C&O Allegeheny Sound


B

beiland

Well-Known Member
C&O Allegheny Sound

I realize that this is a simulation, but I sure would like to find a sound installation for an Allegheny (Rivarossi) that even closely approached this husky-ness.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvM_J-7HopI

Most every thing I've heard in the stock units just doesn't approach this. So where is the best??
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I couldn't access your link, it said there was a malformed video link and didn't open, but you may be referring to bass. There are some high bass speakers on the market that will give you what you want. I put sound in a PFM Allegheny and it sounded great. Tsunami of course...lots of room for a big high bass speaker in that tender!
 
High bass speaker and try fiddling with the Tsunamis' equalizer. You should be able to get more bass. not sure if you'll get there, I've never tried, but you can enhance the factory settings
 
The Tsunami equalizer is the cat's meow. You wouldn't believe the difference.

Good job on the suggestion, Alan. You hit the nail on the head. Also adding a deeper "basket" speaker, a woofer, if you will, makes a big difference too. Installing the speaker in the tender of steam engines gives you all kinds of room to add multiple speakers, if you wish.

I have a friend that is helping me build a "mini-crossover" for some of my compounds that I plan to install a multi-speaker system. It's been on the back burner for several months. Guess I need to get back on the project, huh?

Bob
 
Designing Locomotive Acoustics for On-Board Sound Systems

So both of you agree that the Tsunami decoder is superior to the new OSI's. It was my understanding that these new QSI's were going to be very programable down the road, even more than Tsunami??

I had figured the high bass speakers were definitely the way to go. But then what is the best speaker orientation in those big steam engine tenders?

I had started this subject thread at a previous time:
Designing Locomotive Acoustics for On-Board Sound Systems
http://www.modelrailroadforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11521

In the second posting of that other subject thread I noted, "On the other hand I have a Proto 2-8-8-2 with the sound vented out the coal load that I consider substandard". In fact I have a copy of these I bought used that I'm not impressed with. Yet it appears that a number of manufacturers chose this coal load route for venting the speaker sound.

Correct me if I'm wrong but one of the best 'factory sounds' I've heard in articulated steam engines is the Broadway N&W Class A, and their Big Boy?? I think both utilize the QSI decoders and twin speakers facing downward in the tenders??

I was hoping this subject thread might lead to someone who has actually done a custom installation in the Rivarossi Allegheny that could definitely define their work by example. And/or someone who knows of such a project. I've not looked all thru the Youtube offerings to see if there is something other than the 'stock factory' examples, but what little I've seen doesn't compare with that simulated example I referenced above...in fact most sound a little 'tin-ny' to me. Maybe its a function of what mic they were using to record their Youtube presentation?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have (2)Rivarossi 2-8-8-2's that I installed sound in the tender. The Tsunamis sound AWESOME!!! And that is an understatement. Others cannot believe to "bottom end"(bass). I was quite taken aback myself. I used my Dremel saw and "cut" slots into the bottom of the tenders and used a "long throw" speaker to enhance the "bass" sound also. I think drilling holes would produce the same effect. I bought the speakers at a trains show and have no idea who manufactured them. In fact, they sat in a drawer in the workbench for a couple of years before I installed them.

I have an old steam engine that I am experimenting with different placement of the speaker. I am wanting to mount a speaker in the vertical position and "vent" a tender on both sides of the speaker. This, in theory should provide sound ports for both the "positive and negative" movements of the speaker cone. I do doubt that it will have much effect on the human ear, but some "acoustically gifted" may notice a difference.

Bob
 
Espeefan said:
High bass speaker and try fiddling with the Tsunamis' equalizer. You should be able to get more bass. not sure if you'll get there, I've never tried, but you can enhance the factory settings
Click to expand...
Can you do that without extra equipment, or proprietary Soundtraxx software?

Can you do it utilizing JMRI DecoderPro?
 
beiland said:
Can you do that without extra equipment, or proprietary Soundtraxx software?

Can you do it utilizing JMRI DecoderPro?
Click to expand...

Yes indeedy! Decoder Pro is certainly the best way to do it but I have done many with the manual in one hand and my NCE Power Cab in the other and just kept changing values until I got what I wanted. My hearing on the low end is a little impaired so I tend not to maximize bass but I always can get the sound I want out of the Tsunami. More later...Time for lunch!

Ahhh! much better! Now on QSI vs Tsunami, I'd say I have to go for the Tsunami. I do have some QSI sound, in diesels, and I bought one of those Sunset Models SP 2-6-0's with QSI installed. There isn't anything wrong with QSI at all. I think if they wanted, they could duplicate the Soundtraxx software and such down to a gnat's behind :)

They do have some things Soundtraxx does not which I like on steam decoders, like the cylinder cocks being open on startup then closing, and their bell ringer does a better job on the air rung bell. I would not take one out to replace with Tsunami, but if both were on a rack at the LHS I would take the Tsunami in most all cases.

Cheers!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Weight is Important

Just got this suggestion from a fellow selling one on Ebay

"I have done 1/2 dozen Rivarossi's now to DCC and one thing that stands out is the weight. They are not heavy enough to contact the rail to make current flow like DCC requires so add as much lead as you can in every place you can get a piece - engine and tender"
 
That sounds odd to me. I've got a plethora of Rivarossi steam engines, from the 2-8-8-2 Mallets, to the Allegheny, to a fleet of NKP Berkshires, as well as others. All are converted to DCC and I have NEVER had a problem. Though I do agree that Rivarossi tenders are a tad underweight. But, most of my Rivarossi's are the Red Box product and have the motors in the boiler and not in the cab as in the older models(AHM), I place the decoder in the boiler also, if'n there be enough room, in the cab otherwise. The tender installation is used as a last resort and for some earlier sound installations.

I have more problems with the Athearn BB and Bachman engines that have been converted to DCC.

I have heard of modelers adding extra pickups to some engines to enhance conductivity, but never have done so myself.

Bob
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Soundtraxx Tsunami versus QSI Revolution

beiland said:
I remember seeing an article abour this (and/or making a posting), but I can't remember where yet.
Click to expand...
Have not located that article I spoke of, but here is an interesting reply I received on another forum;
"Regarding sound quality I believe both are 'differently' equal. I have multiple Y3b's with both decoders. Both have sound characteristics that are better than the other; the tsunami's dynamic chuff and air let-off are very good vs revolutions whistles and 'load' features are excellent.

While sound quality is subjective, motor control is not. Neither is the ability to change sound files. In these areas the revolution is the clearly superior product, not to mention outstanding costumer service through Tony's Trains/QSI Solutions. If you're looking for truly prototypical control capability, whether lighting, movement or sound, I think the Revolution is the way to go. When I'm running an 80 car coal train with helpers in the middle and rear, the revolutions actually communicate with each other so as not to push or pull to much. Tsunami, while good, can not achieve this level of performance.
There is also some really cool sound stuff coming from QSI in the coming months

From lots of experience, the revolution offers superior motor control, especially smooth slow speed control, starting and stopping. While it can't cure a poorly engineered locomotive, slow speed performance is far superior. I've compared both decoders using the same engine [swapping out decoder] on multiple models; Bachmann, BLI, PCM, & Proto 2K and the rev gives better performance 75% of the time, 25% is equal. The Proto 2k with tsunamis are excellent; the proto 2-8-8-2 Y3b is an excellent engine! Bachmanns with tsunami are fair; some times excellent control sometimes not. With rev. I always get outstanding motor control. For my PCM and BLI revs all the way

Any questions I can answer I'd be happy... Sorry to ramble on so long, but given my pretty extensive experience with both decoders in steam locomotives and the $$ per, better to learn by others. Try both out if you can, get one of each and then you can find the one you like."

To which I replied, "Thank you very, very much XXX. This is the type of testimonial I was looking for...someone who had done side-by-side comparisions.

In my reading from various forum sites, etc, I got the distinct impression that the 'programable aspect' of the QSI product, particularly with an eye to the future was a superior approach.

When I looked at the history of these two manufacturers, the QSI was restrained somewhat in their full implimentation of BEMF for legal reasons, but once cleared up a person could 'upgrade' their decoder by replacing a chip...not the whole decoder. On the other hand it appears as though Soundtraxx had to 'jump' to another stage with their Tsunami decoder, and that obsoleted their previous line of decoders.
 
I am late to this thread, but I have a now two-year-old Rivarossi Allegheny that originally had the Loksound decoder, and I hated the incorrect chuff and whistle. I finally had a heavy Tsunami installed in it, and couldn't be happier. The engine actually chuffs, and no longer 'chiffs' like the original, and the hooter is very good.

-Crandell
 
beiland;

For the comparison, did he make just the normal CV adjustments, or did he download the manuals for both decoders and adjust them at the bit levels? If he didn't, then I have a problem with how he did his comparison. Tsunami's can do this and I have adjusted and tuned Tsunami installs to where the loco wheels start turning at speed step 1 and the wheels are barely turning at that.

Not fully adjusting a decoder to its best settings and then comparing it to another decoder that may have been, makes a comparison between the two IMHO, meaningless.

If he did adjust at the bit level, then his comparison has legitimacy.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi Carey,
Let me say up front that I'm not wishing to be argumentative in any of these discussions, I'm just seeking all input, and I greatly appreciate all the great contributions by everone so far.

So here is the reply to your 'adjustment' question:
I should have qualified my answer by stating that I program decoders at what the respondent terms the 'bit' level.
Not fully adjusting a decoder to its best settings and then comparing it to another decoder that may have been, makes a comparison between the two IMHO, meaningless. If he did adjust at the bit level, then his comparison has legitimacy.
Click to expand...

I use the proprietary Q1A/Q2A Programmer for QSI decoders and JMRI DecoderPro [which I am still learning] on Tsunami. I go beyond the commonly programmed CVs. To achieve truly prototypical movement to my eyes [I am a locomotive engineer], relatively extensive 'fiddling' must be done in the motor control values. There are in-depth discussions of limitations and how to best overcome motor control issues on the various yahoo! QSI & Tsunami groups.

For the past 2 weeks on the Soundtraxx Yahoo! forum there has been extensive discussion of the best way to achieve fine motor control [ultra smooth stop and start] with the Tsunami. To my own knowledge and from extensive experience [150+ sound installs], 'dialing' the correct values with QSI Revolution and achieving flawless motor control is nearly universal in the newest generation of steamers from BLI/PCM, P2K, & Spectrum.

The foundation for superior motor control is the locomotive's motor mechanism. Purchase the best you can afford. This alleviates headaches and head scratching
 
Selector said:
I am late to this thread, but I have a now two-year-old Rivarossi Allegheny that originally had the Loksound decoder, and I hated the incorrect chuff and whistle. I finally had a heavy Tsunami installed in it, and couldn't be happier. The engine actually chuffs, and no longer 'chiffs' like the original, and the hooter is very good.

-Crandell
Click to expand...
Yes that is what I thought when I heard the 'stock' Allegheny with Loksound....just not brash enough!!
 
beiland said:
Hi Carey,
Let me say up front that I'm not wishing to be argumentative in any of these discussions, I'm just seeking all input, and I greatly appreciate all the great contributions by everone so far.

So here is the reply to your 'adjustment' question:
I should have qualified my answer by stating that I program decoders at what the respondent terms the 'bit' level.


I use the proprietary Q1A/Q2A Programmer for QSI decoders and JMRI DecoderPro [which I am still learning] on Tsunami. I go beyond the commonly programmed CVs. To achieve truly prototypical movement to my eyes [I am a locomotive engineer], relatively extensive 'fiddling' must be done in the motor control values. There are in-depth discussions of limitations and how to best overcome motor control issues on the various yahoo! QSI & Tsunami groups.

For the past 2 weeks on the Soundtraxx Yahoo! forum there has been extensive discussion of the best way to achieve fine motor control [ultra smooth stop and start] with the Tsunami. To my own knowledge and from extensive experience [150+ sound installs], 'dialing' the correct values with QSI Revolution and achieving flawless motor control is nearly universal in the newest generation of steamers from BLI/PCM, P2K, & Spectrum.

The foundation for superior motor control is the locomotive's motor mechanism. Purchase the best you can afford. This alleviates headaches and head scratching
Click to expand...

What I can understand from the above post is that no matter how much one adjusts the programming of a chip, it boils down to the motor and its reaction to the voltage applied. And that each individual mechanism/drive/motor will have a varied reaction to such.

Is that what I'm reading?

Bob
 
beiland said:
So here is the reply to your 'adjustment' question:
I should have qualified my answer by stating that I program decoders at what the respondent terms the 'bit' level...

Click to expand...

beiland;

That's what I was looking for. He answered my question.
The comparison is legit.

I get so tired of folks comparing apples to oranges in these and other forums that I generally don't consider any of them legit. However since I also do decoder/sound installs for our LHS, I just felt I needed to know how he did the comparison.

The last thing he said is true. If you don't have a good mech to go with a good motor, then you will be unable to achieve the adjustments needed for the best response.
 
I also should have added that the "bit" level, adjusting individual bits, is what the manuals call it, its not my term.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.



Back
Top