I am a just getting into Large gauge and am going to the York Pa show this weekend…My main need are DCC decoders for my locomotives, I have a used NCE ProCab system but need decoders as my fleet is mostly USA & Aristo also used [older not DCC ready] . When I research DCC decoders the technical side makes like chinese algebra and my eyes glaze over, what I want to know is do all decoders meet NMRA standards and the only difference between HO and G would be the amperage? am I correct??? I feel I would need/like to get NCE D408 or 808, TCS’s G8 or Digitrax DG583’s.will they work any other ones [cost is of course a main concern]. Do they have a “flea market” at the show? if so where…Thanks for any input or help…Bobbycoke
Welcome Aboard Rob… There is great bunch of guys here with tremendous knowledge base.
1st. Yes all decoders play nice with each other. That being said… (I’m staying vague here)
2nd If you scroll down the “Forums” page, there is a forum for “POWER AND SOUND”. Scroll thru the many topics, and there is probably the answers there, plus a ton more of general knowledge to help you out.
Generally speaking, you’re correct–the large scale decoders are essentially the same as their small-scale counterparts, except with higher current (and sometimes higher voltage) capacities. There may be subtle differences with regard to the number of lighting function outputs or smoke unit drivers or stuff like that depending on the particular decoders in question, but by and large they’re at least very similar. I’d stick with decoders that are rated for at least 3 amps for most large scale locos. You can get away with the 1-amp HO decoders for really small “critter” type locomotives or small 0-4-0 or similar locos that don’t draw much current.
In terms of which decoders, there are lots of options and twice as many opinions. Many folks opt for decoders which combine motor control and sound in one decoder. QSI’s “Titan” decoder is highly regarded, and is one that I use myself. I’ve played with the ESU/Loksound v4.0 at a train show, and liked what I saw and heard, but I’ve not had the opportunity to install one yet myself. (I run battery power, so it’s only just recently that the ability to use generic DCC decoders in that environment has become practical.) Other motor/sound decoders which seem to be popular with large scale come from Zimo and Massoth. Soundtraxx (Tsunami) and TCS are big players in small scale decoders, but to date do not have large scaled decoders available. But definitely keep them in mind for the smaller locos. I’ve got Tsunami decoders in my two “Galloping Goose” railcars. I don’t pay much attention to the motor-only decoders.
As Dave suggests, head down to the “Power and Sound” forum with questions about specific decoders you may be thinking about using, and also mention which locos you’re thinking of installing them in. There may be subtle nuances which might favor one decoder over another for a given installation.
And welcome to LSC!
Later,
K
Bob
Stop in @ Train-li when you’re @ York.
They can help with questions etc.
In Europe the magazines actually test the decoders against a set of criteria for performance in actual operation.
Zimo usually comes out in front followed by Lenz and a little lower ESU. The US decoder manufacturers generally fall way behind in performance tests. TCS has greatly improved and perhaps may rank up with the leaders the next time the tests are performed.
Stan
Rob, one thing you need to discuss and figure out is what do you want to do with your trains and what do you expect your decoder to do. For me I run on others layouts as I do not have my own currently. As such I prefer my decoders to be wireless meaning I only need my handheld controller and the decoder and receiver installed in my engine, which is not always the case for some systems that require a power pack and base station to be hooked up to the tracks for that wireless to work. So do think of how you plan to use your trains when picking your system.
Another thing to consider, living in Vermont, is how much track cleaning are you willing to do? You might look into Airwire. Its made by the folks who make EasyDCC, but sends its packets by radio.
Rob, first, there a limited number of decoders that plug into the Aristo socket.
Stay away from the Digitrax decoders, they have poor performance, they often won’t tolerate the higher track voltages used by most G scalers.
By the way, welcome to the forum and you will find people that want to convert you to battery even if you ask about DCC track power. (Hi Steve!)
While Stan is well known in the DCC community, I must take HUGE exception to his recommendations, they have terrible sound libraries, very poor American locomotive support, and also, for example, Zimo can want $25 to $50 extra for a “premium” sound file.
I use QSI. I was part of the beta testers in their first large scale version, and also their latest “Titan” plug and play for the Aristo socket, and it also has screw terminals for your USAT locos.
They definitely have the largest US sound library. I like them because of the low cost, American made, and the ongoing technological improvements. They have had some availability problems, but Reindeer Pass has 6 in stock, and they have 6 and 10 amp versions.
Another option is to buy an inexpensive decoder like the NCE ones you mentioned and add a good sound only decoder, but there’s only one game there, Phoenix. Old technology but great sound files.
Check out DCC on my web site (check my signature), and I list up all the major manufacturers of DCC systems.
I really recommend taking your time, and asking questions, and talking to people who have the various units and try them out, or at least listen to them.
Regards, Greg
p.s. I run outdoors, and only sweep the leaves off the track if I have not run for a long time, I have stainless rails and do NO “track cleaning”.
Greg, that’s not fair. Kevin just convinced me that that I was using DCC all along, after thinking I was using RC. imagine my surprise. Besides, he lives in Vermont, land of maple trees. You live in Southern Cal i for n i a, where it never rains. There’s a difference. I was just trying’ to save him some heartbreak.
Thanks to all I really needed the feed back to clear up some things, Greg I will check your site as I always enjoy your expertise… Steve the track cleaning is easy in Vermont [make that INDOORS only] built her her dream house for retirement she gets floor 1&2, I get entire basement which I felt it was too big but when you start planning track at this large gage it eats it up quick! I have accumulated a ton of stuff [trains, track switches,wire DCC controls] but realize I will need a few more TONS!!! lol Some day maybe a line around the Gazebo but that would be all as we still cannot see the ground and haven’t since november…plus 9 degrees this am up to 29 too cold to play outdoors…thanks Rob
Greg Elmassian said:
While Stan is well known in the DCC community, I must take HUGE exception to his recommendations, they have terrible sound libraries, very poor American locomotive support, and also, for example, Zimo can want $25 to $50 extra for a “premium” sound file.
Regards, Greg
Greg
My apologies for writing a message that was misunderstood.
I had never intended to make a recommendation. I only reported what independent tests has reported for best performance. (have not seen this years report yet). Performance is only one of a number of key factors. Features, actually following the standards, support, cost are all examples of other key points to consider.
Sound is a totally different question that is open to a lot of personnel opinion. For example there are some sound products that I personally do not like the sound of while others love them.
Each sound manufacturer has different marketing approaches. For example Zimo has some great sound files but you pay a premium for them. ESU has yet to update their steam sounds for US locomotives (they report this is a high priority for 2015) Soundtraxx pre-loads their sound files which can not be changed after purchase and QSI has some files that are great and others not so great.
Most locomotives on the SJR&P have a Phoenix sound system but we do have locomotives with most of the major brands of sounds on the railroad.
Stan
Sorry Stan. I will say that the BEMF controls and overall motor “smoothness” is good with the European decoders, BUT I’ve had some really weird experiences with BEMF control with certain European decoders, when there is a very high current, low impedance motor with a very “free” drivetrain.
An example is the lab-grade Pittman motors often used in Accucraft, with the double worm and Zimo BEMF… the system goes nuts and it takes quite a bit of parameter tuning to get it to work even reasonably…
(this particular combination can cause so much “apparent” BEMF that the decoder goes nuts.
I have the same thing happen in Z scale with the very old Marklin motors, especially the 3 pole ones.
Tuning the 3 BEMF parameters are about the least fun I have had in programming a DCC decoder.
Regards, Greg
Hi Rob,
I am by no means an expert here, but we have been using DCC for a while now with a lot of success.
We use NCE decoders and Phoenix sound units in almost all of our locos. When we started out in DCC, there really wasn’t much choice for higher amperage locos so NCE was a logical choice back then. They offered (and still do) two very robust and easy to use decoders as you mentioned, the 408 and the 808, the latter specifically recommended for the older USAT locos which used to have quite high stall currents. We also used Phoenix sound boards as back then they were the best sounding units available.
Since then a lot has changed: there are far more options available such as from QSI as Greg mentions, and Zimo are also good too, and even Massoth produce a heavy duty decoder aimed at US locos. For us though I still find myself using the NCE/Phoenix combination as it has been extremely reliable for us, despite a few mishaps, bumps and mistakes along the way! It is not the cheapest by far, but I still love the sound of Phoenix boards, and I have come to appreciate the simplistic, yet basic bullet proof reliability of the NCE chips.
I am currently looking at trying a new Zimo chip with the usual Phoenix board together in our next loco, and so far I am really impressed with the Zimo chip. It certainly has much more advanced features than the NCE board. I cannot comment on the sound side though as I chose a motor only version of the board. I just can’t move away from Phoenix sound!
I hope this is of some use to you? I cannot give you expert advice, but instead try to offer up a view of how we try to approach DCC on our pike.
Best wishes,
Gavin
PS: I would also totally agree with Greg’s comments regarding Digitrax large scale decoders. I used these at first in a couple of our locos, but I really didn’t get good results from them. In the end I decided to just remove them and sell them on ebay. I replaced them with NCE boards and instantly it was a big improvement.
I am working with Train-Li and will have a zimo system running trains, so stop by and I can answer questions and demo operations.
Greg Elmassian said:
Sorry Stan. I will say that the BEMF controls and overall motor “smoothness” is good with the European decoders, BUT I’ve had some really weird experiences with BEMF control with certain European decoders, when there is a very high current, low impedance motor with a very “free” drivetrain.
An example is the lab-grade Pittman motors often used in Accucraft, with the double worm and Zimo BEMF… the system goes nuts and it takes quite a bit of parameter tuning to get it to work even reasonably…
(this particular combination can cause so much “apparent” BEMF that the decoder goes nuts.
I have the same thing happen in Z scale with the very old Marklin motors, especially the 3 pole ones.
Tuning the 3 BEMF parameters are about the least fun I have had in programming a DCC decoder.
Regards, Greg
Greg
You are correct that tuning a decoders back emf is most unpleasant. Fortunately with the current generation of decoders it is rarely needed.
It is really not the current load but rather the high efficiency of the excellent Pittman motors that is the issue. With these high efficiency motors the back emf generated literately overloads the decoders detection circuits. For a long time the Pittmann motors represented a type of holly grail with the DCC manufacturers in part because they were rare in model railroad applications and thus did not get the attention they needed.
Today high efficiency motors are showing up in all scales and the decoder manufacturers have largely solved the problem abet in different ways.
QSI pre configures their decoders with the sound intended so when for example you load a Bachmann C-19 sound file it also loads the correct back emf parameters for the Pittmann motor. Lenz solved the problem by introducing a Back emf switch for high efficiency motors and a selection of 5 pre configured motor types. ESU has perhaps the most novel approach. They have an automatic configuration mode where you place the locomotive on a section of track set a CV and watch as the locomotive does some weird motions after which it runs well. I am not sure but I suspect Zimo also loads the parameters with the sound files as many of the premium sounds were constructed for specific Accucraft locomotives and I found they work very well out of the box.
Stan
Actually Stan, they are not really efficient, it’s the ultra low impedance combined with the freewheeling effect of the double lead worm.
What really works best for our trains is the cheaper mabuchi motors with a cooling fan and slots integral. Pittman motors like Accucraft uses are used for low load, low duty cycle, short impulse driving. All one who is schooled in electrical engineering needs to see is the current vs. torque graph on the manufacturer’s site, and see that while the motor can sustain 5 amps for a very brief interval, the constant current is about 0.7 amps.
These are lab type motors normally used in servo type applications, move to a location quick and then stay there for a while.
By gearing them way down, you can “get by” in our hobby, but they are just the wrong answer.
I have a hard time blaming the decoder manufacturers since these electrical characteristics are really wrong for the hobby, but I do hope they put more “range” in the BEMF “circuitry” to handle these extreme cases.
Of course, many people just turn off BEMF and solve the issue. I do go to the effort to attempt to tune to these, but it’s a pain.
Yes, my research on BEMF settings are the foundation for the stock settings in the QSI decoders, and there’s various “workarounds”. Luckily I only have about 5 locos with this “lab type” pittman motor.
Regards, Greg
Greg, the coded projects are $25 for the small decoders (mX 64X series) and $35 (MX69X) for the large ones.
I have not seen a $50 charge.
Plus the small decoders are rated for 35 volts, 50 volts for short durations.
I use the small MX645 which is programmable in small engines like Gustav, rail trucks, goose, even a Stainz.
In a past life, working at a major resort and convention center, my job was making train displays and maintaining them, I used the NCE Pro 5 and 10 systems with either the NCE D408 or D808 decoders and also the TCS T1 decoders in small single motor engines with great success (Eggliners).
Today for my pike, I am using the Lenz Set-100 Version 3.6 and primarily the TCS G8 decoders. TCS has an excellent reputation for making all decoders with the same basic standards for CV values. The new WOW sound decoders have the basic set of CV’s and a special set of CV’s (201-204) just for the sound functions. However the WOW decoders are only designed for the ‘N’ & ‘HO’ scale engines.
I do have a WOW Steam Decoder installed in a Bachmann ‘G’ 2-4-4 Porter engine and works like a dream. the sound is the best I have ever heard from a US manufacturer. The Back EMF is easy to configure and all the 200+ sounds is mind boggling.
Will make a video if you are interested.
Dennis in Tennessee
Dan, since we have a new person here, we need to indicate any affiliations that could cause some bias. I have stated that I was a beta tester for QSI, and this came about because I really wanted an inexpensive all in one decoder as opposed to the separate motor and sound decoders that were pretty much it when I started. Dan, you are closely related to Train-Li who is a major importer of Zimo.
By the way, also to the OP: I use Zimo when I cannot use QSI, or a NCE/Phoenix combination. I have the MX645 in several small locos.
Dennis, I’m in Z scale also, and the cost on the TCS are good, but I’ve had TERRIBLE problems with custom speed tables in their decoders, there is definitely a bug in their software. (the speed table is basically impossible to configure, the loco runs wild above a certain speed) Since I consist/MU many locos, this is a critical feature for me. The bug in the speed table is documented in their Yahoo forum, and it’s still not fixed at least in Z scale. I do not believe the firmware has changed, but I will have to try the latest decoder.
Regards, Greg
Greg Elmassian said:
Dan, since we have a new person here, we need to indicate any affiliations that could cause some bias. I have stated that I was a beta tester for QSI, and this came about because I really wanted an inexpensive all in one decoder as opposed to the separate motor and sound decoders that were pretty much it when I started. Dan, you are closely related to Train-Li who is a major importer of Zimo.
By the way, also to the OP: I use Zimo when I cannot use QSI, or a NCE/Phoenix combination. I have the MX645 in several small locos.
Dennis, I’m in Z scale also, and the cost on the TCS are good, but I’ve had TERRIBLE problems with custom speed tables in their decoders, there is definitely a bug in their software. (the speed table is basically impossible to configure, the loco runs wild above a certain speed) Since I consist/MU many locos, this is a critical feature for me. The bug in the speed table is documented in their Yahoo forum, and it’s still not fixed at least in Z scale. I do not believe the firmware has changed, but I will have to try the latest decoder.
Regards, Greg
I have not and will not be using consists, but being on the JMRI user Groups, TCS Group, and other DCC groups this has not been discussed recently. The speed tables I might get into but again have not seen problems discussion on this either. Again I am using the “HO” and “G” decoders only.
Having fun also using throw away old Android Smart Phones as wireless Throttles. Much nicer than the wireless options from the DCC companies IMHO. Works with the IPhones also if you have one.
I have no affiliation have any manufacturer of DCC equipment, just a user that wants reliable equipment and minimal problems.
Dennis in Tennessee