Quandry- DCC sound vs. features, or, getting the most "Bling"!

Model Railroader General Discussion (Model Railroader)
1

Season’s greetings!

I’m going about planning a conversion of my existing locos over to DCC, and would like to have sound and visual features such as ditch lights, Mars lights on my (eventual) F units, perhaps strobes on the roof of the switchers, etc. What can I say- I’m a geek, I like toys. [:o)]

Of course, the ultimate plan for the future would be buying only engines with built-in sound, esp. from what I’ve heard of Quantum. However, that makes the (invalid) assumption that every loco I wants will eventually be supplied w/ DCC&sound built in, which I don’t think is reasonable. [:)]

I’ve been looking at the options for adding sound to existing locos. I like the sound of the Soundtraxx systems, but their all-in-one decoders (DSD-090LC, DSD-100LC, and drop-in) all indicate they only have two (2) function outputs. From what I’ve seen of the Digitrax and other decoders, as well as reading the Kalmbach and Digitrax DCC books, wouldn’t that mean that you can only power two (2) lamp outputs, meaning forward/reverse (Rule 17, IIRC), or forward/reverse on one, with ditch lights on another? Seems rather limiting to me, adding one form of verisimilitude at the expense of another. [B)]

I then toyed with the idea of having two decoders, such as a Digitrax DH-163 series to control train/lights, and a Soundtraxx DSX for sound. I assumed that if one could resolve the programming of two decoders, one could use basic consisting (again, IIRC… I’m a NOOB at DCC, so be gentle if I’m WAY off base) to control the loco as a whole. HOWEVER… I’m reading comments such as http://loystoys.com/info/sound-general.html, which suggest that this technique is problematic, at best. [:(]

I guess there’s always the idea of having the DSX in a boxcar, but that raises operational and more verisimilitude questions, so I would REALLY prefer to not go that way. [V]

SO, I’m putting it out to the world (or at least this forum), and asking what others might suggest.

2

I am not really sure if this is what your talking about but i have a set of intermountain f’s that i have tci in the A fore motor control,soundtraxx first generation sound in the b…I haven’t had a single problem And by the way they were installed by Fred Standish{LOYS TOYS} I have both units programmed to the same address so the engine sound keeps in time with the accelleration and decelleration .I do however program these units seperatley on the program track when changing cv values.By running both units on the same address i can double head my other two f’s have an ABBA consit, I haven’t had any trouble running like this .I cant get into a lenghty disscussion on why it works or why it shouldnt work as many more knowledgeble poeople here on this forum might.All I can say it works for me without problems so far.

3

RailGuyHO,

You’re Close, but No Cigar. [:)]

The link I referred to states that it isn’t worth the trouble trying to have both decoders in the same unit. That is, both the Digitrax/motive power decoder and the Soundtraxx/sound decoder in the same body.

I understand that I could do something like you, and conceptually it works for AB units (or any combination thereof.) The problem comes in that my case, where I’m not going to have a huge mainline, and am more likely to be running single units. As mentioned before, I don’t really want to need to have the same boxcar always following a particular engine. But, the Soundtrax decoders only seem to support two functions, leading to limited options for lighting functions.

Thanks,

Brian

4

I have used this exact combination DH-163P and Sountraxx DSX. But I program them both to the same channel rather than using consisting. The only problem is when only one of the decoders needs a programming change. I handle this with shorting plugs so I can unplug one or the other decoders. I’ve also had success using an AB set of Fs. The B unit has the sound. This also allows for a lot bigger and better speakers so the sound is much better.

5

I haven’t looked at any of the news on soundtraxx new line of decoders if indeed they ever are released,maybe this will solve that problem.I guess now i am curious as to why you couldn’t have two decoders in the same unit,besides space what would be the major problem.The sound unit i have from sound traxx is a very basic decoder as far as wiring goes.,would the problem be in the input having to go thru both decoders?I guess what i am trying to say the decoder in my A unit doesn’t know that the sound decoder is not also mounted in the A unit. Therfore the only advantage i have is having the extra pickups in the B.The A still runs without the B and the B still has sound without the A.The only thing both decoders would share in the same unit is the power leads from the pickups.

6

You can certainly combine two decoders in one loco. In fact it will do more than get extra light functions - the current line of Soundtraxx motor and sound combined decoders aren’t the greates motor decoders, so even the drive will be better if you get a good motor decoder and a Soundtraxx sound-only unit. Plus,t he newer Digitrax decoders implement a ‘decoder lock’ features (some others are starting to have this as well) which when enabled prevents cv changes from altering that decoder. Thus the motor decoder and the sound decoder have the same address but you can program one without messing up the other in the event here are overlapping CV’s to set.
The new Soundtraxx Tsunami decoders, when they get here, should have more functions and better motor drive.
I have toyed with the idea of putting a Soundtraxx EMD first generation sound unit in my Stewart dummy F7 B unit, and then consisting it witht he A unit, or other power - I have photos to show my prototype using F B’s with GP7’s as well as with any F A unit, ie an F3 A with an F7 B or any sort of mixed consist you can imagine. Plus putting sound in the B unit means BIG speaker which means GREAT sound.

–Randy

7

Well, one of the things we should ALL know by now is, if you don’t know, go ask your LHS. After FAR too many hours of overtime during the past week, I stopped by after work today, and brought up this topic.

Turns out that, in one important way, I was mistaken. In looking at the manuals for the DH-123 & DH-163, I wasn’t paying quite enough attention to the good ‘ol RPs. Looking at the figure on the 2nd page of the DH-123D manual (http://www.digitrax.com/ftp/dh123d.pdf), I saw the Green and Violet wires a’ hangin’ in the wind, with only the Yellow & White wires hooked to anything. Well, according to the LHS, that ain’t so. Those are the RP colors corresponding to two function outputs. (Hint, Digitrax, if you’re listening- connect these to something arbitrary, or label them as function outputs- I got the impression they weren’t useful for anything from this figure.) [:)] So, now I can see that when I fini***he MDC Connie, I can install the DH-123D, with an output for the Front light (White), one for the backup light I’m planning on installing on the tender (Yellow), and still have at least one for a firebox light.

Looking at the Soundtraxx DSD-90LC manual (http://www.soundtraxx.com/docs/LCManual.pdf) there are mentioned FX# outputs (I looked at a paper copy in the LHS, which showed a diagram I don’t see in the Soundtraxx on-line manual. Hrm. Soundtraxx- more pictures = good!) So, I could do the sound installation by adding in the appropriate DSD instead of a DH/DSX combination. I would also still have enough outputs for projects like the Connie, or the H16-44 I’ve got on order. However, as some people have noted, the Digitrax (and other purpose-built motor decoders) have better control.

So, therein lies the heart of my question, still somewhat unanswered- to dual to not to dual, that is the question.

But hark, what rumor glimmers in yonder newsgroup… (sorry, I only mangle Shakespeare when I’m tired…)

[quote]
QUOTE: Origina

8

The middle number on a Digitrax decoder model generally indicates how many functions it has. The reason the harness for the DH123 has the extra wires but not connected is that instead of making a ‘special’ 9-pin harness with two of the wieres removed, they just use the same generic 9 pin harness that comes with any other decoder that has the 9 pin plug on it.

–Randy

9

High Bpickering,

You’ve brought up some good points as I’m taking the DSX/Digitrax 163 route.

My only comment that may be of value that I’ve repeateded on other posts is to AVOID the 90LC or “L” series decoders. The amplifier is smaller than on the DSX series and,IMHO, the sound from an “L” sound decoder is dissappointing. Heard it on a Kato HO GE unit. The DSX sound is more “gutsy”.

BTW: I’m sure you’re aware by now that Soundtraxx stopped producing the DSD-150 a while back. If you find any, you’d be quite fortunate. These are what the Tsunami is replacing.

I’m looking forward to the Tsunami, but I do plan on getting at least one DSX decoder along with a Digitrax 163. (Nice thing about Athearn FP45s is that they have quite a bit of space inside for two decoders and a baffled speaker.) In fact, the first locomotives I’m installing sound in will be car body engines because of the space advantage. I’ll be installing sound in my P2K and Stewart covered wagons as well.

Let us know what you decide to do. I’m a novice and enjoy reading input from guys that are already working with sound!

Peace, Merry Christmas!