a catalog or by internet............I personally like talking to my dealer and others who support him and like like to listen to those sounds in person, I like to touch and feel things too..........can't when you got no hobby shops............more and more of them are closing or becoming craft stores not train stores...............
 
The programmer I'm thinking about would have the capability to test and play back recorded sounds...........
 
Bruce C
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 12:35 PM
Subject: Re: [QSIndustries] New Poll & Generic Sound Decoders

Bruce/all:

I personally think limiting reprogramming to dealers is a HORRIBLE idea.  I don't want to have to take my locos to a dealer to get them programmed.  It's fine if the closest dealer is 10 minutes away, but where I live, it would be at least an hour and a half drive...  Yes, there are hobby shops closer (the closest one comes to me for DCC advice), but none of the closer ones are into DCC to the point of offering a service like this (especially if they have to pay for it).   If I don't like the new sound, I take another 3 hour (round) trip?!?!?  And pay them again?!?!?  Sounds like a great deal -- for the dealers.  I'm sure you're right about "good" and "bad" hobby stores -- but what is the availability of "good" stores for everyone?  My gut feeling is that if only a dealer can program, I'd just buy pre-programmed (Soundtraxx?) decoders.

That said, yes, better hobby shops could provide this service for their customers and anyone not willing/able to do it themselves.  It also brings up the issue of would hobby shop A re-program a decoder I purchased at hobby shop B (or train show C) or only ones they sold me? 

As for the concern over viruses, if you only allow downloads from a site and not uploads (users posting additional sounds), the only viruses can come from the people maintaining the site -- so this is a non-issue.

Jeff Warner



Re: New Poll & Generic Sound Decoders

Jon Miller <atsf@...>
 

>I personally think limiting reprogramming to dealers is a HORRIBLE idea<
    I _didn't_ say limiting and agree it would not be good.  But the reality is that most users of the sound units are not going to want to program them.  I think _both ways_ could be accommodated.
 
> but none of the closer ones are into DCC to the point of offering a service like this<
    This is true and probably one of the greatest reason for internet and mail sales!  But in keeping with my comment above a great many users are in this position and also don't want to program their decoder.  How this would be worked out needs to be studied.
 
    The most massive support for DCC today (IMHO) is the DCC mail order dealers.  I personally know of very few B&M shops (I know there are some that do a really good job) that support DCC the way they do.  TTX or Litchfield Station are _just two examples_ of this group of very knowledgeable folks that do DCC only.  This is the group of sales persons I would think that QSI would need to court to produce the sales they would need to do what we are talking about.
 
    Price line is important also.  QSI is used to dealing with the tin-plate group and it's my feeling that this group is willing to spend more than the regular N or HO scale hobbyist.  I'm only talking generalities here but I would place the tin-plate customers as upper disposable income group.  I would place the regular N or HO scale hobbyist from the lower disposable income group all the way up.  This needs to be considered when setting pricing.
 
Jon Miller
AT&SF
For me time has stopped in 1941
Digitrax, Chief/Zephyr systems, JMRI user
NMRA Life member #2623
Member SFRH&MS
 
 


Re: New poll for QSIndustries

Mike Davison <mike@...>
 

On Thu, 2004-02-26 at 08:44, Jens Wulf (WRF) wrote:
I voted. This is a awesome concept and would revolutionize the sound
industry!Imagine the concept.
already deployed by ESU (Loksound). Maybe a revolution in the US?
Yeah.... but..... The Loksound decoders have limited 'channels' (you
can't blow the horn, ring the bell, make dynamic brake sounds and make
engine sounds at the same time. Further, while I've not heard these
decoders, it seems unlikely that the full range of sounds can be
presented well from a few fixed points (A SoundTraxx or QSI decoder does
a good job representing the engine sound from idle to full throttle, but
the Loksound decoder allows you to specify a few sounds that somehow get
blended/stepped.) Further, the programming equipment from ESU does not,
evidently, allow arbitrary sound sources, only sound sources that they
provide. Further, the programmer requires Windows and isn't cheap.
and.....

Point being, the ESU implementation hardly seems like a revolution. The
idea is good, but improvements will have to be made before this approach
becomes more popular in the North American market than fixed-sound
decoders from QSI and SoundTraxx.

A programmable sound decoder for which a platform-independent (Java, for
example) programmer and open/free sound library existed would totally
rock. But the Loksound folks don't seem to be headed in this direction.
Too bad, I bet they'd sell more decoders if they did.

regards,
Mike


Re: New Poll & Generic Sound Decoders

Bruce Crosby
 

I personally like very much supporting my local hobby shop and even buy from him many times when his price is higher than the discount places.......I never buy at flea mkts because you have no place to go when you have a problem.
 
My hobby shop gives discounts on Walters MSRP, as well as BLI, DIGITRAX, SOUNDTRAXX, and Others......Most of the time I call him on Mon or Tuesday and I have my product by the end of the week........Phone call or e-mail.......yes I do support him and I tell him and he knows I do.....if we don't support our hobby shops (the good ones)  we will end up with no hobby shops and we all will have to order out of a catalog or by internet............I personally like talking to my dealer and others who support him and like like to listen to those sounds in person, I like to touch and feel things too..........can't when you got no hobby shops............more and more of them are closing or becoming craft stores not train stores...............
 
The programmer I'm thinking about would have the capability to test and play back recorded sounds...........
 
Bruce C

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 12:35 PM
Subject: Re: [QSIndustries] New Poll & Generic Sound Decoders

Bruce/all:

I personally think limiting reprogramming to dealers is a HORRIBLE idea.  I don't want to have to take my locos to a dealer to get them programmed.  It's fine if the closest dealer is 10 minutes away, but where I live, it would be at least an hour and a half drive...  Yes, there are hobby shops closer (the closest one comes to me for DCC advice), but none of the closer ones are into DCC to the point of offering a service like this (especially if they have to pay for it).   If I don't like the new sound, I take another 3 hour (round) trip?!?!?  And pay them again?!?!?  Sounds like a great deal -- for the dealers.  I'm sure you're right about "good" and "bad" hobby stores -- but what is the availability of "good" stores for everyone?  My gut feeling is that if only a dealer can program, I'd just buy pre-programmed (Soundtraxx?) decoders.

That said, yes, better hobby shops could provide this service for their customers and anyone not willing/able to do it themselves.  It also brings up the issue of would hobby shop A re-program a decoder I purchased at hobby shop B (or train show C) or only ones they sold me? 

As for the concern over viruses, if you only allow downloads from a site and not uploads (users posting additional sounds), the only viruses can come from the people maintaining the site -- so this is a non-issue.

Jeff Warner



Re: New poll for QSIndustries

h8fan
 

I like the concept. I would use a lot of programmable decoders,
assuming the price is competitive. A lot would also depend on the
library of sound files available.
This does not mean there is not a market for a generic decoder, I
like the Soundtraxx LC100 and LC90 for their versatility and size
and, in the case of the LC100, their price.
Jim Butler
--- In QSIndustries@yahoogroups.com, QSIndustries@yahoogroups.com
wrote:

Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the
QSIndustries group:

Which of the two variations of dual
function decoders described below,
would you be most likely to purchase?

o After market, end user re-programmable/upgradeable sound
decoders with access to a large, diverse on-line "sound library" from
which you could download specific sounds in order to easily customize
your decoder for each specific installation.
o Off-the-shelf decoders with pre-programmed sounds which I could
never change even if I wanted to.


To vote, please visit the following web page:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/QSIndustries/surveys?id=463636

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups
web site listed above.

Thanks!


Re: New Poll & Generic Sound Decoders

h8fan
 

I think this adds un-needed steps to the consumer and dealer. 1.
Having to pay a small fee to a dealer to download something I can do
myself seems a little silly. 2. Most hobby shops are not covered
with employees that can drop what they are doing to reprogram a
decoder when I walk in the door, and I really don't want to leave it
and wait till they have time to get to it. 3. A site set up
to "download only" sound files should not be at risk for virus
disruption.
QSI should be able to make a decent profit selling programmable
decoders and allowing consumers access to a database of sound
samples. Charging for files specifically designed for their decoders
would not be necessary. They could even encrypt the files so they
could only be used on their decoders, in the event another
manufacturer would try the same sales technic.
Jim Butler

--- In QSIndustries@yahoogroups.com, "Bruce Crosby" <abcrosby@h...>
wrote:
Jon Miller I think has a good idea.....

Why Doesn't QSI give/sell its dealers a programming machine that
the dealer can download sounds to, to program these generic decoders
with custom sounds, off of a secure site that only dealers have
access to (Keeps out virus). When you purchase the generic decoder
you get free, your custom sounds and if you decide to change some of
the sounds later you pay a small fee to your dealer to reprogram
sounds.......this helps the dealer become more familular with QSI
sound units because he has to program them......some Hobby stores
might not like that but the good stores will........we get better
informed Hobby dealers.......The manufacture would not have to spend
time loading sounds......time is money.......we get cheaper and what
we want for sounds.........I for one, prefer the dealer with
programmer, than me trying my best and getting frustrated trying to
get it right!!!........

Bruce Crosby


Re: New Poll & Generic Sound Decoders

Jeff Warner <jeff@...>
 

Bruce/all:

I personally think limiting reprogramming to dealers is a HORRIBLE idea.  I don't want to have to take my locos to a dealer to get them programmed.  It's fine if the closest dealer is 10 minutes away, but where I live, it would be at least an hour and a half drive...  Yes, there are hobby shops closer (the closest one comes to me for DCC advice), but none of the closer ones are into DCC to the point of offering a service like this (especially if they have to pay for it).   If I don't like the new sound, I take another 3 hour (round) trip?!?!?  And pay them again?!?!?  Sounds like a great deal -- for the dealers.  I'm sure you're right about "good" and "bad" hobby stores -- but what is the availability of "good" stores for everyone?  My gut feeling is that if only a dealer can program, I'd just buy pre-programmed (Soundtraxx?) decoders.

That said, yes, better hobby shops could provide this service for their customers and anyone not willing/able to do it themselves.  It also brings up the issue of would hobby shop A re-program a decoder I purchased at hobby shop B (or train show C) or only ones they sold me? 

As for the concern over viruses, if you only allow downloads from a site and not uploads (users posting additional sounds), the only viruses can come from the people maintaining the site -- so this is a non-issue.

Jeff Warner



New Poll & Generic Sound Decoders

Bruce Crosby
 

Jon Miller I think has a good idea.....
 
Why Doesn't QSI give/sell its dealers a programming machine that the dealer can download sounds to, to program these generic decoders with custom sounds, off of a secure site that only dealers have access to (Keeps out virus).   When you purchase the generic decoder you get free, your custom sounds and if you decide to change some of the sounds later you pay a small fee to your dealer to reprogram sounds.......this helps the dealer become more familular with QSI sound units because he has to program them......some Hobby stores might not like that but the good stores will........we get better informed Hobby  dealers.......The manufacture would not have to spend time loading sounds......time is money.......we get cheaper and what we want for sounds.........I for one, prefer the dealer with programmer, than me trying my best and getting frustrated trying to get it right!!!........
 
Bruce Crosby


Re: The QSIndustries group is a big success

Jon Miller <atsf@...>
 

Question for Pat,
Has QSI considered a booth at the Seattle NMRA convention? Maybe
sharing with BLI or other manufactures that use the QSI sound unit.


Re: The QSIndustries group is a big success

Jon Miller <atsf@...>
 

As an aside to everyone and as a big pat on the back for Pat Quinn
--sic--don't seem to listen to the group's discourse.<

Amen!!!!!

Jon Miller
AT&SF
For me time has stopped in 1941
Digitrax, Chief/Zephyr systems, JMRI user
NMRA Life member #2623
Member SFRH&MS


Re: New poll for QSIndustries

Jon Miller <atsf@...>
 

OK... I'm not familiar with the Loksound decoders (other than having
heard one in a Trix bigboy -- and I wasn't impressed). Can someone tell
me more about how they work and how you update the sounds as I have no
idea. Also, Jon wrote that we 'know what Loksound cost". I don't. Can
somebody enlighten me (off-list is fine if you don't want to post it).<
Most of this data is on their site. I'm not impressed with their sound
either. One problem they have is the decoder is not "polymorpific" or
however you spell that word. Basically it means all sounds mixed together
and the Loksound (like most European sound units) doesn't do that. ESU is
the manufacture, see sites below;

http://www.loksound.de/index.php?showId=44

I used the Google translate button!
Also

http://www.dcctrain.com/esu_loksound.htm

Pricing;

http://www.rjftrains.com/esu/esu.htm#pricing



Jon Miller
AT&SF
For me time has stopped in 1941
Digitrax, Chief/Zephyr systems, JMRI user
NMRA Life member #2623
Member SFRH&MS


The QSIndustries group is a big success

Bryan
 

As an aside to everyone and as a big pat on the back for Pat Quinn
for making the QSIndustries user group available to all of us, I
just want to thank everyone and especially Pat for making this a
great user group where all manner of new ideas and the spirited
exchange of same, are taking place. This is really refreshing as
compared to other (nameless) groups in which the manufacturers
seldom participate and really don't seem to listen to the group's
discourse.


Re: New poll for QSIndustries

keystonecrossings <jerry@...>
 

I love the wording of this poll... akin to

Which would you prefer...

1) A fully flexible sound system

2) A sharp stick in the eye

Hmmm, let me get back to you on that!

18781 - 18800 of 19172