Since there was a topic on what’s bad about MR, I’d like to Know what’s good.
I thought the Jan 2002 issue had a lot of good stuff in it. If they keep it up they might be on the road to recovery!..Walt
I love layout articles in MR - they’re generally very well done and give me a feel for the layout. They almost always come with track plans (including indication of where the photos were taken from so I can orient myself when looking at the photos), and give me a good idea of what another (usually very skilled) modeller has accomplished given a certain space and theme. They’re motivational, inspirational, and sometimes instructive. As far as I’m concerned, they can’t have enough layout visits.
The how-to articles are somewhat hit and miss - lots of hits, but several misses. Perhaps this is because the magazine covers a wide range of skills and interests, and the misses are usually those articles that don’t appeal to me but maybe appeal to some other part of them audience. I think they could offset that by making sure each issue has at least one how-to that hits each major target (beginners, experienced, scratchbuilders, scenery-makers, etc.).
Mostly, I think MR represents a monthly addendum to the most authoritative collection of model railroading information around. Kalmbach is the Great Library of our hobby, and there’s a certain tradition MR has to (and generally does) live up to.
If MR were not the most widely respected source in the hobby, do you think people would bother to criticize it? They would just not buy it. MR has led the field for so long because it makes very few mistakes, and despite what some say, gives fair reviews of products, widely covering all aspects of the hobby. It has the look and feel of a quality magazine and evidently still knows what a proofreader is, if some of its advertisers don’t. I would like to get my subscription copy of the magazine I saw in the bookstore 17 days ago though. As someone who lives over 100 miles from a full time hobby shop, I’d be lost without MR and “N-Scale”.
Best thing for me is the All Time Index of articles available on this website…can refer back to anything in the 650-odd issues I have.
Find a lot of projects from 15-25-35 years ago that didn’t interest me at the time, but do now.
regards/Mike
MR I think is starting to get on the right track
again. The article Build the HO Rock Ridge
Central for the last two issues has been a lot
more informative. These types of articles are what
is needed instead of the larger layouts. Not that
the large layouts are bad but, most people do not
have room for layouts at those sizes. Jim Kelly
needs to do more articles the same way. Thanks
I am thouroughly (yeah, Im pretty sure I spelled that wrong) enjoying building the Rock Ridge Central, albeit in N scale with handlayed code 55 track and scratchbuilt bridges. But hey, all I have room for right now is a 4x8. But its a lot of fun. MR is not a bad magazine, the only huge beef I have with them is their (now a tradition) delinquency. Ill continue to subscribe, even if I dont find anything “useful” to me, its always enjoyable to just read the magazine.
Matt
On the same thread as those relating to the current layout building series, the first issue of MR I ever saw was at the age of 12 1/2 - the January 1965 issue. That had the second installment of the Ma & Pa project layout that ran for the best part of a year. The hook was set - both for the hobby and MR. I have every issue of the mag since and many before.
David
I enjoy the consistent quality of the photography and the broad range of coverage in the features and columns/departments. The ‘One reader’s opinion’ is a good counterpoint to Tony K’s ‘Trains of Thought’ and the How To feature articles do an excellent job of following technological trends in the hobby.
Perhaps that’s MRs best overall quality - staying in the forefront of the hobby in terms of showing what’s being done at the forefront, keeping a much needed eye out for beginners who don’t know a “turnout” from an exit on the Interstate and often challenging all of us to push our skills to “raise the bar” on our abilities and providing enough variation in the content to keep the creative juices flowing.
You know,I always thought a turnout was a fire frighters coat!!!
Goatherder said…
“Since there was a topic on what’s bad about MR, I’d like to Know what’s good.”
Well, to be perfectly blunt, I far prefer RMC for real world articles on modeling and reference info. That said, MR is the leading magazine in the field with the most new information in it. MR is where I look to see what’s new.
It has, however, lost its way using photo glitz with little information. Look to the issues from 4 and 5 years ago to see what they have lost. I want to see detail with those beautiful photos. One of their turn offs to me is spining the detail out into new magazines that cover the material that used to be in MR. The last two issues did look as if they were going to return to some of the older style of articles.
Bottom Line? With its current faults, it is still the leader and worth buying if for no other reason than the photo essays. However, it is no longer the leader in reference and how to for the new modeler.
Roger
Roger Hensley
rhensley_anderson@juno.com
== http://cid.railfan.net/eci_new.html[/URL] ==
== East Central Indiana HO Scale Railroad ==
The good thing about MR is that they are a consistently GOOD magazine. Maybe not GREAT, but considering their audience I think they do a superb job. They have been given the responsibility/curse of being the “standard” magazine of the hobby of model railroading, (or at least one of the most visible/most distributed) which means they have to deliver universal content that, among other things, must not scare away newcomers to the hobby. With all the specialty mags there are now I think their niche is probably right where they want to be. I feel fortunate that there are TWO major N-Scale magazines out there and a majority of my interests fall within their subject matter but I still enjoy MR nonetheless. I grew up reading MR and I attribute my good writing skills (ok, at least above-average anyway!) in part to the fact that I had a well-written magazine that allowed me to develop a sense of how an article is laid out, etc. In that respect, I hope the guys at MR realize the influence they have on young minds and will continue to have pride in their work and keep doing a good job. Sure I get frustrated with the occasional stagnant issue like the next guy but I think year in and year out they do a fine job. Kudos, MR!!!
Doug Andreasen
dougandreasen@aol.com
I think that what’s good about MR is that,like Doug says, they cater to a HUGE audience with an equal number of different interests. So for the modeler who is only interested in say N scale, 1960 period, mid-western roadname, with a preference for electronics, not every issue will cater specifically to him. He may find only 2 or 3 issues a year with articles of interest to him. But for the modeler who appreciates others work (no matter the scale or roadname or historical period)and keeps an open mind and sees the BIG picture of the hobby as a whole with all it’s nuances and different ways of going about it, MR does an awesome job of trying to keep every issue that has a little something for everyone.
Keep up the good work MR and don’t read too deep into what every critic says.
I read much criticism of MR around here, and I think much of it is underserved. Certainly it is not perfect, as recent subscription problems prove. But what many seem to forget is that MR is a publication that attempts to refelct the WHOLE of model railroading as a hobby. That means that it serves the novice who has just bought his first train set as well as the veteran who has been scratchbuilding steam loco’s for years. It must cover everything from Z to G and beyond, from benchwork to superdetainling, and from track wiring to DCC. That is a large bill to fill.
There are certainly articles from time to time that do not appeal to me personally, and even some that seem frivilous and pointless. Even the greatest of periodicals, however, has its dud articles and issues. To expect otherwise is unrealistic. I entered model railroading as an adult and without the benefit of friends in the hobby. MR was the first resource I had in learning this hobby, and its influence and instruction for me have been invaluable. Now I consider myself and intermediate level modeler, and I still look forward to receiving my MR every month and learn much from its pages. Hats off to the editors and staff at MR for producing a quality periodical that covers all aspects of a great hobby. Keep up the good work.
Page for page and subscription dollar for subscription dollar, MR still represents the best deal going. The production quality has improved tremendously over the years, the writing and editing is superb - especially when compared to a couple of other magazines I could name - and the photography is usually outstanding.
Sure, not every article appeals to me, but then I don’t expect that any more than I expect every article in the Gazette or Finescale Railroader to appeal to me either. I’m way past the beginner stage, but I’m probably nowhere near the league of, say, Sellios or Koester. But a great many other readers are at one or the other of those extremes. So, all in all, MR has a good balance of material to appeal to a very diverse readership.
While I don’t think that MR is all that it can be, I do believe that it is still a high-quality production. What’s right? The artwork (including photos, diagrams, graphics, drawings, etc…), the technical writing and editing, and the layout features. In addition, I still like (and I know others will disagree, but hey, it’s just an opinion) Trains of Thought, Workin’ on the Railroad (although at times it gets a little too basic), One Reader’s Opinion, Trackside Photos, and Along the Line. With all of that said, it may appear that I have no gripes. Well, there are a few. I was always a fan of Paint Shop and would like to see its return (and maybe even Student Fare on a quarterly basis if nothing else). I don’t like At the Throttle at the front of the magazine (some things just aren’t right, and that’s one of them…return it to its rightrul location just before the special features). In looking back at some of the issues, it seems that some issues display MRs past brilliance and others are lackluster. I think that in some issues, a little less filler and a little more beef would suffice. I am curious about the quality & length of the submissions. Is the content solely the editor’s choosing or have the submissions taken a turn for the worse? Otherwise I think its a fine magazine. I haven’t missed an issue since the early 80s and I’m not planning to miss any in the future. I don’t think there are any fatal problems, it just needs refinement. They still do alot of things right.
Jeff, you asked in your posting if submissions have taken a turn for the worse. I can’t speak for MR and won’t presume to. But I do know in the case of another magazine, Finescale Railroader, that what you’re asking about is at least part of the picture. After reading two or three editorials in FR on that subject in the last couple of years, and after a personal exchange of emails with the editor/publisher over the last couple of years, I know that a lack of quality articles being received there is causing some real concern. I have the feeling that is also the case with a couple of other magazines, because the quality and interest level just seems to be missing. In the case of MR, only Andy or one of the other editors could answer your question about number/quality of article submissions.
I feel for Andy and other editors,having worked in newspaper publishing for over 50 years. Editors have to take what writers offer in such magazines as MR. About everything in the U.S. is getting lower in grade so the lower quality of writing is,in most cases, no exception. Standards should be kept high for once they are lowered to beginner status, it is almost impossible to raise them. Perhaps a partial solution is to run more monthly columns by those who know what they are talking about instead of so many layout features, at least for awhile. Remember the old Layout Doctor column? One thing for sure - it is easier to critize than to do the job.
Earl, Tug Fork R.R.