I have subscribed to CTT for many years now and I like the increased Hi-Rail layout coverage. The articles flow well and content is usually very good. The October issue however featured unusual narration of one of the featured layouts by Roger Carp. I found this irriratating. Roger, please stick to the pertinent facts of the layout and its builder.
For product reviews, I think a more balanced representation from all manufacturers is needed. Bob Keller comes across a little too like a salesman.
All in all, CTT has gotten better in the last 2 years.
I thought Roger’s approach to the Smokey Mountain layout was imaginative and fun to read. But then again, I always enjoyed watching the Andy Griffith Show. As for Bob Keller’s reviews, I think he was very objective in stating that the MTH loco quit not long after the review period. I’ve never regarded any thing he’s written as sounding like a salesman. Jim
There’s every variety of opinion out there about every aspect of the mag. I liked that article - if you want to comment on the subject of a particular review, you can do it on this website
Did not get into the whole Andy thing, mind you I like the show, but the article did get a bit irritating. That is just my opinion and they certainly don’t do that kind of thing too often, which is good. As for the reviews, I think they are good and much more informative and fair than the “other” magazine. My last issue of OGR seemed like MTH is The Toy Train company, oh, and there is another company that has been around awhile (100+ years).
I did like the photos that showed a large section of the layout and feel they should be included in most photo spreads so you can get a over-all view. It is easy to make a small diorama look good, but how does it play into the whole thing? Please try to do this in the future.
I agree that more wide-area shots of layouts are enjoyable; closeups are fine if and only if the layout article has more wide area shots. Narration of layouts - while some are boring, others are interesting. I especially like when the layout builder tells his own story, and the ones where the builder is generally enthusiastic about the layout/operations show through. I use to like Roger’s narration, but it seems the last year or so they are a little too much fluff.
As for product reviews, I’ve owned some of the MTH engines Bob Keller has reviewed, and I don’t relate to his use of adjectives - to me it sounds like he is pushing the items. Both mags should review each companies products evenly, e.g., scale steam from each, then move to diesels, electrics, semi-scale steam, etc. Then and only then will the reviewer gain an appreciation of what each product’s features has, how they compare to each other, strengths and weakenesses, etc. Objectivity is not easy in what unfortunately seems to have become a politically-influened hobby.
If you’re a subscriber, Paul, feel free to post your own comments on our on-line reviews. Just be specific in your comments and have at it. The only postings I’ve disapproved have either had nothing to do with the review, or were broad comments like “I can’t see paying $XX for a locomotive,” or “Lionel … MTH … K-Line … etc etc etc stink.”
Yes, I am a subscriber. I was wondering what people were talking about “on-line reviews”, I guess its a separate forum on this site? I’ll try to find it.
I couldn’t agree more with your 3 points. I’ve yet to buy a copy of CTT I haven’t read from cover to cover and mainly enjoyed and I have every issue from day one. I no longer purchase OGR blindly off the shelf for the precise reason you’ve mentioned above. I have no interest in putting DCS on my layout nor owning some of the fantasy products (non prototypical) that are created by the new kid on the block.
Regarding the phots from the layouts. A wider angle view please and also a better detailed ddrawing of the layouts. It’s sometimes hard to visualize exactly where the structures shown in the pictures is located on the layout.
Ken
Different strokes for different folks, as is most often the case.
I enjoy reading as much about the hobby as I can get my hands on, and in various scales from Z through Large Scale, since I like them all.
I haven’t detected a manufacturer bias one way or another in any of the two-and-a-half O gauge magazines (including O Scale here), but I suppose that’s because I care more about the models being reviewed rather than the manufacturer who made the model. If an item attracts my interest, I couldn’t care less who makes it. I felt that way even when I was a kid, when my predominantly Lionel layout also had accessories from Marx and train items offered by a couple of other makers such as AMT.
These days, about the only manufacturer that isn’t represented on my layout or in my collection is Atlas O (aside from their track, which I use exclusively) simply because their items are a bit too costly for my O gauge budget and they haven’t offered many items in the sizes or roadnames that I prefer. That may change one of these days, and it’s certainly not a knock on Atlas, which is offering some great items.
I haven’t seen the current issue of CTT yet–will see if it’s available at B&N when I visit there later today–but I’m a big fan of Roger’s writing and always look forward to reading anything my former colleague and old pal writes.
No one publication, or single issue of any publication, can be all things to all people. But I ALWAYS learn something new from each and every issue of all the various magazines, regardless of scale, and I’m just glad there is a variety of them out there to enjoy on a regular basis. I intend to continue supporting them all for as long as I can, because without reader support they will simply no longer be there. And if that day ever comes, people can really begin wringing their hands and whining about the future of the hobby.