Synchronized Chuff & Smoke With Steam Blunami Installation

I think it is pretty clear that synchronized chuff and smoke is the most desired missing feature of the Blunami 4408.  For many it is a deal breaker.  The more we express demand for this feature, the more likely that Soundtraxx will respond.  Below is the message I sent to them via their customer feedback page. Here is the link to the page.

Feel free to copy/paste or edit this, but do take a couple of minutes to respond.  And to encourage others, let us know your participation.  

Bob

I am one of many 2- and 3-rail O scalers that is excited about the release of the Blunami 4408.  The timing of your entry into this market is greatly appreciated given the cost and limited availability of command control upgrade options from MTH and Lionel. Additionally the Blunami offers a level of customization and sound options that exceeds our other O gauge options.  There is one critical missing feature for steam installations that has been discussed extensively on the O Gauge Railroading forum:  the ability to sync a smoke unit to the chuff sound.  What is needed is a trigger pulse output capable of firing a small relay timed with the chuff sound.  I understand that this feature is available on some of your Tsunami boards.  An alternative would be to add a chuff input to trigger the chuff sound as is commonly done in the other systems.

Some of the high visibility YouTubers in O scale are now posting videos about their Blunami installs (see Norm's Trains and Syd's Trains channels).  There have been 24,600 views between these 2 videos.  This is generating a lot of interest, but many remain reluctant to do steam installs because of this limitation.  I believe that right now you have an opportunity to capture a significant portion of the upgrade market.

Thank you for considering this.

Great idea, but Harry got a flat NO when he asked about this.

While I’d prefer a switched input option I have to wonder if it wouldn’t play well with their method of generating exhaust sounds for steam using motor PWM and their DDE feature. Whatever they’re doing works well enough for now especially considering that you don’t have to hassle with a chuff switch. The additional hardware and code to support a switched input would make the boards cost more too. Maybe they found their sweet spot in the market for these boards and 3 rail smoke lovers might not be their primary customer?

" 3 rail smoke lovers might not be their primary customer"

Seems highly likely.  Might not be worth the effort/time/money to address the needs of a few dozen customers.  We are a niche market within a tiny niche market.

@Norm Charbonneau posted:

While I’d prefer a switched input option I have to wonder if it wouldn’t play well with their method of generating exhaust sounds for steam using motor PWM and their DDE feature. Whatever they’re doing works well enough for now especially considering that you don’t have to hassle with a chuff switch. The additional hardware and code to support a switched input would make the boards cost more too. Maybe they found their sweet spot in the market for these boards and 3 rail smoke lovers might not be their primary customer?

AFAIK, there would be no new hardware.  This should be a simple software change.  They already know when they're going to trigger a chuff in the audio, so all they have to do is provide an optional output on one of the function outputs to tell the outside world.  If they send out the chuff trigger, there's no need for an extra chuff switch.  FWIW, I know a number of 2-rail guys that like smoke as well, this doesn't just apply to 3-rail.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

AFAIK, there would be no new hardware.  This should be a simple software change.  They already know when they're going to trigger a chuff in the audio, so all they have to do is provide an optional output on one of the function outputs to tell the outside world.  If they send out the chuff trigger, there's no need for an extra chuff switch.  FWIW, I know a number of 2-rail guys that like smoke as well, this doesn't just apply to 3-rail.

Plus, don't they already offer this in the non-bluetooth hardware?

@rplst8 posted:

Plus, don't they already offer this in the non-bluetooth hardware?

Yes, many of their other decoders have a chuff output, that makes it all the more curious as to why it's such a stumbling block here!

@Landsteiner posted:

" 3 rail smoke lovers might not be their primary customer"

Seems highly likely.  Might not be worth the effort/time/money to address the needs of a few dozen customers.  We are a niche market within a tiny niche market.

I might be one of the rare weirdos that likes my chuffs squared on the crankpin position but if I don’t get the option I will still get a few more of these boards. I think the motor control is amazing and the sounds with all the onboard options are great too. I have another one ready to go in another project hopefully soon.

@Norm Charbonneau posted:

I might be one of the rare weirdos that likes my chuffs squared on the crankpin position but if I don’t get the option I will still get a few more of these boards. I think the motor control is amazing and the sounds with all the onboard options are great too. I have another one ready to go in another project hopefully soon.

You can’t get that with Blunami. Chuff sound  start point changes every time you start up. Another argument for a chuff input on the board from a switch of some sort where you can set the mechanical trip point.

Pete

@Landsteiner posted:

" 3 rail smoke lovers might not be their primary customer"

Seems highly likely.  Might not be worth the effort/time/money to address the needs of a few dozen customers.  We are a niche market within a tiny niche market.

You think the market is just a few dozen?  Why would Lionel add Blue tooth for a few dozen?  The upgrade market belongs to MTH, DCC, and ERR with a minor role in some experts doing Legacy conversions.  JMHO.  Only MTH and the DCC allow you to easily upgrade and have options.

ERR is limited and costly with specific sounds locked in.  Same with the Legacy though you have far more options than TMCC.  So far Lionel is the only manufacture that has walked away from product support to date.  Even Legacy engines that are only 15 years old.

Blunami would be a big player.  You would be surprised how many dozens of people are upgrading PS-1, TMCC Lionel and the whole brass market.  G

"You think the market is just a few dozen?  Why would Lionel add Blue tooth for a few dozen?  "

Wasn't referring to the entire upgrade market.  Just those who want to move on from TMCC/Legacy/DCS and also want synchronized chuff/smoke.  Converting functional locos to Blunami probably isn't very attractive financially or time/effort-wise for most people.  So this isn't an upgrade market except for conventional only locos, and replacing failed command control electronics.  That's likely a fairly small market, because most people will go with PS3 or ERR replacements and upgrades I'd think.

Lionel introduced Bluetooth in their sets initially, including LionChief. Primary motivation is likely to allow people who preferred a smart device/app to the universal remote this choice, and also so they didn't need to include a physical remote in every set/loco sale.  That's tens of thousands of sets per year, probably, if not more.   It made sense to eventually add it to all of their locos for this reason. Many thousands of separate sale locos per year, if not more.

I'm guessing the number of folks who are ditching TMCC/Legacy/DCS for Blunami in three rail O gauge is currently no more than a few hundred people total throughout the country.  Maybe quite a bit fewer, hence the estimate of dozens.   If correct, that's a small market.  If wrong, well, we'll find out.

It's too bad Lionel didn't take Base3 as an opportunity to address some of the shortcomings of the platform -- specifically sounds.   New features similar to the DCC motor tunings and advanced momentum control would have been awesome too.  4-digit addressing, which is by far the biggest new feature (my CAB2s are better and more stable than any software remote offered by their apps, and will likely be that way for years), isn't needed by anyone except for clubs and the most prolific of collectors.  So now we're stuck with $2,000+ Big Boys with sounds that are what they are and always will be, unless Lionel decides to "mass repair" them like they did with the J Class paint awhile back.  Sure it's not catastrophic (for most), but this is a Vision Line, flagship product that's supposed to be the ultimate model of the world's largest steam locomotive, and the whistle is weak and there's no way to turn it up.   Maybe that sounds a bit unfair, but it's also exactly why open platforms like DCC will always be superior.

I do see some cause for optimism though.  Projects like Dave's PyTrain effort will enable Legacy-compatible DIY (and commercial!) hardware remotes and controllers in the not too distant future, and at costs which are likely more reasonable than what Lionel would sell them for.  We may even be able to emulate some of the advanced DCC momentum behavior and similar use cases by playing with speed steps etc. using this software stack.

User-managed Legacy sounds and Blunami chuff sync would require some effort and cooperation from the manufacturer.  While I feel that Blunami might eventually add this functionality, I don't see any scenario where Lionel ever redoes Legacy to allow user-programmable sounds, for multiple reasons.

My main point is that just supplying a chuff output signal that is programmable like all the other dozens of options in the Blunami has to be a trivial software exercise.  There is no hardware changes of any kind to support this, it's just programming one of the function outputs to emit a chuff pulse when the internal logic generates the chuff sounds.

I'd have to imagine that maybe the steam exhaust input/output implementation isn't as trivial as some would like to believe. It could be that 98% of Blunami customers right now are happy with the product in its current form. Maybe some combination of a Bluerail board with another DCC product could get your puffing smoke. I am new to DCC so I'm not familiar with the other products out there but I'm under the impression Bluerail will work with some of them. From what I gather Blunami came together as a single board solution when Soundtraxx licensed the standalone Bluerail tech (?).

@BlueFeather posted:

It's too bad Lionel didn't take Base3 as an opportunity to address some of the shortcomings of the platform -- specifically sounds.   New features similar to the DCC motor tunings and advanced momentum control would have been awesome too.  4-digit addressing, which is by far the biggest new feature (my CAB2s are better and more stable than any software remote offered by their apps, and will likely be that way for years), isn't needed by anyone except for clubs and the most prolific of collectors.  So now we're stuck with $2,000+ Big Boys with sounds that are what they are and always will be, unless Lionel decides to "mass repair" them like they did with the J Class paint awhile back.  Sure it's not catastrophic (for most), but this is a Vision Line, flagship product that's supposed to be the ultimate model of the world's largest steam locomotive, and the whistle is weak and there's no way to turn it up.   Maybe that sounds a bit unfair, but it's also exactly why open platforms like DCC will always be superior.

I do see some cause for optimism though.  Projects like Dave's PyTrain effort will enable Legacy-compatible DIY (and commercial!) hardware remotes and controllers in the not too distant future, and at costs which are likely more reasonable than what Lionel would sell them for.  We may even be able to emulate some of the advanced DCC momentum behavior and similar use cases by playing with speed steps etc. using this software stack.

User-managed Legacy sounds and Blunami chuff sync would require some effort and cooperation from the manufacturer.  While I feel that Blunami might eventually add this functionality, I don't see any scenario where Lionel ever redoes Legacy to allow user-programmable sounds, for multiple reasons.

I think going forward, Lionel will  just dumb-down Legacy. The Base 3 is awful and it is the first time I hooked up a Lionel command control product to my layout and made it run worse. 3 rail used to have some pretty decent tech, very easy to use. Most mods were pretty trivial if you wanted better performance. The current lame-o state of tech in 3 rail is what made experimenting with Blunami so intriguing.

@Norm Charbonneau posted:

I'd have to imagine that maybe the steam exhaust input/output implementation isn't as trivial as some would like to believe. It could be that 98% of Blunami customers right now are happy with the product in its current form. Maybe some combination of a Bluerail board with another DCC product could get your puffing smoke. I am new to DCC so I'm not familiar with the other products out there but I'm under the impression Bluerail will work with some of them. From what I gather Blunami came together as a single board solution when Soundtraxx licensed the standalone Bluerail tech (?).

I think you're reading way more into my statements than reality would suggest.  The steam exhaust input/output implementation is already done, it can't be that difficult to simply emit a pulse on one of the function outputs when the chuff process starts.  Clearly, they know when that process happens!

As for combining multiple boards to get the desired effect, that is bound to be more difficult than what I'm suggesting!

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

I think you're reading way more into my statements than reality would suggest.  The steam exhaust input/output implementation is already done, it can't be that difficult to simply emit a pulse on one of the function outputs when the chuff process starts.  Clearly, they know when that process happens!

As for combining multiple boards to get the desired effect, that is bound to be more difficult than what I'm suggesting!

I'm curious if they are deliberately excluding a chuff signal output on boards designed for use in O gauge for legal reasons or a potential lawsuit given the history between manufacturers who have previously traded blows for this.

@Norm Charbonneau posted:

I think going forward, Lionel will  just dumb-down Legacy. The Base 3 is awful and it is the first time I hooked up a Lionel command control product to my layout and made it run worse. 3 rail used to have some pretty decent tech, very easy to use. Most mods were pretty trivial if you wanted better performance. The current lame-o state of tech in 3 rail is what made experimenting with Blunami so intriguing.

I figured Blunami was a solid win for you Norm, ….I thought you despised smoke anyways??……

Pat

Blunami is just another tool in the kit.  I don't have a problem running Blunami, DCC, and Legacy/TMCC engines.  The smartphone/tablet apps, flawed though they may presently be and unacceptable to some, reduce the number of physical controllers to misplace.   I see Blunami mainly as a lower-cost, greater-featured option for 1990s scale locos that use DCRU or PS1, especially diesels.  On the steam front, it may be practical for switchers, but the 4A current limit renders it impractical for large steamers, especially ones with large Mabuchi motors.  H1000;s view of why Soundtraxx isn't doing the obvious and providing a wheel-sensor input is likely correct.

@H1000 posted:

I'm curious if they are deliberately excluding a chuff signal output on boards designed for use in O gauge for legal reasons or a potential lawsuit given the history between manufacturers who have previously traded blows for this.

I was under the impression some DCC decoders had a chuff in option. An external switch told the board when to put out the chuff sound.

Others believe that those boards create the chuff sound and should be able to output a pulse at the same time to drive a smoke smoke fan or whatever. ie. chuff out vs chuff in.

TAS had to give up driving smoke fans along with the chuff sound they created by counting flywheel pulses but only on boards they were offering to other manufacturers. EOB boards sold to individual hobbyists retained that feature so no mechanical chuff switches were required.

Given Blunami is only be sold to end users now I can’t see where legal ramifications should be a problem.

Pete

"Given Blunami is only be sold to end users now I can’t see where legal ramifications should be a problem."

I vaguely recall MTH had a patent on synchronized smoke/chuff and at some point many years back threatened legal action related to anyone who offered this feature.  I assume this is what H1000 is referring to?  Patent may have expired by now.  But ancient bad karma could be at work here I suppose.

@H1000 posted:

I'm curious if they are deliberately excluding a chuff signal output on boards designed for use in O gauge for legal reasons or a potential lawsuit given the history between manufacturers who have previously traded blows for this.

Now, there's an angle that I didn't consider.

@Landsteiner posted:

"Given Blunami is only be sold to end users now I can’t see where legal ramifications should be a problem."

I vaguely recall MTH had a patent on synchronized smoke/chuff and at some point many years back threatened legal action related to anyone who offered this feature.  I assume this is what H1000 is referring to?  Patent may have expired by now.  But ancient bad karma could be at work here I suppose.

I believe it expired in 2020.

@harmonyards posted:

I figured Blunami was a solid win for you Norm, ….I thought you despised smoke anyways??……

Pat

Yes! In its current form at least. I see a lot of promise with the water based ultrasonic units. Atomized oil is so bad!

I'm under the impression that other manufacturers offer different CVs in their products. Is there one out there that has a chuff trigger CV that could be mapped to a function output? I am a total noob to DCC but it's pretty interesting stuff. Blunami is a good intro to it so far. How is someone like BLI doing it with their hardware?

@Norm Charbonneau posted:

I'm under the impression that other manufacturers offer different CVs in their products. Is there one out there that has a chuff trigger CV that could be mapped to a function output? I am a total noob to DCC but it's pretty interesting stuff. Blunami is a good intro to it so far. How is someone like BLI doing it with their hardware?

Yep, the Soundtraxx Tsunami has the chuff trigger!

I was watching this vid for some insight:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...Vg0acx-Q&t=1445s

Also:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI8nbp7hcZc

These guys were swapping Tsunami 2 in place of BLI's stuff.

Doesn't seem so simple really, but maybe it is if you imagine someone else doing it.

@Norm Charbonneau posted:

Doesn't seem so simple really, but maybe it is if you imagine someone else doing it.

I'm not suggesting swapping the Blunami for a Tsunami.

As for how easy it would be to simply add the chuff trigger at the start of the chuff audio to the Blumani, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that point.  I spent a lot of years developing far more complex software than the Blunami, and IMO adding that trigger would be a trivial software exercise.  Obviously, you're free to have a different opinion.

@Norm Charbonneau posted:

I was watching this vid for some insight:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...Vg0acx-Q&t=1445s

Also:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI8nbp7hcZc

These guys were swapping Tsunami 2 in place of BLI's stuff.

Doesn't seem so simple really, but maybe it is if you imagine someone else doing it.

Neither the Tsnami 2200 nor 4400 have cam inputs. They are the same as their Blunami counterparts. The first video shows the smoke out of phase. Second video the presenter states the smoke unit does not work with a 2200.

These are examples of DCC decoders that do have cam or chuff switch inputs. They work similarly to TMCC R2LCs. Unfortunately none have Bluetooth. You could use them with a Bluerail board but its no longer competitive on cost.

https://www.tcsdcc.com/product-page/wow501-steam

https://www.zimo.at/web2010/pr...decodergrosse_EN.htm

https://tonystrains.com/produc...ew-terminals-g-scale

Pete

Well, if it makes any sense, it was my own curiosity regarding the Tsunami chuff trigger and smoke control that led me to those vids. From what I've seen, BLI engines seem to be the closest resemblance to O gauge features in DCC. They were pretty insightful.

"I spent a lot of years developing far more complex software than the Blunami, and IMO adding that trigger would be a trivial software exercise."

Then just make your own Blunami!

@Norm Charbonneau posted:

Then just make your own Blunami!

I'd probably get in hot water with patents.

I look at Blunami as a option to keep locomotives running if the electronics stop working or adding it to locomotives that never had electronics. I don't care for smoke or synchronized chugging. I run at 100 speed steps and it sounds like a machine gun anyway.

The MTH PS1 I installed Blunami in my opinion in way better than legacy in features available. I'm just happy someone is making a board that can be used in O to keep the fleet running

@Trainmstr posted:

I contacted SoundTraxx yesterday to comment on their lack of a chuff input on their Blunami product. Their response, as noted previously in this tread, is it isn’t necessary due to their “decoder is able to read the BEMF to determine the revolutions of the motor”. In their response they say a cam can easily be synchronized with motor revolutions to have sound & smoke synchronous.

Thoughts on this?

I know this this is an 8 month old message, but I’ve had some experience here. I have had two engines where the Blunami/Tsunami BEMF system simply cannot “read” the motor properly to even generate chuffs. 2 weeks of back and forth with Soundtraxx email support, and the only solution was to turn off motor control CV and manually set start voltage and chuff rate CVs.

If their BEMF monitoring system was infallible then a chuff out function line would be fine for smoke but it’s not.

It’s really, really absurd that on their top end, do everything product there is no CV options to set set up a chuff input, like digitrax, TCS, earlier soundtraxx or other decoders.

This is a lame excuse they offer, and I'm sure anyone that knows anything about how back-EMF speed control works knows it's total BS.  There's no way a back-EMF speed control stays in perfect sync, it's a strictly analog system!  The reason that you can do it with a tach strip is you have digital feedback.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

IMO adding that trigger would be a trivial software exercise.

There is this tagline quote I read all the time.  Let's see, what was it again?

Oh yes... here it is.

You would think as three railers the major "ask" would be to have AC and DC power inputs like the predecessor BlueRail board.

That would have a direct and immediate positive impact.

@Ron045 posted:

There is this tagline quote I read all the time.  Let's see, what was it again?

Oh yes... here it is.

You would think as three railers the major "ask" would be to have AC or DC power inputs like the predecessor BlueRail board.

That would have a direct and immediate positive impact.

Yuk it up, but it really would be easy.  There are simple work-arounds for AC or DC input power, there aren't for the chuff sync.

@gunrunnerjohn posted:

Yuk it up, but it really would be easy.  There are simple work-arounds for AC or DC input power, there aren't for the chuff sync.

Let's just be truthful John.  You have complained what Blunami does and doesn't do in dozens of threads for 2 years since I and others started talking about it.

Soundtraxx could give you chuff sync tomorrow and you would just find something else to huff and puff about.

@Ron045 posted:

Let's just be truthful John.  You have complained what Blunami does and doesn't do in dozens of threads for 2 years since I and others started talking about it.

Soundtraxx could give you chuff sync tomorrow and you would just find something else to huff and puff about.

Let's just be truthful Ron.  You'd apparently defend it no matter how big the flaws were.   Knock yourself out, enjoy.

I sent SoundTraxx an email and told them I would buy 10-15 Blunami decoders if they added a chuff input or output.

Sans a reason why it wouldn't be easy, with 20+ years of software development experience myself, including 10 doing embedded systems programming, I tend to agree with John.

My guess is that they are shy to do it because of the litigious nature of the other 3-rail manufacturers.

@christie posted:

I know this this is an 8 month old message, but I’ve had some experience here. I have had two engines where the Blunami/Tsunami BEMF system simply cannot “read” the motor properly to even generate chuffs. 2 weeks of back and forth with Soundtraxx email support, and the only solution was to turn off motor control CV and manually set start voltage and chuff rate CVs.

If their BEMF monitoring system was infallible then a chuff out function line would be fine for smoke but it’s not.

It’s really, really absurd that on their top end, do everything product there is no CV options to set set up a chuff input, like digitrax, TCS, earlier soundtraxx or other decoders.

It would be interesting to know some more info. What engine was this in? Any idea on the motor, gear ratio, etc.?