|
|
Post by Donnell Wells on Oct 24, 2012 12:14:49 GMT -8
Yeah...the title might be a bit misleading as this post is not intended as a slam against the modelers featured in the annual, but mearly to point out it's lack-luster appeal, at least for me. I do like the article featuring the PRR, and the nice job the author has done replicating the overhead catenary system used by that railroad. However, that's about where it stops.
While there are many model railroads around, probably many more than could ever be published in our lifetime, Model Railroader magazine seems to focus on the same type of "hum drum" layouts year in and year out. I think I'll save my $8.95 this year as well...
Donnell
|
|
|
|
Post by catt on Oct 24, 2012 12:28:29 GMT -8
Donnell,with all of the really nice layouts out there would it not make more sense to put layouts in the rag that were not in the parent mag?
I quit buying about 6 years ago because I had already seen every layout that was in the book.The same goes for all the rest of their "specials" you've already seen it why look again.
|
|
|
|
Post by railthunder on Oct 24, 2012 13:26:45 GMT -8
Actually I think this particular issue is one of the best I've seen in a long time. I have no connection to any of the authors or railroads listed. I thought the sidebars on each railroad with how they did particular things were very interesting, as they didn't just showcase the railroad. There were a lot of things that were scratchbuilt using unique techniques that could benefit a lot of modelers.
What grabs one person might not grab another. Some might grab one as their favorite prototype is modeled, others might grab as there are some neat ideas on how to do things, and so on. I'm sure there is hit or miss in all of this as well with some modelers/readers.
|
|
|
|
Post by buffalobill on Oct 24, 2012 14:11:48 GMT -8
Donnell: I agree nothing jumps out in this years annual. Been that way for a couple of years. I wish Model Railroader would stop using the same layouts in multiple publications. I agree that there were some improvements in the presentation. But I felt the substance was short. That is a few less bucks I will spend.
Bill
|
|
|
|
Post by atsfan on Oct 24, 2012 17:51:56 GMT -8
I pick these up second hand for a few dollars at train shows.
Not worth the full price for years.
Ebay has some great deals on Kalmbach's books. Lots of 10 for low prices for example.
I do like the Pelle Soeborg books. Yes the articles were in MR, but they are great references and good inspiration.
|
|
|
|
Post by rhpd42002 on Oct 24, 2012 19:01:07 GMT -8
As I don't regularly buy MR, some of the work in GMR 2013 is "new" to me, so I didn't mind spending the $$ for it. That, plus the fact that I'm on vacation and can't access my trains, makes for some good, late evening, armchair model railroading.  It's too bad that they can't or haven't run any of Jon Grant, Joe Atkinson or Tom Johnson's layouts. Just my humble opinion........ |
|
|
|
Post by Amboy Secondary on Oct 24, 2012 19:53:16 GMT -8
I took a quick look at Barnes & Noble, and passed on it, for the same reason I should have passed on the latest MR. Nothing that interested me. That doesn't mean either publication was lacking in content, it's just that I've been reading MR since 1960. There are quite a few modelers out there that would enjoy the magazines. It is too easy to bash the current MR and its staff. On the other hand, they have adjusted their content toward the modeler that is new or re-entering the hobby. Nothing wrong with that, eh?
It's a different world out there, and I still remember those fellows who expressed their feeling that only stamped metal and craftsman wood kits were for real model railroaders. Those newbies who build those shake together plastic kits will never amount to anything.
|
|
|
|
Post by Donnell Wells on Oct 25, 2012 0:48:49 GMT -8
The two publications I miss the most are Mainline Modeler magazine and Prototype Modeler magazine. These were two first rate/class periodicals that I hated to see go. I pick up back issues of each whenever I find them at a train show or LHS.
Prototype modeling is long from being dead, and I think if a magazine of this type were to be reintroduced to the modeling community at large, it would generate a sizable following. Sites like Protomodeler.com, therustbucket.com, some of the articles posted here and at therailwire.com, and yes, even some articles posted over on the militant Diesel Detailer Forum have generated pretty substantial followings. The only problem is not everyone is aware of their existence, or they do not have access to, or in some cases even care to follow the content in an online environment.
Donnell
|
|
|
|
Post by gregw66 on Oct 25, 2012 3:45:19 GMT -8
I like to pick up these specials and annuals ever since I gave up buying MR on a monthly basis. I miss the heyday of the magazine but like to have something in hand for those trips to what my father called; "The House of Parliament".
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Cutler III on Oct 25, 2012 7:32:37 GMT -8
Sigh. Yet another thread criticizing an apparently profitable MR for not being more like failed magazines. If MM and PM were so great, then why weren't either one the No. 1 model railroad hobby mag when they were publishing...and why aren't they still around?
To me, it says that there are far more "casual" model railroaders than "serious" ones. MR serves this larger market, and does it well. They are a business, and their job is to sell the most magazines. Obviously, that means doing simpler "how to lay flex track" articles vs. "scratch build a brass steam engine"-type articles. In the past 20+ years, I have known hundreds of individual model railroaders, almost all of them have layed down flex track at one time or another. Of all these folks, only two of them ever scratchbuilt a brass steam engine; John Pryke being one of them. If one was in charge of a magazine that put food on one's table, which sort of articles would be preferred? The type that appeals to many, or the type that appeals to few?
|
|
|
|
Post by Donnell Wells on Oct 25, 2012 11:25:31 GMT -8
Well Paul,
I suppose by definition, my original post is a criticism of MR's GMR 2013. However, I must reiterate that the critism is not directed at the contributors, but at the publisher for basically giving us a repeat of "years prior-like" subject matter. I did not criticize the annual for not being more like "failed magazines", but for being somewhat predictable, and less than inspiring, specifically toward my own interests. So let's not read too much between the lines. This is just my personal take, and I am only speaking for myself. And regarding those failed magazines, you seem to be a smart guy, and I'm fairly confident that you could deduce why both MM and PM aren't around anymore.
Both PM and MM were niche magazines full of great content. By great, I mean that which went well beyond the skill level of the novice, and in some cases beyond that of the intermediate modeler. However, the articles were well laid out to where both the novice and intermediate modelers could follow along and try out many of the techniques for themselves, thus improving their own skills. On the other hand, it is my personal opinion that MM (in its later years), moreso than PM, was all over the map in regard to diversity of content. This was not necessarily a bad thing, just more a "freestyle" type of publishing structure.
If I were to do a protoype-style modeling magazine today, it would be more structured, and a bit more specific in content, though the quilty and style of articles would be very similar to what was published in MM. It would feature one or two articles under each of several sections divided by era, for example, steam era, 1st , 2nd, and 3rd genration diesels, as well as similar period freight and passenger car articles. I would still include "how to" articles, and try to focus on innovative modeling techiques similar to the early days of MR, MM, and PM, as well as many modern examples such as those displayed by the likes of our own
Jim aka [glow=red,2,300]AustralianTerrier[/glow]
John aka [glow=blue,2,300]onequiknova[/glow]
Antonio aka [glow=gray,2,300]antoniofp45[/glow]
Bill Denton aka [glow=gold,2,300]skytop35[/glow]
and others from various sites like Liz Allen, Brian Banna, Chris Zymunt, Brian Strom, Tony Scissons, and K-Pack (Kevin) from Protomodeler.com just to name a few! I may throw in some periodic reviews, but primarily stick with modeling content.
Layout, structure, and scenery articles would be done in annual, semiannual, or quarterly fashion, and would feature subjects that more closely follow the practices of whichever prototype is being modeled. There would be no "proto-lancing" or "proto-freelancing" articles as there are currently other media that cover that kind of content.
Now...if I were to take on this endeavor, it would merely be for the purpose of providing a prototypical modeling resource to those whose interests are somewhat aligned with my own. I would not expect everyone to be "on board" (pun intended) as not everyone would particularly be interested in the content that I would like to publish, but... many will! Maybe not as many as MR, but judging by the followings on many of the sites I mentioned in an earlier post, there is a great deal of interest in prototype modeling.
Donnell
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2012 12:11:58 GMT -8
As a subscriber to Model Railroader, I used to also pony up the money for "Great Model Railroads" and "Model Railroad Planning". The cost of those two additional magazines is about a 1/3 of an MR subscription.
Which leads us to ask is Kalmbach holding out the "juicy" layout articles for GMR? I have no quarrel with Kalmbach making a profit. But an MR subscription which has steadily gone up over the years, never was "cheap" compared to other magazines, plus another $8 to $9 for the "special" issues, adds up....in a hurry!
I stopped buying and even looking at GMR when, I felt that many of the layouts featured had been published before. Some hadn't, but is spending $8 to see one or two layouts really worth it? The layouts featured in previous issues or MR or Railroad Model Craftsman generally weren't too much different than when they were published in the past. So its back to spending $8.00
When Kalmbach first rolled out "Model Railroad Planning", I was hooked. It covered the planning side of a layout, the how and the why from the builder. Then, that magazine seemed to be looking for content. There was an issue where the author is drawing out his track plan on pieces of cardboard and then setting them up on boxes, etc. in the layout room to see how things look. I've seen people do similar things with laying out tape on the floor to define layout edges, etc. But to devote 8 to 10 pages on drawings on cardboard, I felt was kind of padding the page count.
About four years ago, Kalmbach published a number of specialty "magazines" on basic construction such as bench work, scenery, etc. Again, unless they are going into more depth, why not include the some of these articles in MR? Again, I don't fault Kalmbach for chasing a dollar, but don't make your subscribers feel like you are siphoning off the "good stuff" for separate publication, which is only going to cost the subscriber more money.
|
|
|
|
Post by redp on Oct 25, 2012 12:54:39 GMT -8
As a subscriber to Model Railroader, I used to also pony up the money for "Great Model Railroads" and "Model Railroad Planning". The cost of those two additional magazines is about a 1/3 of an MR subscription. Which leads us to ask is Kalmbach holding out the "juicy" layout articles for GMR? I have no quarrel with Kalmbach making a profit. But an MR subscription which has steadily gone up over the years, never was "cheap" compared to other magazines, plus another $8 to $9 for the "special" issues, adds up....in a hurry! I stopped buying and even looking at GMR when, I felt that many of the layouts featured had been published before. Some hadn't, but is spending $8 to see one or two layouts really worth it? The layouts featured in previous issues or MR or Railroad Model Craftsman generally weren't too much different than when they were published in the past. So its back to spending $8.00 When Kalmbach first rolled out "Model Railroad Planning", I was hooked. It covered the planning side of a layout, the how and the why from the builder. Then, that magazine seemed to be looking for content. There was an issue where the author is drawing out his track plan on pieces of cardboard and then setting them up on boxes, etc. in the layout room to see how things look. I've seen people do similar things with laying out tape on the floor to define layout edges, etc. But to devote 8 to 10 pages on drawings on cardboard, I felt was kind of padding the page count. About four years ago, Kalmbach published a number of specialty "magazines" on basic construction such as bench work, scenery, etc. Again, unless they are going into more depth, why not include the some of these articles in MR? Again, I don't fault Kalmbach for chasing a dollar, but don't make your subscribers feel like you are siphoning off the "good stuff" for separate publication, which is only going to cost the subscriber more money. Its kinda like the news media. They keep rehashing the same old thing, but try to make it sound new and exciting. P |
|
|
|
Post by Brakie on Oct 25, 2012 14:24:16 GMT -8
Paul:"scratch build a brass steam engine"
--------------------------------------------
Paul,I remember when such articles was the norm along with scratchbuilding cars and structures..There were true craftsmen back then.
The hobby has changed a lot since those days and that art has all but disappeared..
|
|
|
|
Post by carrman on Oct 25, 2012 16:02:59 GMT -8
Well, I guess we'll see what happens when GMR comes to visit my club in 2013 for the 2014 edition.
Dave
|
|
|
|
Post by Donnell Wells on Oct 25, 2012 19:30:43 GMT -8
What's the name of your club Dave?
|
|
|
|
Post by atsfan on Oct 26, 2012 6:55:46 GMT -8
Sigh. Yet another thread criticizing an apparently profitable MR for not being more like failed magazines. If MM and PM were so great, then why weren't either one the No. 1 model railroad hobby mag when they were publishing...and why aren't they still around? To me, it says that there are far more "casual" model railroaders than "serious" ones. MR serves this larger market, and does it well. They are a business, and their job is to sell the most magazines. Obviously, that means doing simpler "how to lay flex track" articles vs. "scratch build a brass steam engine"-type articles. In the past 20+ years, I have known hundreds of individual model railroaders, almost all of them have layed down flex track at one time or another. Of all these folks, only two of them ever scratchbuilt a brass steam engine; John Pryke being one of them. If one was in charge of a magazine that put food on one's table, which sort of articles would be preferred? The type that appeals to many, or the type that appeals to few? The concept of the best product winning or else it proves it is not the best product does not work in the real world. If being them most popular equals best, that does not speak well for humanity  The fact that MR focuses on new people who don't know how to lay track is a diminishing game since the numbers of people new who don't know that is diminishing. One thing Kalmbach does have well is a company running their magazines, versus a person. Thus the people running it can come and go and it remains. I am always amazed at some of their titles such as "Bead and Button". I mean, really, how many people are hanging out at their mailboxes to grap a new issue and run inside to read the latest on buttons? Reminds me of the SNL skit on the Scotch Tape Store........  |
|
|
|
Post by calzephyr on Oct 26, 2012 7:22:51 GMT -8
The two publications I miss the most are Mainline Modeler magazine and Prototype Modeler magazine. These were two first rate/class periodicals that I hated to see go. I pick up back issues of each whenever I find them at a train show or LHS.
Prototype modeling is long from being dead, and I think if a magazine of this type were to be reintroduced to the modeling community at large, it would generate a sizable following. Sites like Protomodeler.com, therustbucket.com, some of the articles posted here and at therailwire.com, and yes, even some articles posted over on the militant Diesel Detailer Forum have generated pretty substantial followings. The only problem is not everyone is aware of their existence, or they do not have access to, or in some cases even care to follow the content in an online environment.
Donnell Donnell Do you look at the MRH on line magazine?? They showcase some really nice layouts and articles on how to build those items. Larry model-railroad-hobbyist.com/ |
|
|
|
Post by gregw66 on Oct 26, 2012 7:34:43 GMT -8
One thing Kalmbach does have well is a company running their magazines, versus a person. Thus the people running it can come and go and it remains. I am always amazed at some of their titles such as "Bead and Button". I mean, really, how many people are hanging out at their mailboxes to grap a new issue and run inside to read the latest on buttons? Reminds me of the SNL skit on the Scotch Tape Store........ While that sounds funny, I judge the popularity of anything on advertising dollars. If a company is advertising something, there must be a market for it. I don't hear model trains being advertised on radio or TV, but I do hear about beads being advertised. There is a local store that consistently advertises their "troll beads" I have no idea what they are but they must be a pretty marketable and profitable item for them to advertise on radio about it. |
|
|
|
Post by gregw66 on Oct 26, 2012 7:42:23 GMT -8
I picked up GMR 2013 yesterday when I hopped across the border to the States to get gas, milk and chicken. Magazines are also cheaper and the little store I go to will take my Canadian money at par. So $8.95 is a deal for me to get this magazine.
The content is what I would expect, except that usually they highlight a smaller layout and all the ones in GMR 2013 seem to be large basement or auxiliary building layouts. Far beyond my scope in ability, time and money.
However, I did like the article on the portable club layout. We are in the process of conceiving a modular group in our area and the idea of a themed layout is attractive.
My point is, even in an issue where not much directly appealed to me, I got an idea for something and for me that is worth $8.95.
|
|
|
|
Post by atsfan on Oct 26, 2012 8:44:54 GMT -8
One thing Kalmbach does have well is a company running their magazines, versus a person. Thus the people running it can come and go and it remains. I am always amazed at some of their titles such as "Bead and Button". I mean, really, how many people are hanging out at their mailboxes to grap a new issue and run inside to read the latest on buttons? Reminds me of the SNL skit on the Scotch Tape Store........ While that sounds funny, I judge the popularity of anything on advertising dollars. If a company is advertising something, there must be a market for it. I don't hear model trains being advertised on radio or TV, but I do hear about beads being advertised. There is a local store that consistently advertises their "troll beads" I have no idea what they are but they must be a pretty marketable and profitable item for them to advertise on radio about it. |
|
|
|
Post by gregw66 on Oct 26, 2012 9:46:01 GMT -8
Gold Troll Beads upwards of $1200. Something for everyone in this world.  |
|
|
|
Post by carrman on Oct 26, 2012 11:27:34 GMT -8
What's the name of your club Dave?Rogue Valley Model RR Club. rvmrc.net/ |
|
|
|
Post by umtrrauthor on Oct 26, 2012 12:28:02 GMT -8
Having grown up with the Pennsy and railfanned the Northeast Corridor with my Dad, the GMR was worth it just for the Pennsy layout. The catenary modeling is spot on.
My two cents, or perhaps I should say $8.95 worth.
|
|
|
|
Post by valenciajim on Oct 26, 2012 13:56:52 GMT -8
The GMR 2012 issue was extremely disappointing in my view. I thought this year's issue was better than last year's but not up to the standards of pervious years.
|
|
