Model Railway Forum banner
1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,650 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I have been reading the reviews in February's Model Rail and the reviewers seem to be adopting the approach of talking more about negative points than positive points. Whilst accepting that models are never perfect I don't see why they should ram it home in a way that seems to replicate some of the extreme views that often appear on the internet.

No longer is a "if it looks right it is right" approach adopted and it now appears that every reviewer is out to make a name for himself. Basically it seems that they are under instructions to find fault from the off, and then having found fault, only then start looking for the good things. If this is an approach that they consider sell magazines and advertising then in my view they are wrong. Its a big turn off.

It is almost as if the reviewers sneek into forums and see what the rivet counters are saying, and then go away and write something that then allows the rivet counters to say "I told you so!"

Basically I am looking at the prototype images and I am looking at what the reviewers are attempting to say and I am thinking "what on earth are they on about?"


Wrong approach.

Better that they approach the manufacturer whilst preparing the review and seek comments if they deem it necessary to adopt a nick picking rivet counting approach. This way we can get a balanced view. The hobby is not so big that it can allow a few primadonna reviewers to turn people off!

I am very glad that manufacturers want to offer us fantastic new models however the way some of these reviewers write about the models you do have to wonder why the manufacturers take the trouble!

My own opinions.

Happy modelling
Gary
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,650 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
QUOTE You getting a commission on extra sales from this, Gary?

Sadly not however if anybody from Model Rail does happen to read this....


Subscribers in the UK get theirs about a week ahead of it appearing on the racks so don't rush down to the shop just yet.

I am deliberately keeping a bit coy about the content for the moment as I don't want to spoil it for those who are unable to get a copy just yet. Read the reviews and lets see what you think.

OTT or spot on with the balance of good and not so good?


Happy modelling
Gary
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,650 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
In terms of the MRF comparison between models its about choice and the Hornby model is brand new and the Bachmann model 4 years old. Technology and production methods move on. It was a Hornby review and it was considered fair to point out why the Hornby model was more expensive than the Bachmann model. Folk can either go for the value Bachmann model or the detailed Hornby model. Both represent remarkable value for money.

Bachmann have recently bought out a superdetailed Jinty and if a comparison was made between that and the Hornby version then the scenario would be reversed. Again both offer choice and are remarkable value. If Bachmann or Hornby are reading this then why not send us a review sample?


This discusion is about comparisons made between the prototype and the model and how this is put over.

Happy modelling
Gary
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,650 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
I have looked at reviews of new models from 30-40 years ago in some of the old magazines that I have around the place. In the light of this topic they do make interesting reading!

I don't know how the rules stand and the models are clearly no longer available in the form offered then but would you like to see one or two reviews of old Tri-ang and Tri-ang Hornby models so that you can judge for yourselves how things have moved on?


It would be very interesting to see how one of todays crop of reviewers would react when reviewing a model of the type offered by Tri-ang Hornby 40 years ago!

Happy modelling
Gary
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,650 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
The very big advantage of the internet is its capacity to allow people to have a visual feast.

We have all seen it with the Model Rail Forum Hornby 2006 review. Compare that with the news offering in traditional magazines. Would you rather read about it or see it and make up your own mind?


As Doug says, you don't have to be an expert in trains to provide good pictures of models which allow members and visitors to make up their own mind. Why have a long narative?

Surely its better that web reviews focus on providing plenty of images and offering info on running qualities and the installation of any electronic devices. Again with good pictures there would be little to say on this last point.

The current crop of traditional magazines seem to have this habbit of acting as hangmen. And they only publish a small number of images so generally you have to rely on the written word and the language used can make an issue seem far worse than it really is. When you actually handle the model and see it for yourself then you can sometimes wonder what all the fuss was about.

Some may say it is more interesting to have an open discussion here about a new model after looking at the visual feast.

Happy modelling
Gary
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top