Large Scale Central

Proprietary systems are better than everything else including DC

General Discussion
#1

You heard it here second.

On another forum, a G scale company executive said (defending their proprietary system and taking more shots at DCC):

  1. "Also, the fact is that only the signal itself is standard in DCC, but the equipment is different from vendor to vendor as they all manipulate to compete with each other. "

  2. “We have heard that after a few years the boards need to be replaced and there are always issues about compatibility based on new codes for new features.”

sigh… in my opinion (and watering down my words) … doublespeak and misleading… but how can you miss the obvious? Maybe it is true that mixing that magic powder with water makes you believe anything.

There are some major things right about non-proprietary systems, and one is interoperability. (Ok everyone that makes a proprietary system, relax, you do have your place, and this is not a Greg E. vs. Tony W. vs. Del T. thread… )

This is about why “open systems” are helpful.

I have a lot of different locos. Not all DCC decoders from NCE do what I want, nor is the QSI always the best choice, nor a Zimo, or a Digitrax, nor an ESU, nor a Massoth, nor a Soundtraxx…

BUT, I have the ability to make up my own mind and make my own decision of what I want to use on my DCC system.

And if some day I switch from NCE to Zimo or another system, guess what, all my locomotives will still work fine with no reprogramming or hardware changes.

Now the statement #1 above is misleading… the decoders in the locos all meet the standard, and the electronics to put it to the rails also do so. Saying equipment is different from vendor to vendor is misleading. This is like saying: even though all cars run on streets of the same width, and have white headlights and red taillights, they are bad because not all the parts are interchangeable, you cannot put a ford ashtray in a chevy.

Statement #2 is basically the pot calling the kettle black. Of all the companies that make nothing backwards compatible, this particular one has many different versions that do not work with each other and they all are called by the same name.

The statement is also a LIE, DCC boards do not need to be replaced after a few years. Where does this come from? I have never heard this, and certainly DCC has existed much longer than any ONE incarnation of that company’s R/C system.

Sorry, this is blatently untrue, and no one with an IQ over room temperature should believe this.

My DCC system will run DCC stuff made years ago, and there are systems that even will run all the non-standard varients like MTS and the Motorola protocol, and those systems can be purchased today.

Maybe the technique is to accuse other systems of this company’s OWN SHORTCOMINGS?

It surely seems to fit the bill.

So, I don’t want to hear about Aristo bashing any more, unless you want to admit that DCC bashing is fine. Why should we embrace this kind of misdirection and blatant untruths? It’s ok to try to kill off all the smaller DCC companies? Everyone is happy that Soundtraxx no longer makes a large scale sound system, that they don’t have the finances to bring out the Large Scale Tsunami?

This is a big company trying to throw it’s weight around by BASHING and telling untruths. Why cannot their product just be advertised on it’s own merits? Think about that, and you may come up with the right answer.

Regards, Greg

#2

Hey, MY proprietary systems are better than your dcc!

Out here in the pouring freaking rain with ballast splashed all over the rails…

Quit pickin’ on louieeeeeeee.

Geez, you’ll get the mindless drivel over here complaining (with printed directions, no less!).

#3

“Statement”.

BELTROL is now compatible with DCC.
Two standards coming together for the better enjoyment of Large Scale train operation.

How about that for telling the truth.
It IS the truth. Just not all of the truth.

#4

Soooooooooo Greg, why would you get excited about that? Isn’t that par for the course? It’s the old story, buyer beware … and … those who can read and think will have a clear advantage. :wink:

BTW are you ready to switch to ZIMO yet? :lol: :stuck_out_tongue: :lol:

#5

HJ.
Greg is a relative latecomer to Large Scale and has had to experience first hand the “joys” of dealing with the dispenser of Kool Aid.
He has learnt rapidly all is not what it it seems, or is claimed to be.

#6

…and there is a very quiet trend going on, not often spoken of.
A large bunch of quiet spoken lurkers, along with many people fed up with noise polution. And a fair number of those that desire the movement “Back to simplicity…”
A simple rechargeable battery pack…usually a gel cell or two; and a simple on/off switch.
No debates. No arguments on merits of one system over another.
The premis is that all these very inteligent people are only wanting to see their simple train, run in a simple loop around the garden, without track cleaning, and without wiring.
No bells and whistles, or flickering firebox lights. No lights of any sort, as the operators go to bed at night and only play during daylight hours.
Occasionly one of the fun-loving group might, after several swigs of a fine holy water; put a wooden whistle to his lips, just for the effect of letting the other ones know that he is awake.

These same, SANE people have long found happiness, without “Silly Phones”, “Berrie type crappers” and “Twit Vision”…they still converse with each other in understandable English. Dinner is announced by a small bell , and calling for a refill is accomplished by getting up and walking to the bheer fridge.
Heck; most of them even WALK to the corner store…imagine.

#7

Father Fred,
What are you you???

I suspect a traitor to the cause of unfettered consumption of “stuff”. Just because it is the latest and greatest.
Have you not learned and understood that if we don’t keep on consuming at an ever faster rate the World will fall apart?

I think you are bit like me. You want stuff that is made to last without any planned obsolescence forcing you to buy a new one spurred on by big time advertising.
I have two perfectly good old Ford LTD’s. They are big and comfortable and run on (economic and low polluting) LPG. One needs a new motor and bit of rust removal and repaint (tops A$4-5 000) and it will be as good as new for another 30 years.

#8

My old CCM single gear bicycle works just fine thank you. One of these fine days, er, weeks, or years, I might get around to finding a slightly used pair of tires and tubes for it. In the mean time, I’ll just waddle along on my two legs to the pub for my day’s quota of good Whisky. I might make it home, or I may not…seems that if I make it home, I’ll only have to find my way back…for medicinal purposes only, I assure you.

#9

Of course.
Have a dose of medicine for me. A wee dram of Yukon Jack will do just fine. We can’t get that here. I have run out.

#10
TonyWalsham said:
[b]"Statement"[/b].

BELTROL is now compatible with DCC.
Two standards coming together for the better enjoyment of Large Scale train operation.

How about that for telling the truth.
It IS the truth. Just not all of the truth.


Yes Tony, but now I want to know where the compatability starts and ends i.e. how exactly will the BELTRON react to my ZIMO MX31FU?

#11
TonyWalsham said:
Of course. Have a dose of medicine for me. A wee dram of Yukon Jack will do just fine. We can't get that here. I have run out.
By God ...you have run out of Yukon!!! Just the horror of the thought is unnerving!! I'm Sorry to hear this disturbing news, may your cupboards be blessed with it's presence again in the very near future .
#12

HJ.

QSI is DCC. BELTROL works it. Therefore BELTROL is compatible with DCC.

I didn’t say that it was compatible with ALL DCC decoders. However, it could be said that I implied that it was. That is my point. Splitting hairs is the weasel way BS is disseminated.

As you well know, one needs to dig below the surface to get at the real truth inadvertising. Especially advertising from that certain Company that blatantly “gilds the Lily”.

BTW. That is BELTROL not BELTRON.

#13
TonyWalsham said:
HJ.

QSI is DCC. BELTROL works it. Therefore BELTROL is compatible with DCC.


Not necessarily so. QSI supports several protocols and depending on which protocol you support would depend on how you can answer the question. For example QSI has its patented DC protocol that also activates its sounds. This approach has nothing at all to do with DCC as it does not use either the DCC protocal or DCC signal.

DCC has two parts, a signal specification and a protocol specification.

For the signal specification you need both timing and signal strength (voltage) A reduced signal strength specification to allow for low voltage applications is properly called DCC Direct.

Assuming you have the signal specification correct then you also need to have the protocol specification correct to properly call the product compatible with DCC. There are a few common mistakes in this area but if you do have a problem it is relatively easy to fix.

I would be happy to test out your system for you should you desire. I have a lot of experience testing out DCC system so is relatively easy for me to accomplish.

An easy start from your standpoint is to simply publish a scope trace of your output. That will quickly determine which protocol you are using.

Stan Ames
http://www.tttrains.com/dcc/

#14
Stan Ames said:
Stan Ames http://www.tttrains.com/dcc/
Stan, Thank you for the link to your site. A lot of useful information there. Ralph
#15

Stanley.

You miss the point. Entirely. As usual.

For a start I did not say BELTROL R/C was DCC compliant. Secondly I was using it as an example of how unscrupulous manufacturers try and befuddle the consumer with BS advertising as I stressed in the following lines.
If you want to twist what I said to suit your own agenda, feel free.

#16

Why not?
He twists everything else to his own advantage.

#17

Tony et al,

As far as Looooeeeee goes, I believe the most enlightening missive that he wrote is the one about “the birth of 1:29”. :wink: Take that as the baseline and the rest follows!

#18

…or the way the very first 2-4-2t model was arrived at.

Just taken from a woodcut as I understand it.
Not from plans of a prototype or anything like that.
Claimed to be 1:29 but turns out to be quite close to 1:20.3. A bit like the LGB Porter was not actually 1:22.5.

#19
TonyWalsham said:
Stanley.

You miss the point. Entirely. As usual.

For a start I did not say BELTROL R/C was DCC compliant. Secondly I was using it as an example of how unscrupulous manufacturers try and befuddle the consumer with BS advertising as I stressed in the following lines.
If you want to twist what I said to suit your own agenda, feel free.


Tony

No agenda, just confused by your multiple posts in the thread above. From your post on my-large-scale I can see that indeed you are controlling the QSI sounds using their patented DC power reversal approach rather then DCC. You can indeed control all of their sounds this way using their unique protocal.

Alas to date they are the only ones using this approach.

Stan

#20

Stanley.

You are still missing the point.
Let me spell it out slowly so even you can understand.

This thread is more or less about BS advertising and promotion in the industry. Something that you yourself are well versed with.
My comments are examples of weasel words that are often used. Compatible instead of Compliant is just one example.
I think you need to understand the dictionary definition of Compatible.

The facts are, the BELTROL R/C system can operate a DCC compliant QSI sound decoder. Therefore the BELTROL R/C is compatible with said QSI sound decoder. I am quite within my rights to say it is compatible even though I KNOW that term can be misleading to the newcomers.
I did not say it was COMPLIANT with DCC. That would be simply untrue.

It is the use of misleading information by others to promote their “agendas” that I am trying to illustrate.