I’m usually among the first to pile on when there’s criticism of the content in our favorite monthly “fix”, so let me be among the first to offer praise for a job well done on the July 08 edition of Model Railroader.
Useful articles on scenery techniques, operations, weathering, and structures, plus a couple of excellent layout features.
Naturally I gravitated immediately the WM Thomas Sub N scale article. Everything in the edition has a nugget in there that I can apply to my modeling, or at least something to think about. The mix of articles is just about perfect.
I also really liked Neil’s editorial addressing the nay-sayers who complain that the hobby is dying. Gold Star for you, Neil. You hit the nail right on the head.
Now, I hope you didn’t save all the best stuff for this issue, and won’t have anthing left in ya for the rest of the year!
Yeah. Mine showed up in the mail, and I took it upstairs with me for my “bedtime story” before drifting off. Wrong. I’m still tired. I got into the “making rapids” article, was glad to see the next installment of San Bernadino, and when I came to the Western Maryland pics, I thought “I know Lee will like this one.” None of which helped me get to sleep.
I like it, althought I have to say, Tylick’s article was seriously lacking. They made that article seem like it would be a monumentally useful how-to when they put the info on the website and the newsletter before the issue actually came.
and I really wish they would get out of their habit of publishing 6 photos of the SAME part of a layout… that really bugs me. Lionel Strang’s Allegheny and Lackawanna Southern is my favorite layout ever, and when I finally found the old issue with it in it, I was so pissed when I realized that all but 1 picture was of the same area of the layout. I horde his Trackside Photos like soccer moms horde bottled water when a snow storm is coming.
I just rec’d July issue yesterday, so haven’t read it cover to cover yet. However I did read the editorial, and couldn’t help but wonder where the trend in the number of new model railroaders is headed. Just looking at the size (number of pages) of the current MR compared to the early 90’s doesn’t give me a warm fuzzy feeling; its about half the size today. Not sure how that relates to number of modelers, new or old, nor how the changing information technology scene (read internet) factors into it. I suspect its more related to declining advertising revenue rather than fewer subscribers. Note that cover price has doubled in same time period, about 5%/yr increase which I suspect is a little higher than the inflation rate over the same period, which makes me further suspect its a decline in advertising revenue that is behind the size reduction. But my gut feeling is that the number of new modelers also is declining. Combined with an aging population, ie more of us old timers (my first issue of MR was purchased 12/58) will be “departing” (and not on a train!), doesn’t sound promising to me.
All the more reason to work harder at attracting the younger crowd to the hobby. MR’s support/startup(?) of World’s Greatest Hobby on Tour is a step in the right direction. and this forum does a very good job of encouraging younger members I believe. But I believe to make real progress we all need to work harder at attracting new blood (young or old) in our everday lives. Gone are the days when when could sit back and be anonymous model railroaders - we need to “come out” and promote the hobby.
On the other hand, there has never been more (or greater variety of) models and supplies available than today, which wouldn’t happen unless the market was there. So maybe there are fewer customers but much higher per person spending on average. Increased spending may be a result of demographics, but
I’ve been following the Pike Sized Passenger Train contest with some interest, as my brother is working on developing one of his own. This Gila Tomahawk is great and would be a perfect inspiration if I had a layout that fit the era and type for a small passenger train.
Anythinh with the V&O and something by Gary Hoover in it is great for me. GMRR 1994 is what got me into model railroading as a kid. It featured Hoover’s Missouri, Kansas, & Quincy as the cover story and an article on the V&O. I was very pleased with the last two issues but this month’s was the better of the two.
I really enjoyed seeing the pics of the lunch counter in Gary Hoover’s depot and the article on building oversized load cars. I also like what I’ve been seeing of MR’s Wisconsin Southern Railroad layout and hope to see more of it.
I really liked the N track plan for the Wester Maryland. Not my kind of prototype but I really liked how it was designed. It included a well throught out staging yard, a layout broken into scenes, and no duck unders. Everything I could want!
I agree “Weather with Washes” was a bit of a dud, especially the related online extra.
Most of that was fluff… more advertising for mail order places and the back was filled with club listings and events that they no longer carry in the magazine. Both gone due to the web. I think the amount of actual content is comprable.
Funny thing, I got both MR and Trains magazines in the mail last week and still have yet to read either. Guess I’ll just have to crack open the pages soon…[:-^]
The number of pages in the mag is driven by factors like advertising, printing cost, paper cost, etc, which don’t necessarily correllate to the potential number of readers. IMAO, a better gauge of the health of the hobby is the number of new products being released. It costs $$$ to develop a new product and bring it to market. In a dying hobby, no company is going to do that.
I model in N scale. I’ve only been in the hobby about 2 years, but in that time I’ve seen the number and variety of products growing . My sense is that the same is true in HO. So I think the signs are good, no matter how many pages in the magazine.
I will agree that the weathering article was a bit spartan, however, it’s a phase of the hobby that a lot of guys are struggling with, and I think it was a good introduction to a process that doesn’t require a lot of esoteric products.
I dare say I’ve seen better results using the same process here from Dave Vollmer and others, but it was still nice to see a nice, direct, how to article instead of bilge like the “bucket of trees.”
And the article about building your own tarped loads was a total departure from the recent trend of “dream it, plan it, BUY it.” There are a lot of very nice commercial loads out there, but here’s a guy still picking through the junk in his garage and finding ways to use it on his layout. And with very nice results!
As for the page count, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that many advertisers have changed from multi-page catalog ads to a small block directing readers to their websites. If you combine what’s on the printed page with the on-line content, and on-line advertisements, I dare say we’re getting a lot more information than we did 10 years ago. Limiting the on-line content to subscribers is MR’s way of keeping a good nose count, and also encouraging newsstand buyers to go ahead and sign up as regulars. My guess is that over time, it will work to their advantage in a big way.
The post above is, most unfortunately, of a sort all too commonly seen on this forum, originating from a lack of actual knowledge about, or the researching of, a particular subject.
In fact, MR in the early 1990’s had more than twice the useful editorial text (by column inches) that it contains lately…and that content was certainly not fluff. If one honestly takes the time to examine the magazines, you will discover that in the years since the early 1990’s MR’s type-size has increased, column widths decreased, page borders and empty “white space” enlarged, together with most articles today tending to be dominated by increasingly larger and larger “pretty pictures” and less informative text. In light of this and observing that MR sold for $2.95 in 1992 and costs $5.95 today, you are essentially paying 400% more today for the content you are receiving.
I would add that the dropping of the magazine’s show/events listings, which was done against the wishes of a great percentage of the readership (see this forum’s posts at the time), was hardly the result of Web access. Rather, it was most likely instituted to create an additional source of income for the magazine, through pay-for-publication of the event listings.
I suspect you are ‘on target’ with the number of subscribers/advertising revenue. The hard number to get a grasp on is the number of modelers in the hobby. In the past it seemed that ‘everyone’ was buying a monthly copy of MR or RMC. Currently our club has 12 members, and maybe 4 members regularly buy a monthly magazine. They get their ‘news’ via the Internet and do most of their buying via mail order.
I am basing my opinion on having recently read through most of the 90s in the last few months thanks to getting a lot of back issues off ebay. I have managed to accumulate every year except 1992 of which I have only several issues. So, whille you may not agree with me, your statement that my opinion is “originating from a lack of actual knowledge about, or the researching of, a particular subject.” is unfair and the kind of attack that unfortunately is the dark side of this particular message board.
Remember, MR’s primary revenue stream is from magazine advertising and subscriber fees. This income supports not only publication of the magazine, but also the free forum which you’re now reading. Yes, there’s a bit of ad income here, too, but not much. So, if you’re reading this, you’re getting value from the magazine whether you’re a hard-copy reader or not.
I really like this month’s magazine. I’m hoping it’s the start of a trend.
On a slightly different note, I’ve been buying the MR wall calendar the last couple of years. I look at it as a way to support both the magazine and my LHS. It hangs on my wall at work, and I’m amazed at some of the modelling. “Miss June” is an O-gauge F7 in Pennsy colors, photographed on Rob Enrico’s layout. Even knowing that this is a model, I find it hard to believe it’s not real.
Exactly. It’s been “dumbed-down,” and yet the magazine’s editors continue to blame video games and anything but the quality of the product for the drop in circulation.
Businesses don’t do anything out of the goodness of their hearts. The board doesn’t exist because the company’s being really nice to you. In this instance, Kalmbach, like many other online entities, is using this board as a means to draw people to its website.
The point of my original post was that this month’s edition of Model Railroader is head and shoulders better than what has been in there recently. I suspect that Neil B. is now finished with the stale leftovers he had to deal with when he started, and we are starting to see his thumbprint being applied to the content.
Many of us here and on other boards have complained (and rightly so) that the content had drifted toward the ordinary, but I see the July edition as turning the corner and providing more meat and potatoes for guys like me who want to do more with the hobby than swipe a credit card.
I don’t expect every issue to appeal to me as thoroughly as this one has, but it would sure be nice!
This month’s issue was really good. So was last month’s. I was going to make a full-scale review last month, but have less time than once I did for such things. Unfortunately the HO V&E is also experiencing this downturn. But the brass rail hasn’t been cleaned for months and trains still run! Go GLEAM method!
Great couple of issues. I’m glad I started subscribing again. Even the photo angles are more varied!
I think they have a long way to go, but I think MR is continuing to turn things around from their very low point a few years ago, and I have noticed a distinct change in the way they handle the online extras. These last couple of months, I have really felt like I have a whole magazine again for easy-chair reading. THAT is what I want.
That San Bernardino layout is fantastic, too. Remember when everybody was gushy over that well done bit of western dustball Soeborbia? Except a few grouches? Well, to this grouch, that San Bernardino scene is what Soeborg’s excellent miracle-mile is to its fans.
See, there are layouts which are allegedly historic but just don’t look it. There are layouts which have every historic detail perfect to the highest degree, and still don’t look right…everything is right, and yet the builder’s zeal to remove every bit of nonauthenticated detail leaves it looking strangely unreal, like a movie set. When I look at that train pulling into San Bernardino, I get the feeling that I am in another time, looking at the present. This make sense to anyone?
(And it helps that the builder set up his photos with creativity in composition.)
Keep on the current track, MR, and the bad times will be nothing more than a memory.
Unfortunately the HO V&E is also experiencing this downturn. 
But the brass rail hasn’t been cleaned for months and trains still run! Go GLEAM method!