K3 Auto CW copy
Locked
 
|
I have noticed that the CW text display of auto copied CW signals often does
not get the spacing between words and runs words together. When I copy the same text in my head the word spacing seems pretty good. Also when I send CW it will also run words together. So I am wondering about a tweak to the algorithm. Making a computer copy CW of unknown speed must be difficult. But everyone knows my code is perfect :) On the other hand I had a QSO with a near local (80 miles) and he had trouble copying me because of QRM. I was dialed down to 50 Hz and heard no other signal present. I opened up to 1 KHz and there they all were. Isn't that great or what? Mike Scott - AE6WA Tarzana, CA (DM04 / near LA) K3-100 #508/ KX1 #1311 _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
On Tue, 20 May 2008 20:12:14 -0700, you wrote:
>I have noticed that the CW text display of auto copied CW signals often does >not get the spacing between words and runs words together. When I copy the >same text in my head the word spacing seems pretty good. Also when I send CW >it will also run words together. So I am wondering about a tweak to the >algorithm. Making a computer copy CW of unknown speed must be difficult. But >everyone knows my code is perfect :) I noticed the same thing when I was sending, but when I paid more attention to making sure my timing between words was consistent the spacing improved along with my sending ;o) What a nice tool for improving my sending! >On the other hand I had a QSO with a near local (80 miles) and he had >trouble copying me because of QRM. I was dialed down to 50 Hz and heard no >other signal present. I opened up to 1 KHz and there they all were. Isn't >that great or what? > >Mike Scott - AE6WA >Tarzana, CA (DM04 / near LA) >K3-100 #508/ KX1 #1311 > > >_______________________________________________ >Elecraft mailing list >Post to: [hidden email] >You must be a subscriber to post to the list. >Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > >Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm >Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" An excerpt from a letter written in 1755 from the Assembly to the Governor of Pennsylvania. Support the entire Constitution, not just the parts you like. http://www.n5ge.com http://www.eQSL.cc/Member.cfm?N5GE _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Amateur Radio Operator N5GE
|
|
|
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
|
|
|
On Tue, 20 May 2008 22:53:52 -0700, you wrote:
>Tom makes an excellent point. > >Like spoken or written language, we consider the context when copying CW. >That's how we can copy words even when we miss some characters. And, when we >see the end of a recognizable word, we automatically assume that is the end. >That is, we often sense a space where there isn't one. That's why a word >like "superstructure", taken out of context, is easily copied as "super >structure" even when there is no intentional space. > >An unforgiving algorithm measuring the time and reporting accordingly is a >great training aid if you want to approach "machine timing". > >Ron AC7AC [snip] Well said. I think of it this way: Sending machine timing code helps those who can't copy code read it on their decoders, in addition to making it easier for those who do copy CW to have well formed characters and words, which is very important when head copying in rag chews. Head copiers tend to listen for words rather than characters. I can't count the times I've heard someone sending "NN MM A" when looking for another operator to talk to... 73, Tom, N5GE - SWOT 3537 - Grid EM12jq "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" An excerpt from a letter written in 1755 from the Assembly to the Governor of Pennsylvania. Support the entire Constitution, not just the parts you like. http://www.n5ge.com http://www.eQSL.cc/Member.cfm?N5GE _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Amateur Radio Operator N5GE
|
|
|
Tom Childers, N5GE wrote:
> I can't count the times I've heard someone sending "NN MM A" when looking for > another operator to talk to... I know. You'd think they would've learned by now that the general call to all stations is NN GT. -- 73, Vic, K2VCO Fresno CA http://www.qsl.net/k2vco _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by N5GE
Hi All,
I have only tried using he CW reading feature on my K3 a few times. Like most code readers, it misses a lot, and a little interference can throw it off track fairly easily. It takes a pretty good signal to minimize the errors. But I did check once by having it copy W1AW. There are two benefits to trying that. First, the CW is machine sent, so it's nearly perfect. Secondly, W1AW has such a good signal that interference issues are minimal. The reader did very well in that test. There were very few errors, and word separation was very good. I would strongly suggest that you check your K3 in the same manner to see if you are getting the word spacing problem. It was also interesting to watch my own sending. I've always thought my sending was reasonably good, and the reader did confirm that by showing the text I was sending in pretty much the correct text and spacing. But if I got the least bit casual about it, the reader reflected that as well. Spacing was the big issue, although most of my errors were exaggerated spaces rather than insufficient spacing. But I send with somewhat exaggerated spacing between words on purpose. I try to send words correctly spaced, and then leave a slightly extended space between words. I think this helps the receiving station clearly identify just what the word is I am sending. Every so often expresses appreciation for my doing it that way. In my view, I'm not sure there is a greater CW "sin" than running words and/or letters together. Interestingly, this process pointed out a glaring error that I have probably been making forever. That was in how I sent my call. I have a "K" on the end of my call, and I've always had problems in contest exchanges, etc. with the other station truncating my call to just a two letter suffix, presumably thinking my last letter "K" was asking them to transmit. It only takes a slight hesitation to cause the reader to reflect that. I kept seeing my call appear on the reader as "W7AQ K" rather than "W7AQK". In thinking about it, it made me realize how easy it is to slip into these little bad habits. Some stations send their calls with insufficient spacing between letters. Things that we send repeatedly, like call, name, QTH, etc. seem to be common candidates for this type of error. It's as if, on occasion, we develop our own rhythm for sending these standard items in violation of the standard timing and spacing rules. And some folks just plain don't put the right number of "dits" in what they send. I heard one W6 station who repeatedly sent his call with 5 dits in the number 6, as well as repeatedly sending a "5" for an "H". In cases like that, the reader won't lie! But your brain won't lie either. You will probably get that "hey, wait a minute" feeling about what you are hearing. Anyway, I then used the reader to "retrain" myself to send my call so that it did not insert an extra space between the "Q" and the "K". It was a hard habit to break. Years of doing it wrong aren't easily erased. But I would strongly recommend that folks use the reader now and then to monitor their own sending. On a transmitted signal, the reader is very accurate in my view. And if you intend to utilize the K3's capability of translating your CW into RTTY, you better have your sending timing in good shape. Anyway, as I said above, the W1AW test is about the best way I know to really check out the reading capability of your K3. If it doesn't read that pretty well, I would guess you have a problem with your K3. Dave W7AQK ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Childers, N5GE" <[hidden email]> To: <[hidden email]> Cc: <[hidden email]> Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 9:08 PM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Auto CW copy On Tue, 20 May 2008 20:12:14 -0700, you wrote: >I have noticed that the CW text display of auto copied CW signals often >does >not get the spacing between words and runs words together. When I copy the >same text in my head the word spacing seems pretty good. Also when I send >CW >it will also run words together. So I am wondering about a tweak to the >algorithm. Making a computer copy CW of unknown speed must be difficult. >But >everyone knows my code is perfect :) I noticed the same thing when I was sending, but when I paid more attention to making sure my timing between words was consistent the spacing improved along with my sending ;o) What a nice tool for improving my sending! >On the other hand I had a QSO with a near local (80 miles) and he had >trouble copying me because of QRM. I was dialed down to 50 Hz and heard no >other signal present. I opened up to 1 KHz and there they all were. Isn't >that great or what? > >Mike Scott - AE6WA >Tarzana, CA (DM04 / near LA) >K3-100 #508/ KX1 #1311 > > _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
If ur call ends in K, then just send KN always after ur call. Many, but sadly not all, know KN means "go ahead you only" but it gets the job done as per problem noted below. 73 Charles Harpole [hidden email] > From: [hidden email] > To: [hidden email]; [hidden email] > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Auto CW copy > Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 11:39:57 -0700 > CC: [hidden email] > > Hi All, > > I have only tried using he CW reading feature on my K3 a few times. Like > most code readers, it misses a lot, and a little interference can throw it > off track fairly easily. It takes a pretty good signal to minimize the > errors. But I did check once by having it copy W1AW. There are two > benefits to trying that. First, the CW is machine sent, so it's nearly > perfect. Secondly, W1AW has such a good signal that interference issues are > minimal. The reader did very well in that test. There were very few > errors, and word separation was very good. I would strongly suggest that > you check your K3 in the same manner to see if you are getting the word > spacing problem. > > It was also interesting to watch my own sending. I've always thought my > sending was reasonably good, and the reader did confirm that by showing the > text I was sending in pretty much the correct text and spacing. But if I > got the least bit casual about it, the reader reflected that as well. > Spacing was the big issue, although most of my errors were exaggerated > spaces rather than insufficient spacing. But I send with somewhat > exaggerated spacing between words on purpose. I try to send words correctly > spaced, and then leave a slightly extended space between words. I think > this helps the receiving station clearly identify just what the word is I am > sending. Every so often expresses appreciation for my doing it that way. > In my view, I'm not sure there is a greater CW "sin" than running words > and/or letters together. > > Interestingly, this process pointed out a glaring error that I have probably > been making forever. That was in how I sent my call. I have a "K" on the > end of my call, and I've always had problems in contest exchanges, etc. with > the other station truncating my call to just a two letter suffix, presumably > thinking my last letter "K" was asking them to transmit. It only takes a > slight hesitation to cause the reader to reflect that. I kept seeing my > call appear on the reader as "W7AQ K" rather than "W7AQK". In thinking > about it, it made me realize how easy it is to slip into these little bad > habits. Some stations send their calls with insufficient spacing between > letters. Things that we send repeatedly, like call, name, QTH, etc. seem to > be common candidates for this type of error. It's as if, on occasion, we > develop our own rhythm for sending these standard items in violation of the > standard timing and spacing rules. And some folks just plain don't put the > right number of "dits" in what they send. I heard one W6 station who > repeatedly sent his call with 5 dits in the number 6, as well as repeatedly > sending a "5" for an "H". In cases like that, the reader won't lie! But > your brain won't lie either. You will probably get that "hey, wait a > minute" feeling about what you are hearing. > > Anyway, I then used the reader to "retrain" myself to send my call so that > it did not insert an extra space between the "Q" and the "K". It was a hard > habit to break. Years of doing it wrong aren't easily erased. But I would > strongly recommend that folks use the reader now and then to monitor their > own sending. On a transmitted signal, the reader is very accurate in my > view. And if you intend to utilize the K3's capability of translating your > CW into RTTY, you better have your sending timing in good shape. > > Anyway, as I said above, the W1AW test is about the best way I know to > really check out the reading capability of your K3. If it doesn't read that > pretty well, I would guess you have a problem with your K3. > > Dave W7AQK > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tom Childers, N5GE" > To: > Cc: > Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 9:08 PM > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 Auto CW copy > > > On Tue, 20 May 2008 20:12:14 -0700, you wrote: > >>I have noticed that the CW text display of auto copied CW signals often >>does >>not get the spacing between words and runs words together. When I copy the >>same text in my head the word spacing seems pretty good. Also when I send >>CW >>it will also run words together. So I am wondering about a tweak to the >>algorithm. Making a computer copy CW of unknown speed must be difficult. >>But >>everyone knows my code is perfect :) > > I noticed the same thing when I was sending, but when I paid more attention > to > making sure my timing between words was consistent the spacing improved > along > with my sending ;o) What a nice tool for improving my sending! > >>On the other hand I had a QSO with a near local (80 miles) and he had >>trouble copying me because of QRM. I was dialed down to 50 Hz and heard no >>other signal present. I opened up to 1 KHz and there they all were. Isn't >>that great or what? >> >>Mike Scott - AE6WA >>Tarzana, CA (DM04 / near LA) >>K3-100 #508/ KX1 #1311 >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Post to: [hidden email] > You must be a subscriber to post to the list. > Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm > Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
On Wed, 21 May 2008 21:05:00 -0600, Dale Putnam <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >Using an automated reader.. is a good good thing... to practice sending to. It can be done with any machine... but it will garuntee that it will improve your sending. Even as far back as the Vic20 could be used, and sending to it, will fix the problems... way before you get to be known as "that guy that can't send his QTH" or some such. > Try sending a page or two from QST, to a reader... or send a q or two. it works... >Another trick is to use a recorder.... record your next Q... then wait two days... >play it back... you will hear yourself in a different way than ever before. > Try it... you will be amazed.--... ...--Dale - WC7S in Wy [snip] I agree completely! Tom, N5GE - SWOT 3537 - Grid EM12jq "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" An excerpt from a letter written in 1755 from the Assembly to the Governor of Pennsylvania. Support the entire Constitution, not just the parts you like. http://www.n5ge.com http://www.eQSL.cc/Member.cfm?N5GE _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Amateur Radio Operator N5GE
|
|
|
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
|
|
|
On May 22, 2008, at 8:48 AM, Ron D'Eau Claire wrote: > Nothing teaches "machine" sending like sending to a dumb machine! I recall visiting HRO about 30 years ago and seeing a Commodore VIC-20 with a Dr. DX QSO simulator module plugged in. It was connected to a straight key. I played with it for 20 minutes and had probably a 5% success rate getting the box to recognize my sending. I suspect that the newer software is a bit more tolerant, but I am probably worse at sending with a straight key than I was in those days. Bob, N7XY _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |