OT: Decoding high speed CW
Locked
12
12
 
|
I became enamoured with N1MM+ after this weekend's contest and wanted to
see if I can use it for other stuff like CW. I got the keying working with my K3S so that's no problem. The issue is I can't decode 30 WPM CW in my head. I need help. I've been using the K3 Util terminal for CW contests and that's worked out well. I wanted to see if I can use both N1MM+ and K3 Util and share the COM port with LP-Bridge, but apparently K3 Util doesn't work with LP-Bridge. I also tried using FLDigi but the results weren't too great. It doesn't decode most of the time. Any suggestions (besides suck it up and learn to decode high speed in my head)? ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
Peter,
None of the decoders out there, including the better ones (internal to the K3/K3S and the KX3) decode CW even close to accurately unless the conditions are ideal and the sending operator is close to perfect in his/her sending so the ultimate answer is "suck it up" and learn to decode it in your head. If you rely on the decoders, you will have difficulty in actually learning to copy in your head and you will get enough call signs wrong in your contest logs that they could even be rejected due to too many "busted" calls. That being said, as for the decoders, I was a Morse Intercept Operator during the first 6 years of my 20 year Army Security Agency career. I had the copying of Morse code drummed into my head 8 hours a day, but that was copying mostly 5 letter or number coded groups on a typewriter. It took a large amount of money to train us electronic spies, and the NSA decided to design a decoder to replace us, figuring that a computer could do a better job. They spent several millions of dollars on this electronic black box (back in the 60's) and discovered that the human brain was a much better decoder than a machine could ever be. Every little static burst would disrupt the decoding and it would take a few characters to catch back up. Also, if the code wasn't being sent by automatic means (in those days that was a punched paper tape) and the receiving conditions weren't very close to perfect (almost never happens these days and even worse back then) the decoder output gibberish. After a couple years of mostly abject failures and after spending millions of dollars, they abandoned the project. Wayne and others have done a marvelous job of computer coding, allowing the firmware in Elecraft's radios (and other stand-alone devices) to decode CW, but the above conditions apply to them as well as to NSA and NSA spent a heck of a lot more money trying to achieve perfect copy than Elecraft had in their coffers. Bottom line, use it for occasional help, but work at learning to read it in your head yourself. It isn't as hard as most people make it out to be and all it takes is practice. That's the absolute bottom line, it takes practice. If you are willing to go the extra mile and put in that practice, the rewards will outweigh the initial frustrations. 73 and good luck, Jim Sheldon - W0EB ------ Original Message ------ From: "Peter Pauly" <[hidden email]> To: "Elecraft Reflector" <[hidden email]> Sent: 3/28/2016 7:14:49 AM Subject: [Elecraft] OT: Decoding high speed CW >I became enamoured with N1MM+ after this weekend's contest and wanted >to >see if I can use it for other stuff like CW. I got the keying working >with >my K3S so that's no problem. The issue is I can't decode 30 WPM CW in >my >head. I need help. > >I've been using the K3 Util terminal for CW contests and that's worked >out >well. I wanted to see if I can use both N1MM+ and K3 Util and share the >COM >port with LP-Bridge, but apparently K3 Util doesn't work with >LP-Bridge. I >also tried using FLDigi but the results weren't too great. It doesn't >decode most of the time. > >Any suggestions (besides suck it up and learn to decode high speed in >my >head)? >______________________________________________________________ >Elecraft mailing list >Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >Post: mailto:[hidden email] > >This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html >Message delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Peter Pauly
Hi Peter,
Good for you! N1NN+ is great and CW contesting is even better. There are a couple of programs that will help you improve your copy for call signs and numbers. These are Morse Runner and Rufz. http://www.dxatlas.com/morserunner/ http://www.rufzxp.net/ Morse runner even simulates N1MM in a pileup and you can adjust the speed, pileup conditions etc. Rufz sends one call at a time and if you get it right, ups the speed for the next one, wrong, slows down a notch. Try to develop the following habits: In Morse Runner Hit enter to start sending the call before you type the last letter of the call. In Rufz when speeds get high, let the whole call go by before you type it it. Use these a few minutes each day and you will be amazed how much better you will be. 73, Fred KE7X For all KE7X Elecraft books, see www.ke7x.com ________________________________________ From: Elecraft <[hidden email]> on behalf of Peter Pauly <[hidden email]> Sent: Monday, March 28, 2016 6:14 AM To: Elecraft Reflector Subject: [Elecraft] OT: Decoding high speed CW I became enamoured with N1MM+ after this weekend's contest and wanted to see if I can use it for other stuff like CW. I got the keying working with my K3S so that's no problem. The issue is I can't decode 30 WPM CW in my head. I need help. I've been using the K3 Util terminal for CW contests and that's worked out well. I wanted to see if I can use both N1MM+ and K3 Util and share the COM port with LP-Bridge, but apparently K3 Util doesn't work with LP-Bridge. I also tried using FLDigi but the results weren't too great. It doesn't decode most of the time. Any suggestions (besides suck it up and learn to decode high speed in my head)? ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
Re: OT: Decoding high speed CW
|
|
In reply to this post by Peter Pauly
+1 to what Fred Cady said. I'm a fairly new CW op and just graduated from CW Academy level 3. In that class, they teach you how to head copy high speed contest CW, primarily using Morse Runner and RufzXP, but also by live practice in the weekly CWT tests. If you want some free, structured, hands on training, I can't recommend CW Academy highly enough. http://www.cwops.org/cwacademy.html
db / WB4RFQ On March 28, 2016 at 05:15:07, Peter Pauly ([hidden email]) wrote: I became enamoured with N1MM+ after this weekend's contest and wanted to see if I can use it for other stuff like CW. I got the keying working with my K3S so that's no problem. The issue is I can't decode 30 WPM CW in my head. I need help. I've been using the K3 Util terminal for CW contests and that's worked out well. I wanted to see if I can use both N1MM+ and K3 Util and share the COM port with LP-Bridge, but apparently K3 Util doesn't work with LP-Bridge. I also tried using FLDigi but the results weren't too great. It doesn't decode most of the time. Any suggestions (besides suck it up and learn to decode high speed in my head)? ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Peter Pauly
Peter,
The CW Operators Club has a CW Academy has a course tailor made for you. Sign up for a level 2 or 3 class to increase your speed and your contesting skills. Check out http://www.cwops.org/cwacademy.html for details. 73, Brian, K0DTJ > > Any suggestions (besides suck it up and learn to decode high speed in my > head)? > ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Peter Pauly
Don't feel too bad, I kind of have the inverse problem: I can copy at a much greater rate than I can send lol. Also, I never learned to translate CW into keyboard keystrokes, mainly because I just refuse to get a computer anywhere near my rigs lol. I prefer to just pound brass, so I think I'm doomed to S&P in contests, even tho I've learned to copy calls and contest exchanges at reasonably high speeds.
As for copying in one's head, I know I'm drifting slightly off topic, but just a couple tips for free that helped me: - the key to getting above about 25 wpm on plain language is to start learning the CW for entire words or parts of words: "the", "and", and segments like "tion", "ing", etc. Instead of discrete letters, learn what entire words or frequent endings sound like. Then in a pinch you can decode individual letters that you may have missed by not having to decode the familiar-sounding ending or even guess from context what the entire word is. - for call signs, which are basically just code groups, be familiar with the patterns - 1-2 letter/number/2 or 3 letters, etc. That will help you store those and limit the amount of brain power you have to devote to decoding a call at high speed. Not infallible but it helps. For learning words, W1AW code practice .mp3's on arrl.org are really good for practicing this. For call signs, well, just listening during a hefty contest is what I do. Anyway, back to the regularly scheduled program, 73, LS W5QD |
Re: OT: Decoding high speed CW
|
|
In reply to this post by Brian Hunt
+1 from me. I recently finished CWA Level 3 and with the 8 week class and lots and lots of practice moved from a comfort level of 20 wpm to comfortable head copy at 30 wpm. Just be aware that because of demand for the classes and a shortage of instructors you may have to wait six months or more from signup until your classes begin. It is well worth the wait if you want to improve your CW chops. Highly recommended. The instructors and classes are phenomenal!
73,John W7SAG Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad On Monday, March 28, 2016, 9:05 AM, Brian Hunt <[hidden email]> wrote: Peter, The CW Operators Club has a CW Academy has a course tailor made for you. Sign up for a level 2 or 3 class to increase your speed and your contesting skills. Check out http://www.cwops.org/cwacademy.html for details. 73, Brian, K0DTJ > > Any suggestions (besides suck it up and learn to decode high speed in my > head)? > ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Jim Sheldon
On Mon,3/28/2016 5:43 AM, Jim Sheldon wrote:
> None of the decoders out there, including the better ones (internal to > the K3/K3S and the KX3) decode CW even close to accurately unless the > conditions are ideal and the sending operator is close to perfect in > his/her sending so the ultimate answer is "suck it up" and learn to > decode it in your head. I agree. To paraphase the musician's gag -- "How do you get to Carnegie Hall? Practice, practice, practice." The good news is that turning off your decoder and working a CW contest with your ears and brain can boost your copy speed by 5 WPM (or more). And I agree with recommendations that you spend some time with MorseRunner http://www.dxatlas.com/MorseRunner/ MorseRunner was written by VE3NEA, author of CW Skimmer and more than a dozen other very useful ham programs. MorseRunner and PileupRunner are free; some of the others are paid shareware. And if your schedule and the availability of CW Academy classes permits (they tend to fill up in advance), by all means sign up. 73, Jim K9YC ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
Re: OT: Decoding high speed CW
|
|
In reply to this post by lstavenhagen
Same here, LS. As I've gotten older my muscle
coordination has deteriorated a tad, so ...; most seemed to result from an open heart surgery I had three years ago which also killed my kidneys (which came back after five weeks of dialysis -- whew!), making poor CW sending seem a minor price to pay). Or maybe that's just a good excuse :-) 73, Phil W7OX On 3/28/16 8:10 AM, lstavenhagen wrote: > Don't feel too bad, I kind of have the inverse problem: I can copy at a much > greater rate than I can send lol. > > 73, > LS > W5QD > > ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
Well, to take the other side for a moment, I promise I'm not a curmudgeon hi hi. I'm a software engineer in my day job and am accustomed to embracing new technologies when required; I have a lot of admiration for things like MorseRunner and CW Skimmer & reversebeacon.net and so forth.
All that said, I did get my novice at age 10 when you only had 2 years and that was it unless you upgraded, and CW and 75W input was all you were allowed to use. So I started off pounding brass and somehow never went away from it since. So all that's just a qualification to take my comments with a grain of salt - it's my fault that I never learnt to use a paddle very well or how to shield my rigs from computer RFI, etc. not the technology. But once I get setup at home with either a Windows box or a suitable VM on my mac, I definitely _will_ start using MorseRunner. I definitely need some sustained practice at 30wpm + that I don't get to have as much as I'd like just S&P during contests.... 73, LS W5QD |
Re: OT: Decoding high speed CW
|
|
Morserunner works under Wine on my Mac, or at least it used to. I quit
using it because it would suck me completely in and then several hours would disappear. And none of those computer QSOs would QSL! :) On Mon, 28 Mar 2016, lstavenhagen wrote: > Well, to take the other side for a moment, I promise I'm not a curmudgeon hi > hi. I'm a software engineer in my day job and am accustomed to embracing new > technologies when required; I have a lot of admiration for things like > MorseRunner and CW Skimmer & reversebeacon.net and so forth. > > All that said, I did get my novice at age 10 when you only had 2 years and > that was it unless you upgraded, and CW and 75W input was all you were > allowed to use. So I started off pounding brass and somehow never went away > from it since. > > So all that's just a qualification to take my comments with a grain of salt > - it's my fault that I never learnt to use a paddle very well or how to > shield my rigs from computer RFI, etc. not the technology. > > But once I get setup at home with either a Windows box or a suitable VM on > my mac, I definitely _will_ start using MorseRunner. I definitely need some > sustained practice at 30wpm + that I don't get to have as much as I'd like > just S&P during contests.... > > 73, > LS > W5QD > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/OT-Decoding-high-speed-CW-tp7615612p7615628.html > Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to [hidden email] > -- Hisashi T Fujinaka - [hidden email] BSEE + BSChem + BAEnglish + MSCS + $2.50 = coffee ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
Re: OT: Decoding high speed CW
|
|
In reply to this post by Jim Sheldon
Jim, Paul
Paul, Jim is correct. Practice, practice, practice, then sooner than not you will be copying in your head. Jim's ASA training and experience works for him. For me it was USAF CW Intercept and over 7 years experience. I don't use skimmers or cw decoders. My K3 has one, and to be honest, I use it very infrequently, mostly to check on the other guys/gals speed when it gets up there. I may have to hear a call more than once, at 35 or higher, but not often. It's usually the QRM/QRN that gets you. Then there's the QSB. Ever copy "weak" sigs Jim? Do your practicing "On the Air", not by machine, if you can. W1AW code practice is good, and there are others out there I believe as well. Start at a speed you can copy fairly well, then work up from there. I wish you well, and welcome to the world of CW. Jim and I might even have to chat off list. Have to figure he was in Germany also. Take care and have fun. 73, Rick, W7LKG -----Original Message----- From: Elecraft [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jim Sheldon Sent: Monday, March 28, 2016 05:44 To: Peter Pauly Cc: Elecraft Mailing List Subject: Re: [Elecraft] OT: Decoding high speed CW Peter, None of the decoders out there, including the better ones (internal to the K3/K3S and the KX3) decode CW even close to accurately unless the conditions are ideal and the sending operator is close to perfect in his/her sending so the ultimate answer is "suck it up" and learn to decode it in your head. If you rely on the decoders, you will have difficulty in actually learning to copy in your head and you will get enough call signs wrong in your contest logs that they could even be rejected due to too many "busted" calls. That being said, as for the decoders, I was a Morse Intercept Operator during the first 6 years of my 20 year Army Security Agency career. I had the copying of Morse code drummed into my head 8 hours a day, but that was copying mostly 5 letter or number coded groups on a typewriter. It took a large amount of money to train us electronic spies, and the NSA decided to design a decoder to replace us, figuring that a computer could do a better job. They spent several millions of dollars on this electronic black box (back in the 60's) and discovered that the human brain was a much better decoder than a machine could ever be. Every little static burst would disrupt the decoding and it would take a few characters to catch back up. Also, if the code wasn't being sent by automatic means (in those days that was a punched paper tape) and the receiving conditions weren't very close to perfect (almost never happens these days and even worse back then) the decoder output gibberish. After a couple years of mostly abject failures and after spending millions of dollars, they abandoned the project. Wayne and others have done a marvelous job of computer coding, allowing the firmware in Elecraft's radios (and other stand-alone devices) to decode CW, but the above conditions apply to them as well as to NSA and NSA spent a heck of a lot more money trying to achieve perfect copy than Elecraft had in their coffers. Bottom line, use it for occasional help, but work at learning to read it in your head yourself. It isn't as hard as most people make it out to be and all it takes is practice. That's the absolute bottom line, it takes practice. If you are willing to go the extra mile and put in that practice, the rewards will outweigh the initial frustrations. 73 and good luck, Jim Sheldon - W0EB Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Hisashi T Fujinaka
Yeah, but it is a real kick when the program sends your call to you which can happen if you are practicing with a dx call!
________________________________________ From: Elecraft <[hidden email]> on behalf of Hisashi T Fujinaka <[hidden email]> Sent: Monday, March 28, 2016 10:13 AM To: lstavenhagen Cc: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] OT: Decoding high speed CW Morserunner works under Wine on my Mac, or at least it used to. I quit using it because it would suck me completely in and then several hours would disappear. And none of those computer QSOs would QSL! :) ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
KX3 - Future Feature button assignment?
|
|
Seeing Rick’ post has me thinking… I rarely use my KX3 for decode CW but… maybe a future feature is to have a one button “speed is” on the KX3?
I know it is ‘there’ but one key touch would be a nice feature to see how fast the other guy is moving at. Frank KG9H ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by lstavenhagen
All - I'm about to write a president's letter for our local club
publication on learning CW, and this entire thread is a good source of ideas. Thank you. Peter - I learned 5 WPM in 1960 for my novice license, but never used it. I learned 5 WPM again in 2001 for my extra, but didn't start using it until 2013. TX5K is the first CW QSO in my log and W6SQQ is the 2nd QSO and first rag chew. My learning CW at age 70+ is definitely an example of old dogs and new tricks. Now I am mostly operating in contests and chasing DX with about the same abilities as you have. I can use a straight key up to about 18-20 WPM, but I haven't gotten the timing right for a paddle. Most of my sending is from K3 memories or my contest logger. My survival strategies are: In contests I only search and pounce. I can hear the other op's call many times and get it right. I'm working on getting good enough to run. With my 100W and wire antennas, I get a lot of chances to listen to DX stations handle other callers. It is good practice to try to decode the call signs they're working. (It also helps locate the caller in the pileup.) I use the K3's decoder and display in the P3's SVGA. That keeps the decoded data from disappearing off the screen before I read it. (Note that the SVGA display can't be used if the computer is also reading the decoded data via the K3 utility or some other program.) The K3's decoding acts as a check on my head decoding. If the DX is only rarely identifying, I see if I can find him on the QRZ.COM DX spotting network. It is a lot easier to verify a call sent faster than you can read than it is to copy it. LS is absolutely correct (below). When you get to 20+ WPM, CW is no longer an encoding system. It is a language of its own and should be approached like any foreign language. The big win for contesting and DX is that the vocabulary is so small. For things like 5NN, TU, CQ, DE, TEST, UP etc., I don't even think of the letters. The CW sequence is a spoken word and understandable as such. I'll keep hanging in there and hope you do too. 73 Bill AE6JV On 3/28/16 at 8:10 AM, [hidden email] (lstavenhagen) wrote: >As for copying in one's head, I know I'm drifting slightly off topic, but >just a couple tips for free that helped me: >- the key to getting above about 25 wpm on plain language is to start >learning the CW for entire words or parts of words: "the", "and", and >segments like "tion", "ing", etc. Instead of discrete letters, learn what >entire words or frequent endings sound like. Then in a pinch you can decode >individual letters that you may have missed by not having to decode the >familiar-sounding ending or even guess from context what the entire word is. >- for call signs, which are basically just code groups, be familiar with the >patterns - 1-2 letter/number/2 or 3 letters, etc. That will help you store >those and limit the amount of brain power you have to devote to decoding a >call at high speed. Not infallible but it helps. Bill Frantz | Ham radio contesting is a | Periwinkle (408)356-8506 | contact sport. | 16345 Englewood Ave www.pwpconsult.com | - Ken Widelitz K6LA / VY2TT | Los Gatos, CA 95032 ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
Just a quick point of clarification (since I did my graduate work in a similar field). I would say it's more like a "pidgin" language in contesting exchanges, yes, but in a regular QSO, CW is still basically just an encoding system for the underlying language the QSO is in.
The only difference is in the representation of the "items" of that language: they are now represented by CW rather than the sounds made by the human voice. Putting it another way, you're not having to relearn English when you take up CW, but only a new representation for the "pieces" of it (words and parts of words). That would explain why, for example, your copy speed will drop (sometimes dramatically) when the content is blocks of random letter/number groups instead of plain language, or if you're reading the mail on a QSO in another language like Spanish or German (and you don't speak those languages). And (though by now you know where my comment is going hi hi) why your copy speed can drop dramatically when it's 90% call signs like in a contest. You're not totally at sea, since we have a definite and small set of patterns to go by with calls and the format of contest exchanges (regarding my 'pidgin' judgment above), but that's why contest QSO's kind of need their own copy practice... 73, LS W5QD
|
|
|
Here's one more excellent resource: http://lcwo.net/
The site was developed by Fabian, DJ1YFK, one of the 2 guys who broke the 200 WPM mark with RUFZ. If anyone is interested and attending, I will be speaking about the IARU High Speed Telegraphy World Championship at the ARRL Rocky Mountain Division Convention in Keystone, CO, in mid May. Barry W2UP |
|
|
In reply to this post by Peter Pauly
LD,
That is why it was so hard to pass the CW tests back in the 1950's taking before the FCC because the test did not have any real words. The entire 5 minute code test was five random character groups, not all of which were letters or numbers and you had to have one minute perfect copy to pass. I never managed to pass at the FCC in Detroit with the unsmiling stern FCC employees that looked like they were FBI ready to haul you off to Cuba or somewhere? ;-) So imagine my pleasure taking my 13wpm at the Anchorage FCC office in 1982 with happy friendly faces and copying samples of an actual QSO with real words and only having to answer seven multiple choice questions about the test correctly - absolutely no comparison with the CW "inquisition" of the 1950's. BTW I did get to the point that I recognized common words like "CQ", "de", "73", "name", "RST", "QTH", etc. They became words in the CW "language". Too bad CW isn't sent in Latin; I took two years of that in HS <laughter>. Only good that did me was understanding the priest at a Catholic Mass back in the days they still spoke in Latin. Of course I can pick out a few words in Spanish and French and several other languages that have Latin base (like English) - <more laughter>. Pretty hard to copy CW in Yupik Eskimo. Good points about CW becoming a language. 73, Ed - KL7UW dasvidaniya ---snip That would explain why, for example, your copy speed will drop (sometimes dramatically) when the content is blocks of random letter/number groups instead of plain language, or if you're reading the mail on a QSO in another language like Spanish or German (and you don't speak those languages). ---snip 73, LS W5QD 73, Ed - KL7UW http://www.kl7uw.com "Kits made by KL7UW" Dubus Mag business: [hidden email] ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
Excellent points, IMO. I took both types of code tests. For my novice in 1973 when I was 10 years old, it was the random groups at 5WPM format. IIRC, I achieved the 1-min-solid-copy requirement by some miraculously slim margin. It was something like 2 or 3 characters and I remember being extremely relieved and elated at the accomplishment.
For the Extra, years later, it was when the content was a regular old QSO, so I had virtually completely solid copy of the whole thing; the written test was nearly my downfall in that case (I passed with like 71% or something). Finally, IIRC, licenses like the commercial radiotelegraph license had even more comprehensive requirements - something like 5 minutes of random groups at 20wpm, 5 minutes of plain language at 25wpm, or something like that, depending on what class of license you were going for. Pretty tough! So yes it seems to be well established that plain language is quite distinct from random letter/number groups with respect to copy speed. And it was tested accordingly, or at least in my opinion it was. Fortunately, now that CW isn't required at all has seemed to, ironically, started a revival in CW. The CW portions of the bands do seem to still be more sparse than the SSB portions, but they're still there.... 73, LS W5QD |
|
|
I ordered a LP-Pan 2 and the requisite accessories. I also installed
MorseRunner and am attempting to improve my speed. Thanks everyone for your help. On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 7:45 PM, Ron D'Eau Claire <[hidden email]> wrote: > In the 1950's the U.S. 2nd class commercial Radiotelegraph license exam > required 20 wpm sending and receiving. Receiving was 5 character random > groups that included all punctuation and most of the special characters you > see above the numbers on a keyboard. After 6 months of sea duty as an > assistant radio officer, one could apply for a First Class license that > required the same but at 25 wpm. I don't recall how long we had to copy, > just the elation LS experienced at passing, Hi! > > In our work we had to have excellent character-by-character copy, usually > pounding keys on a mill. Contesting is a bit like that except that in a > contest one has a planned format and very short message as contrasted so, > say, copying press (news) for half an hour at a time. > > I'm not surprised at the speeds one hears in contests. When rag-chewing, > however, I seldom find stations running more than 20 wpm, often much less. > And I often just "read the mail" in my head listening to CW rag chews while > puttering around the shack. > > IMHO, the different uses for CW lend themselves to different learning > techniques. I have met good, competent contest operators completely unable > to have a QSO that is not a contest exchange. They simply cannot think > conversationally at a key or paddle. On a keyboard they often revert to a > brag tape and must QRT when it runs out. And of course, everyone seems to > go > through a bit of a learning curve to copy CW in their head. > > After all these years 99% of my operating is still CW. I joke that I spent > so much time learning CW that I am determined to get as much value from the > effort. (It's not entirely a joke, Hi!) > > 73 Ron AC7AC > > -----Original Message----- > From: Elecraft [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of > lstavenhagen > Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2016 10:32 AM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] OT: Decoding high speed CW > > Excellent points, IMO. I took both types of code tests. For my novice in > 1973 when I was 10 years old, it was the random groups at 5WPM format. > IIRC, > I achieved the 1-min-solid-copy requirement by some miraculously slim > margin. > It was something like 2 or 3 characters and I remember being extremely > relieved and elated at the accomplishment. > > For the Extra, years later, it was when the content was a regular old QSO, > so I had virtually completely solid copy of the whole thing; the written > test was nearly my downfall in that case (I passed with like 71% or > something). > > Finally, IIRC, licenses like the commercial radiotelegraph license had even > more comprehensive requirements - something like 5 minutes of random groups > at 20wpm, 5 minutes of plain language at 25wpm, or something like that, > depending on what class of license you were going for. Pretty tough! > > So yes it seems to be well established that plain language is quite > distinct > from random letter/number groups with respect to copy speed. And it was > tested accordingly, or at least in my opinion it was. > > Fortunately, now that CW isn't required at all has seemed to, ironically, > started a revival in CW. The CW portions of the bands do seem to still be > more sparse than the SSB portions, but they're still there.... > > 73, > LS > W5QD > > > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to [hidden email] > Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |