N gauge Journal 6/13

[Malc]

Nice to see that Graham Hedges' missive in Journal 5/13 raised a few eyebrows and elicited 9 very full replies. Nice one H

[ParkeNd]

In my view the NGS were both brave and honest to print the original letter and the large number of replies.

For my part I hope the N Gauge Journal does not lose it's charming style and readability. For a lowest common denominator like me who buys RTR locos and rolling stock, and enjoys the reviews with their quirky style and additional facts that the mainstay mags don't bother with, it is both different and highly readable. Even the not so good photos sometimes and bits of layouts that I think are bettered by parts of mine are inspirational - it makes me feel I am getting somewhere and one day may improve to a level that gets me a hairs breadth above unworthy. If N Gauge were to become the sole preserve of diehards with four digit NGS membership nos it will in my view fade away.

Everyone is entitled to have an opinion and to express it - but they have to expect that others may not agree with every one of those opinions.

[EtchedPixels]

Interesting discussion and some good articles including at least one from a member of the forum.

I was surprised the letters editor felt it appropriate to print the rather peculiar  letter containing the rant about the lack of code 55 rail and rather silly dig at the 2mmSA.

I can't decide if the magazine has gotten dumber or I've got better. I'm going to pretend it can only be the latter 

Alan

[NeMo]

I can't decide if the magazine has gotten dumber or I've got better. I'm going to pretend it can only be the latter

That's the age-old problem for hobby magazines of all sorts. They're most attractive to beginners, may be read by intermediate-level hobbyists, but eventually become too shallow to appeal to the advanced hobbyists. It isn't the magazine that changes, it's the readership, and all hobby magazines have to appeal to a new readership on a continuing basis. My understanding is that most hobby magazines expect people to read them for a couple years before dropping them.

At any one time the majority of model train hobbyists won't be experts or people who prefer to kit-build all their rolling stock. It would be truly insane for any magazine to focus on just 10% of their potential readership to the exclusion of the other 90%, especially if that 10% doesn't buy or read the magazine anyway, and has little/no interest in the advertisements published in it either. I've worked with a major hobby magazine in another field for about 15 years now, and one editor tried to do exactly this, turning it into something for the more discerning hobbyist interested in the most challenging aspects of the hobby. The result was not a success.

My real problem with Graham Hedges' letter wasn't that it was wrong but that it was uncharitable. At the end of the day the NGS Journal is put together by volunteers, and unless Mr Hedges' is volunteering to help 'improve' the journal in the directions he suggests, his letter seemed (to me) a bit unkind towards the people running the society and its journal.

I also don't like the assumption that people who aren't kit-building (or scratch-building) aren't modelling. That smells of elitism to me, which is a bit daft since we're all playing with toy trains and really don't have anything to be elitist about. It's not like we're doing Ironman triathlons or something similar that genuinely separates the boys from the men*! But what constitutes real railway modelling is perhaps another discussion for another day...

Cheers, NeMo

*And something I'm the first to admit I'd definitely be among the worst at!

[ParkeNd]

^^^^ Well said NeMo.

[pape_timmo]

In my view, the model world does tend to be dominated by older people these days. I say this based on my time as a member of the Railway Enthusiasts Club in Farnborough, where most of the members were over 40.

I'm not tarring everyone with the same brush, but younger people today tend to prefer electronic entertainment equipment... Xbox, playstation etc.

To get younger people interested in modelling I think manufacturers have to develop models so that they can buy and run, with all the detail that involves. I too can't expect to produce models on par with those available rtr, and I'm happy to buy the models I like the look of.

As you'll know, I'm also trying to build the Royal Train using etches from Hurst, and I've got the NMT coaches and 3 other RTC  coaches to do afterwards. I'm also hoping to buy some kits from the NGS, but I don't expect any of my efforts to come anywhere near the quality of the rtr stuff.

If Dapol were to make the coaches of the EWS Executive train, the Royal Train or the NMT, I Would gladly buy all of them, but I'm not holding my breath. I am enjoying my Royal efforts, and I'm learning all the time, with the help and encouragement of members of this forum.

The NGS too inspires me to have a go, having not done any model making for a number of years. My good lady had a go at me a few months ago saying I kept buying models but not doing any modelling.

To each their own, and all encouragement is valuable. Criticism is also valuable, if well intentioned, and correctly administered.

Just my thoughts. Cheers, Timmo

[Dorsetmike]

If N Gauge were to become the sole preserve of diehards with four digit NGS membership nos it will in my view fade away.

Dunno if that's a dig at me; what gets up my nose about the RTR only gang are the ones who complain and whinge at length about not having a particular loco, coach or wagon  and won't even consider advancing their skills by attempting a kit, or possibly doing a bit of hacking.

They will never know the satisfaction and pride that can come from being able to say "I did that".

Also consider if we all became  RTR only, then Alan (Etched Pixels) and others producing kits and items for scratch builders would have to look for other sources of income.

I've nothing against the RTR gang, I have been known to buy RTR from time to time, but as I choose to model the Ex LSWR part of the Southern Railway as it was in the 1930s there are only 4 RTR locos that "qualify", and no coaches; if I include LMS stock that came into the area via the Somerset and Dorset line then I can add 3 or 4 more locos and maybe some of the Stanier coaches.

[ParkeNd]

If N Gauge were to become the sole preserve of diehards with four digit NGS membership nos it will in my view fade away.

Dunno if that's a dig at me; what gets up my nose about the RTR only gang are the ones who complain and whinge at length about not having a particular loco, coach or wagon  and won't even consider advancing their skills by attempting a kit, or possibly doing a bit of hacking.

They will never know the satisfaction and pride that can come from being able to say "I did that".

Also consider if we all became  RTR only, then Alan (Etched Pixels) and others producing kits and items for scratch builders would have to look for other sources of income.

I've nothing against the RTR gang, I have been known to buy RTR from time to time, but as I choose to model the Ex LSWR part of the Southern Railway as it was in the 1930s there are only 4 RTR locos that "qualify", and no coaches; if I include LMS stock that came into the area via the Somerset and Dorset line then I can add 3 or 4 more locos and maybe some of the Stanier coaches.

No dig at you Mike - you seem to be a very decent guy.

But it is a dig at Mr Hedges letter that came across as sneering at newbies and the inexperienced. Us lowest common denominators need pandering to by the likes of the NGS Journal. That's the only way we will learn apart from by our own mistakes. Mr Hedges seemed to me to be craving for the mag to raise its standards to only that of the few elite. Like a cycling magazine that only writes for elite athletes.

[Geoff]

Nemo you have hit the nail on the head by letting us know it is a charitable magazine, OK we pay a subscription but we expect something in return and what do we get a magazine, So we have a new editor and maybe he does not do things the same way as others in the past but he does it for free and we should be grateful instead of calling the guy, pius what is dumbing down that is brought up and pandering to the lowest common denominator, its all a little sensative to me.

The new Editorial team could say we are not taking this and just call it a day and where would the society be, its all very strange and to print all of the replies as well they must really be down by all this.

I for one will not stop my subscription but will watch what happens via the armchair reading the magazines, I am not an expert modeller but an every day guy that enjoys reading anything that is useful to help me with my toy trains, oh it must be awfull not getting what you want but hey the world is never perfect.

All I can say is a big thank you to the N Gauge society team for keeping me on track.

[PaulCheffus]

If N Gauge were to become the sole preserve of diehards with four digit NGS membership nos it will in my view fade away.

Dunno if that's a dig at me; what gets up my nose about the RTR only gang are the ones who complain and whinge at length about not having a particular loco, coach or wagon  and won't even consider advancing their skills by attempting a kit, or possibly doing a bit of hacking.

Hi

That's what annoys me too. How many times do you read I don't have the skills or time to do that?

I don't believe anyone is born with the skills to make models, it is all down to practice. I have been modelling for the last thirty years and I am still learning. Ten years ago I used to shy away from etched brass kits as I could never put them together well enough, then one day I read something about using flux. Since then I am quite happy to attempt any etched kit. My next challenge is learning to use the airbrush as I have always brush painted in the past.

I don't have as much time for modelling as I used to but ten minutes here and ten minutes there get things done. I am currently building a Mermaid from a Stephen Harris kit and in the past I would have had this built in around three evenings. This one has now been under construction for the last ten days and I have nearly finished the chassis. The time spent has been enjoyable and surely that is the point of the hobby.

Cheers

Paul

[Richard G Dallimore]

Graeme is not sneering at anyone, he has started a debate that has been going on, in other circles. I know several people who have had material rejected by the journal as too high brow.

If we are not allowed to give negative feedback then nothing in live will change. I personally skim through the journal, unless I see something of interest. I have other issues with the society and journal but will not raise them here and will continue biting my tongue.

[H]

But it is a dig at Mr Hedges letter that came across as sneering at newbies and the inexperienced. Us lowest common denominators need pandering to by the likes of the NGS Journal. That's the only way we will learn apart from by our own mistakes. Mr Hedges seemed to me to be craving for the mag to raise its standards to only that of the few elite. Like a cycling magazine that only writes for elite athletes.

I think you need to re-read the original letter - you have obviously completely missed the point.

It's not about changing the content to be only 'advanced' or 'elite' but to more inclusive and cater for all enthusiasts - currently it only panders to the 'starter' (and the membership isn't solely composed of them). Plus it's about raising the quality and production values for the entire magazine which all articles (both newbie and experienced style) will benefit from.

H.

[NeMo]

Graeme is not sneering at anyone, he has started a debate that has been going on, in other circles. I know several people who have had material rejected by the journal as too high brow.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with an editor rejecting unsolicited submissions on the basis that they wouldn't appeal to his/her magazine's readership. Has happened to me, professionally, many times. While it's never nice, there are two ways to respond. One is to just forget about it and write something else. The other is to rewrite the piece, but in a way that makes it more accessible. The thing you must never do is take it personally.

Like it or not, the job of an editor is, in part, to understand his/her readership. Arguing with an editor is generally pointless. I've spent about ten years of my life writing for commercial hobby magazines as my main source of income, and continue to do so on an ad hoc basis. In that time I've probably had well over 500 articles published. And not once, ever, have I convinced an editor to take a piece he/she didn't think was right for his magazine.

What one person sees as "high brow" another sees as inaccessible. Teaching is about making new material accessible by building on what the learner already knows (or so I was told at teacher training college). I'd love to read a piece that showed me how to get started with a N gauge brass kit of something simple, like a wagon. I'd like to see the writer show me how the skills I already have from making plastic kits can be used. Ideally, such an article wouldn't assume I had soldering skills or even a quality soldering iron, but perhaps chose a kit that could be done with glue instead. Perhaps the next article in the series could tackle soldering! But in any case, a simple, step-by-step article would be, I'm sure, accessible to the NGS readership and welcomed by the editor.

If we are not allowed to give negative feedback then nothing in live will change. I personally skim through the journal, unless I see something of interest. I have other issues with the society and journal but will not raise them here and will continue biting my tongue.

I think it's pretty clear that the NGS Journal has been very open to criticism, firstly by publishing Mr Hedge's letter and then by printing a whole slew of follow-up letters. In absolutely no sense can I see them "not allowing" anyone to voice their opinions. Full credit to them for being so open and, frankly, big hearted.

Cheers, NeMo

[ParkeNd]

But it is a dig at Mr Hedges letter that came across as sneering at newbies and the inexperienced. Us lowest common denominators need pandering to by the likes of the NGS Journal. That's the only way we will learn apart from by our own mistakes. Mr Hedges seemed to me to be craving for the mag to raise its standards to only that of the few elite. Like a cycling magazine that only writes for elite athletes.

I think you need to re-read the original letter - you have obviously completely missed the point.

It's not about changing the content to be only 'advanced' or 'elite' but to more inclusive and cater for all enthusiasts - currently it only panders to the 'starter' (and the membership isn't solely composed of them). Plus it's about raising the quality and production values for the entire magazine which all articles (both newbie and experienced style) will benefit from.

H.

I accept that you can voice your opinions and to that end I have just this minute re-read Mr Hedges letter as you have proposed.

The tone of the letter is uncharitable and it's slant is contrary to the line the NGS needs to appeal to its wider membership.

There are already well produced and comprehensive magazines like Model Railway Journal which for £4.20 per copy meet what seem to be Mr Hedges beef with the mag and is aimed squarely at the model railway engineer with donkey's years of specialist experience. The NGS would in my view fail to meet its objectives to the majority of its membership if it moved in this direction.

[H]

Like it or not, the job of an editor is, in part, to understand his/her readership. Arguing with an editor is generally pointless. I've spent about ten years of my life writing for commercial hobby magazines as my main source of income, and continue to do so on an ad hoc basis. In that time I've probably had well over 500 articles published. And not once, ever, have I convinced an editor to take a piece he/she didn't think was right for his magazine.

There is quite a difference between the 'commercial publications' and editorship of them and the NGS Journal. With a commercial magazine the editor falls or survives on his ability to select appropriate content that won't adversely affect sales. The journal is different - there is no commercial pressure for sales (the circulation is fixed by the membership), they do not pay for submissions (unlike Railway Modeller, etc., so there is no competitive financial pressure) and in general all the content is provided by the members (so as they are also the readership no doubt they have some interest in it).

Additional, especially as it is an in-house society thing, I would expect the editor to explain the reasons for rejection with more than just a 'too high-brow' comment. Of course, that may or may not have been done but I've not heard that explanation.

H.