Ultimatic keying
Locked
 
|
To elaborate a little bit further:
1. For those of us that lack iambic skills, there are rational reasons for us to use dual paddles, although simple-minded logic would suggest that we stick with single paddles. Not only is the paddle travel excessive when moving a single paddle from dot to dash, but there is also the annoying detent in the middle. 2. Given that the non-iambic operator uses dual paddles, the dual paddles open up ways to screw up that don't exist with a single paddle. Ultimatic is clearly designed to mitigate the risk of such mishaps. That is not to say that Ultimatic is the only possible logic that meets that goal, but it is at least established. 3. How many operators can truly say that they make use of iambic features? Could a poll be conducted? I think to learn iambic, one would have to start using it at very slow speeds to begin with, and unless one did this at the start of one's ham career, who goes back to slow speeds just to learn iambic? Silent majority? 73, Erik K7TV >Me too! Gary KJ7RT Sent from my iPad On Aug 12, 2012, at 10:55, "Erik Basilier" <[hidden email]> wrote: > I too support the request to add Ultimatic to Elecraft rigs. I don't > have the fine motor control of my fingers required to make use of > iambic features. I treat the dual paddles the same as a single paddle > for the most part. However, the dual paddle feels better than a single > paddle, probably because pressing one of the paddles gets a result > after a movement of one gap space, while a single paddle means the > paddle travels two gap spacings within a character. Given my way of > using dual paddles, the keyer logic just needs to be as forgiving as > possible in handling the inconsistencies in my finger motions. Years > ago when I built the external keyer with Ultimatic mode, I tried it > and felt that it made my keying more consistent. At this time I have > almost zero time for ham radio, and haven't plugged in the external > keyer after returning from FD. When I get time, I should test my > maximum sending speed with vs without Ultimatic. I do know that just > using the K3's keyer, I start making excessive errors if I try to send faster than about 25 wpm. Perhaps Ultimatic will let me go faster. > ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
I third the motion!
I have been building external boxes to provide Ultimatic keying mode for about 25 years. It would be VERY nice to have it internal to the K3/KX3... Eric VA7DZ ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
Yes please, I've been waiting for this for a few years now!
73 de David, M0XDF (K3 #174, P3 #108) -- I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. -Galileo Galilei, physicist and astronomer (1564-1642) On 11 Aug 2012, at 16:32, [hidden email] wrote: > I third the motion! > > I have been building external boxes to provide Ultimatic keying mode for > about 25 years. > > It would be VERY nice to have it internal to > the K3/KX3... > > Eric > VA7DZ > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by K7TV
I too support the request to add Ultimatic to Elecraft rigs. I don't have
the fine motor control of my fingers required to make use of iambic features. I treat the dual paddles the same as a single paddle for the most part. However, the dual paddle feels better than a single paddle, probably because pressing one of the paddles gets a result after a movement of one gap space, while a single paddle means the paddle travels two gap spacings within a character. Given my way of using dual paddles, the keyer logic just needs to be as forgiving as possible in handling the inconsistencies in my finger motions. Years ago when I built the external keyer with Ultimatic mode, I tried it and felt that it made my keying more consistent. At this time I have almost zero time for ham radio, and haven't plugged in the external keyer after returning from FD. When I get time, I should test my maximum sending speed with vs without Ultimatic. I do know that just using the K3's keyer, I start making excessive errors if I try to send faster than about 25 wpm. Perhaps Ultimatic will let me go faster. 73, Erik K7TV -------------------------------- >Yes please, I've been waiting for this for a few years now! 73 de David, M0XDF (K3 #174, P3 #108) -- I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. -Galileo Galilei, physicist and astronomer (1564-1642) On 11 Aug 2012, at 16:32, [hidden email] wrote: > I third the motion! > > I have been building external boxes to provide Ultimatic keying mode > for about 25 years. > > It would be VERY nice to have it internal to the K3/KX3... > > Eric > VA7DZ > ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
Me too!
Gary KJ7RT Sent from my iPad On Aug 12, 2012, at 10:55, "Erik Basilier" <[hidden email]> wrote: > I too support the request to add Ultimatic to Elecraft rigs. I don't have > the fine motor control of my fingers required to make use of iambic > features. I treat the dual paddles the same as a single paddle for the most > part. However, the dual paddle feels better than a single paddle, probably > because pressing one of the paddles gets a result after a movement of one > gap space, while a single paddle means the paddle travels two gap spacings > within a character. Given my way of using dual paddles, the keyer logic just > needs to be as forgiving as possible in handling the inconsistencies in my > finger motions. Years ago when I built the external keyer with Ultimatic > mode, I tried it and felt that it made my keying more consistent. At this > time I have almost zero time for ham radio, and haven't plugged in the > external keyer after returning from FD. When I get time, I should test my > maximum sending speed with vs without Ultimatic. I do know that just using > the K3's keyer, I start making excessive errors if I try to send faster than > about 25 wpm. Perhaps Ultimatic will let me go faster. > > > > 73, > > Erik K7TV > > -------------------------------- > >> Yes please, I've been waiting for this for a few years now! > > 73 de David, M0XDF (K3 #174, P3 #108) > > -- > > I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. > -Galileo Galilei, physicist and astronomer (1564-1642) > > > > On 11 Aug 2012, at 16:32, [hidden email] wrote: > > > >> I third the motion! > >> > >> I have been building external boxes to provide Ultimatic keying mode > >> for about 25 years. > >> > >> It would be VERY nice to have it internal to the K3/KX3... > >> > >> Eric > >> VA7DZ > >> ______________________________________________________________ > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by K7TV
For those Listers who don't know what Ultimatic keying is all about -
and are afraid to ask - here is a description by Chuck Olson WB9KZY and some references also: http://wb9kzy.com/ultimat.txt 73, Stan WB2LQF ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by K7TV
I believe this was done several years ago on this list during a previous
Ultimatic thread. Unfortunately, keyer modes are right up with religions for many folks ... I recall the discourse was "spirited." I do not recall the ultimate outcome, if there was one, but I do remember the "spirit!" 73, Fred K6DGW [keyer mode = SIA ... "Slap It Around."] - Northern California Contest Club - CU in the 2012 Cal QSO Party 6-7 Oct 2012 - www.cqp.org On 8/12/2012 1:27 PM, Erik Basilier wrote: > 3. How many operators can truly say that they make use of iambic features? > Could a poll be conducted? ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by stan levandowski
You guys got me interested, and I have a keyer that supports it, so I tried it.
Couldn't send C's or K's. Both of which are in my call! On 8/12/2012 1:25 PM, stan levandowski wrote: > For those Listers who don't know what Ultimatic keying is all about - > and are afraid to ask - here is a description by Chuck Olson WB9KZY and > some references also: http://wb9kzy.com/ultimat.txt > > 73, Stan WB2LQF > > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- Vic, K2VCO Fresno CA http://www.qsl.net/k2vco/ ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by K7TV
On 08/12/2012 03:27 PM, Erik Basilier wrote:
> 3. How many operators can truly say that they make use of iambic features? I do too. I went from straight key to Iambic back in the 70s, or so. I used a HB copy of the Heathkit HD-1410 Iambic keyer and a HB Iambic Key. I decided that I would not chase the various rig internal keyers and standardize on a keyer and key. Mine are Idiom Press K3 and CMOS-4 (VØ Logikey K1, K3 timing w/dot and dash memory) and Vibroplex Iambic key. My suggestion is to find what you like in an external keyer and use it for home use. And make compromises when going portable or ultra portable. I do use the internal K2 keyer (B), sometimes, when going portable. It may be much to ask a rig manufacture to implement the "feel" of every keyer and key permutation implemented through the years. I bring my key and keyer to Field Day. If it was more then once a year, I would make a key/keyer go-box! John KN5L ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by K7TV
Ron, thanks for your comments, and I recognize that there must be a sizable
minority of operators that are fully competent with iambic. And, when iambic is mastered it can probably produce faster code than either a single paddle or a double paddle used by a non-iambic operator. What I don't believe is that if you put a dual paddle with iambic logic in the hands of an established operator, he will gradually slip into making use of the iambic features. Yet, that seems to be the assumption of manufacturers. I can think of 3 dual paddles available from Elecraft, but no single paddle option. Two of the Elecraft paddles are for portable rigs. My experience with portable operation is that the sitting position is usually uncomfortable, the hands may be cold and shaking (due to cold or exertion), and motor skills are way below the level at the shack. In such a situation, my mistakes with a dual paddle go way up, and either Ultimatic or a single paddle would help a lot. Before my KX1 I used a single lever made from flexing PC board with my portable radios. It didn't go fast, but was very reliable after I soldered little pieces of sterling silver to the contact points. Somehow I am guessing that the tendency of manufacturers toward dual paddles and complicated keying logic has something to do with the desire to appear to deliver the most for the money. Beginners may be swayed by that. Some manufacturers seem to really promote "more is more" as in pounds of radio and number of knobs. Others, particularly when selling qrp rigs may promote "less is more". For the thinking ham, neither slogan makes sense. Elecraft provides lots features where more certainly is more, but saves us from backbreaking radio weights and impractical numbers of controls. When it comes to keying, the "more is more" seems to have won out without real justification. BTW many years ago like you I built a keyer from discrete CMOS (published in 73 mag). I don't remember what the keying logic was, but since dual paddles were used, I am guessing that the whole project was motivated by the new iambic ideas. I never learnt to use it at all (let alone the iambic features) until I reversed the paddles to get the dits on the thumb. I can relate to the pleasure of learning a physical skill like that (used to play classical guitar), but feel that the movements with iambic are just too small and delicate. Maybe I just need to set bigger spacing an use more forceful movements to feel what is going on, but I seem to have a preference for very small contact spacings. Interesting to hear about your need for time to adjust between different sets of muscle memories. I experience something similar in copying morse. I can copy quite fast, but it takes a few moments to "load the decoder into my brain". One time I was filling up at a gas station and another customer saw my mobile antenna and asked what I was doing. When I said I was a ham, he started voicing "di-dah's" at me and I couldn't copy at all. In addition to the general boot-up time, I just wasn't programmed for that. 73, Erik K7TV -------------------------------- To answer your question, after 20 years of using a straight key and bug, I built a discrete-component CMOS iambic keyer in the 1970's. I did start out slow but speed came quickly, IIRC, as my fingers learned the correct pattern of movements for each character. But I had to do the same thing when I learned to use a bug in the 1950's. Knowing Morse doesn't mean one's body knows how to operate a particular key to generate it. That takes practice. I was pleasantly surprised to find that the iambic keyer built into the K2 and K3 was as comfortable to use as my old homebrew keyer. Unfortunately, I found that I could -not- use a bug and the iambic keyer (in iambic mode) interchangeably. My "muscle memory" was too strong and I found myself squeezing the bug paddle. Also my timing on the bug was lousy since the keyer did all the timing and spacing for me. So, after about 25 years on the iambic keyer, my bug won out after another re-training period -- at least as long as I enjoy sending CW with it. However, I have gone back to the iambic keyer from time to time to load CW memories, etc., and iambic fingering comes back in a few seconds. But I enjoy learning physical skills like that. It's part of the fun of Ham radio for me. Otherwise I'd not have bothered switching to an iambic keyer and then back to the bug. I don't think I'm part of a silent "majority". Most likely I'm part of a substantial "minority" - either on an iambic keyer or on a bug. 73, Ron AC7AC ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
Hi Brian,
Yes, if you use a single paddle, the logic in the keyer doesn't affect you, but I wouldn't call that "using" iambic. Given that there are so many dual paddles on the market, and so few singles, I have to believe that most hams that use an electronic keyer are currently using dual paddles with iambic keyer logic. My theory is that this can be shown to have a small but statistically negative effect on the average quality of sending, and thus on operator satisfaction, and on the popularity of cw ragchewing. The cause of ham radio would therefore be advanced if the elite iambic features were not compulsory. Unless of course most of those operators have learnt squeeze keying, and you and I are in the minority. I think to be meaningful, a poll should probably not be conducted by messages here, but on some website that has a polling feature. Congrat's on your doing 45 wpm with a single paddle. Maybe I am just too lazy, and spending-averse, and too squeemish about the larger paddle movement, to get a single paddle and be able to go faster that way. 73, Erik K7TV Hi Eric, I use iambic --- sort of. I came through the ranks of bug and single lever keyers where you had to supply your own timing. Hence transitioning to iambic on a single level paddle was easy. Just keep doing what one always did. No real benefit of a dual paddle. Once I get much above 45 wpm, it's time to use the keyboard. Same thing with a CW keyboard. Typing was taught in high school by rhythm and thus typing the next character at the right time was easy. With one key rollover, one can just about forget the need for a buffer. I really pity the person who is trying to learn to use a dual lever paddle from scratch with any type of keying logic. My perception is that squeezing timing is much more unnatural and difficult to achieve than back and forth "slapping". Of course, the rest of the CW world has mastered it, so it's obviously not impossible. I think your survey needs to include how many really CW ragchew. That number has got to be small. All of this stuff becomes unnecessary if one just engages in 599 73 QSO's. 73 de Brian/K3KO ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by John Oppenheimer
My former TS-870 had a built-in Logikey and I could actually send with it. The same can't be said for the K3 internal keyer. I can barely program the memories without a few tries. As to holding a QSO forget it. I've been sending the numeral "7" in my call since 1958 and it still comes out "M S" with the K3. :-)
--- On Sun, 8/12/12, John Oppenheimer <[hidden email]> wrote: Date: Sunday, August 12, 2012, 3:34 PM On 08/12/2012 03:27 PM, Erik Basilier wrote: > 3. How many operators can truly say that they make use of iambic features? I do too. I went from straight key to Iambic back in the 70s, or so. I used a HB copy of the Heathkit HD-1410 Iambic keyer and a HB Iambic Key. I decided that I would not chase the various rig internal keyers and standardize on a keyer and key. Mine are Idiom Press K3 and CMOS-4 (VØ Logikey K1, K3 timing w/dot and dash memory) and Vibroplex Iambic key. ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by K7TV
Ron,
In 1971 in Germany in the Army Signal Corps, we convinced our COL to upgrade us to a 90 WPM RTTY machine so we wouldn't get stalled by the sluggish nature of the 60WPM. To this day, I wonder how I typed that fast as I sure suck today! Noisy is was!!! 73, Bill K9YEQ -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Ron D'Eau Claire Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2012 5:02 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Ultimatic keying I learned to type that way in High School too but what really taught me to keep a steady pace was pounding away on an old Model 15 RTTY keyboard in the Army. As each key was pressed the keyboard locked while the mechanical encoder cycled before another key could be pressed. Fortunately it was pretty noisy so one learned to hear the mechanism cycle and knew just when the next key could be pressed. Tapping one foot worked well too :-) 99.99% of my operating is CW rag chewing. We may be a diminishing "breed", but there are still plenty of us out there to provide some really nice hours on the bands. That got me nostalgic for the old Model 15 "rattle" so I looked and, sure 'nough, someone has one running on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWa6u5_Itvs The trick is to keep that rhythm for maximum inputting speed on the keyboard. 73, Ron AC7AC -----Original Message----- Same thing with a CW keyboard. Typing was taught in high school by rhythm and thus typing the next character at the right time was easy. With one key rollover, one can just about forget the need for a buffer. I really pity the person who is trying to learn to use a dual lever paddle from scratch with any type of keying logic. My perception is that squeezing timing is much more unnatural and difficult to achieve than back and forth "slapping". Of course, the rest of the CW world has mastered it, so it's obviously not impossible. I think your survey needs to include how many really CW ragchew. That number has got to be small. All of this stuff becomes unnecessary if one just engages in 599 73 QSO's. 73 de Brian/K3KO ______________________________________________________________ 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 ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
On 8/12/2012 3:44 PM, Bill K9YEQ wrote:
> In 1971 in Germany in the Army Signal Corps, we convinced our COL to upgrade > us to a 90 WPM RTTY machine so we wouldn't get stalled by the sluggish > nature of the 60WPM. To this day, I wonder how I typed that fast as I sure > suck today! Noisy is was!!! Copying CW direct to TTY tape was hugely easy for that reason. As long as he wasn't sending at 60 WPM [like I have ever been able to make record copy at that speed :-)], you just pressed the keys, with a lot of travel, and it went from ears to fingers with no intermediate stops. It was much the same on the Underwood open-frame mills -- long key travel, you really knew you were pressing the key, and it became something of a finger dance. Today's computer keyboards are much harder for me for record copy, I don't really get the physical sense of pressing the keys, and I tend to wear them out ... pounding far more than I need to. My laptop is the worst. Regarding Ultimatic, I've tried it, never practiced, basically didn't like it all that much. My K3 and Winkey USB are both iambic, too old, don't use it. But, to each his own. The K3 keyer is all firmware, ultimatic could probably be added as an option if enough address space is available. Time is probably the big issue for Wayne/Eric and Company, no one could wait quietly for the K3, then KPA500, KX3, and now KAT500, I'll bet their engineering agendas are very full. 73, Fred K6DGW - Northern California Contest Club - CU in the 2012 Cal QSO Party 6-7 Oct 2012 - www.cqp.org ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by K7TV
On an even more obscure note, in the summer of 1965 or 1966 (can't
remember which) as a recently-minted Conditional class licensee I was spending a lot of time on 40 meter CW during the day. High school was out for the summer and I was busy building electronic keyers and learning to use them. I ran across a W4, down in Alabama I think, who was a regular 40 QRQ guy. He had developed what he called the "Squeeze Keyer". It used a bunch of 12AU7s and had a similar philosophy to the Ultimatic. His version used what he called "single dot injection" and closing the dot paddle while the dash paddle was held closed would inject a single dot in the stream of dashes. Other than for this condition, the dash paddle always had priority over the dot paddle. Using this technique, any letter in the alphabet except X could be generated with a single properly timed squeeze of the paddles. He wouldn't publish the design, so when he went SK it presumably died with him. Sometime in the early '70s I designed and built a keyer that did the same thing using 74xx TTL chips. It worked great, but I was about the only one who could send on it. Does anybody else remember the "Squeeze Keyer"? 73... Randy, W8FN On 08/12/2012 17:00, Erik Basilier wrote: > Ron, thanks for your comments, and I recognize that there must be a sizable > minority of operators that are fully competent with iambic. And, when iambic > is mastered it can probably produce faster code than either a single paddle > or a double paddle used by a non-iambic operator. What I don't believe is > that if you put a dual paddle with iambic logic in the hands of an > established operator, he will gradually slip into making use of the iambic > features. Yet, that seems to be the assumption of manufacturers. I can think > of 3 dual paddles available from Elecraft, but no single paddle option. Two > of the Elecraft paddles are for portable rigs. My experience with portable > operation is that the sitting position is usually uncomfortable, the hands > may be cold and shaking (due to cold or exertion), and motor skills are way > below the level at the shack. In such a situation, my mistakes with a dual > paddle go way up, and either Ultimatic or a single paddle would help a lot. > Before my KX1 I used a single lever made from flexing PC board with my > portable radios. It didn't go fast, but was very reliable after I soldered > little pieces of sterling silver to the contact points. Somehow I am > guessing that the tendency of manufacturers toward dual paddles and > complicated keying logic has something to do with the desire to appear to > deliver the most for the money. Beginners may be swayed by that. Some > manufacturers seem to really promote "more is more" as in pounds of radio > and number of knobs. Others, particularly when selling qrp rigs may promote > "less is more". For the thinking ham, neither slogan makes sense. Elecraft > provides lots features where more certainly is more, but saves us from > backbreaking radio weights and impractical numbers of controls. When it > comes to keying, the "more is more" seems to have won out without real > justification. > > BTW many years ago like you I built a keyer from discrete CMOS (published in > 73 mag). I don't remember what the keying logic was, but since dual paddles > were used, I am guessing that the whole project was motivated by the new > iambic ideas. I never learnt to use it at all (let alone the iambic > features) until I reversed the paddles to get the dits on the thumb. I can > relate to the pleasure of learning a physical skill like that (used to play > classical guitar), but feel that the movements with iambic are just too > small and delicate. Maybe I just need to set bigger spacing an use more > forceful movements to feel what is going on, but I seem to have a preference > for very small contact spacings. Interesting to hear about your need for > time to adjust between different sets of muscle memories. I experience > something similar in copying morse. I can copy quite fast, but it takes a > few moments to "load the decoder into my brain". One time I was filling up > at a gas station and another customer saw my mobile antenna and asked what I > was doing. When I said I was a ham, he started voicing "di-dah's" at me and > I couldn't copy at all. In addition to the general boot-up time, I just > wasn't programmed for that. > > > > 73, > > Erik K7TV > > -------------------------------- > > To answer your question, after 20 years of using a straight key and bug, I > built a discrete-component CMOS iambic keyer in the 1970's. > > > > I did start out slow but speed came quickly, IIRC, as my fingers learned the > correct pattern of movements for each character. But I had to do the same > thing when I learned to use a bug in the 1950's. Knowing Morse doesn't mean > one's body knows how to operate a particular key to generate it. That takes > practice. > > > > I was pleasantly surprised to find that the iambic keyer built into the K2 > and K3 was as comfortable to use as my old homebrew keyer. > > > > Unfortunately, I found that I could -not- use a bug and the iambic keyer (in > iambic mode) interchangeably. My "muscle memory" was too strong and I found > myself squeezing the bug paddle. Also my timing on the bug was lousy since > the keyer did all the timing and spacing for me. So, after about 25 years on > the iambic keyer, my bug won out after another re-training period -- at > least as long as I enjoy sending CW with it. However, I have gone back to > the iambic keyer from time to time to load CW memories, etc., and iambic > fingering comes back in a few seconds. > > > > But I enjoy learning physical skills like that. It's part of the fun of Ham > radio for me. Otherwise I'd not have bothered switching to an iambic keyer > and then back to the bug. I don't think I'm part of a silent "majority". > > Most likely I'm part of a substantial "minority" - either on an iambic keyer > or on a bug. > > > > 73, Ron AC7AC > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 > ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
On Aug 12, 2012, at 9:25 PM, Randy Farmer <[hidden email]> wrote: > Does anybody else remember the "Squeeze Keyer"? Yep! Basically, a POO Keyer with single dot insertion. Bud, W2RU ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by w8fn
Hi Randy,
Sounds suspiciously like the 9TO Mark II which appeared in the June 1967 issue of QST, was called "Dot Insertion" It was my 1st keyer and I still have it!! You can get the article on line at the ARRL if you want to check it out. I think it is an Ultimatic type but relieves some of the timing issue with "slapping" in dots. Also helped keep the shack warm in the winter, had 4 or 5 12AU7"s and 2 regulator tubes (hollow state zeners). 73, Bob K2TK ex KN2TKR (1956) & K2TKR On 8/12/2012 9:25 PM, Randy Farmer wrote: > On an even more obscure note, in the summer of 1965 or 1966 (can't > remember which) as a recently-minted Conditional class licensee I was > spending a lot of time on 40 meter CW during the day. High school was > out for the summer and I was busy building electronic keyers and > learning to use them. > > I ran across a W4, down in Alabama I think, who was a regular 40 QRQ > guy. He had developed what he called the "Squeeze Keyer". It used a > bunch of 12AU7s and had a similar philosophy to the Ultimatic. His > version used what he called "single dot injection" and closing the dot > paddle while the dash paddle was held closed would inject a single dot > in the stream of dashes. Other than for this condition, the dash paddle > always had priority over the dot paddle. Using this technique, any > letter in the alphabet except X could be generated with a single > properly timed squeeze of the paddles. He wouldn't publish the design, > so when he went SK it presumably died with him. Sometime in the early > '70s I designed and built a keyer that did the same thing using 74xx TTL > chips. It worked great, but I was about the only one who could send on > it. Does anybody else remember the "Squeeze Keyer"? > > 73... > Randy, W8FN > > On 08/12/2012 17:00, Erik Basilier wrote: >> Ron, thanks for your comments, and I recognize that there must be a sizable >> minority of operators that are fully competent with iambic. And, when iambic >> is mastered it can probably produce faster code than either a single paddle >> or a double paddle used by a non-iambic operator. What I don't believe is >> that if you put a dual paddle with iambic logic in the hands of an >> established operator, he will gradually slip into making use of the iambic >> features. Yet, that seems to be the assumption of manufacturers. I can think >> of 3 dual paddles available from Elecraft, but no single paddle option. Two >> of the Elecraft paddles are for portable rigs. My experience with portable >> operation is that the sitting position is usually uncomfortable, the hands >> may be cold and shaking (due to cold or exertion), and motor skills are way >> below the level at the shack. In such a situation, my mistakes with a dual >> paddle go way up, and either Ultimatic or a single paddle would help a lot. >> Before my KX1 I used a single lever made from flexing PC board with my >> portable radios. It didn't go fast, but was very reliable after I soldered >> little pieces of sterling silver to the contact points. Somehow I am >> guessing that the tendency of manufacturers toward dual paddles and >> complicated keying logic has something to do with the desire to appear to >> deliver the most for the money. Beginners may be swayed by that. Some >> manufacturers seem to really promote "more is more" as in pounds of radio >> and number of knobs. Others, particularly when selling qrp rigs may promote >> "less is more". For the thinking ham, neither slogan makes sense. Elecraft >> provides lots features where more certainly is more, but saves us from >> backbreaking radio weights and impractical numbers of controls. When it >> comes to keying, the "more is more" seems to have won out without real >> justification. >> >> BTW many years ago like you I built a keyer from discrete CMOS (published in >> 73 mag). I don't remember what the keying logic was, but since dual paddles >> were used, I am guessing that the whole project was motivated by the new >> iambic ideas. I never learnt to use it at all (let alone the iambic >> features) until I reversed the paddles to get the dits on the thumb. I can >> relate to the pleasure of learning a physical skill like that (used to play >> classical guitar), but feel that the movements with iambic are just too >> small and delicate. Maybe I just need to set bigger spacing an use more >> forceful movements to feel what is going on, but I seem to have a preference >> for very small contact spacings. Interesting to hear about your need for >> time to adjust between different sets of muscle memories. I experience >> something similar in copying morse. I can copy quite fast, but it takes a >> few moments to "load the decoder into my brain". One time I was filling up >> at a gas station and another customer saw my mobile antenna and asked what I >> was doing. When I said I was a ham, he started voicing "di-dah's" at me and >> I couldn't copy at all. In addition to the general boot-up time, I just >> wasn't programmed for that. >> >> >> >> 73, >> >> Erik K7TV >> >> -------------------------------- >> >> To answer your question, after 20 years of using a straight key and bug, I >> built a discrete-component CMOS iambic keyer in the 1970's. >> >> >> >> I did start out slow but speed came quickly, IIRC, as my fingers learned the >> correct pattern of movements for each character. But I had to do the same >> thing when I learned to use a bug in the 1950's. Knowing Morse doesn't mean >> one's body knows how to operate a particular key to generate it. That takes >> practice. >> >> >> >> I was pleasantly surprised to find that the iambic keyer built into the K2 >> and K3 was as comfortable to use as my old homebrew keyer. >> >> >> >> Unfortunately, I found that I could -not- use a bug and the iambic keyer (in >> iambic mode) interchangeably. My "muscle memory" was too strong and I found >> myself squeezing the bug paddle. Also my timing on the bug was lousy since >> the keyer did all the timing and spacing for me. So, after about 25 years on >> the iambic keyer, my bug won out after another re-training period -- at >> least as long as I enjoy sending CW with it. However, I have gone back to >> the iambic keyer from time to time to load CW memories, etc., and iambic >> fingering comes back in a few seconds. >> >> >> >> But I enjoy learning physical skills like that. It's part of the fun of Ham >> radio for me. Otherwise I'd not have bothered switching to an iambic keyer >> and then back to the bug. I don't think I'm part of a silent "majority". >> >> Most likely I'm part of a substantial "minority" - either on an iambic keyer >> or on a bug. >> >> >> >> 73, Ron AC7AC >> >> >> >> ______________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 > ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
Administrator
|
In the interest of keeping list volume under control (and improving SNR)
let's end this thread at this time. For those interested, there is a lot of prior discussion of this topic in the searchable list archives at: http://www.elecraft.com/elist.html 73, Eric Elecraft List Moderator _..._ On 8/12/2012 7:14 PM, Bob wrote: > Hi Randy, > > Sounds suspiciously like the 9TO Mark II which appeared in the > June 1967 > issue of QST, was called "Dot Insertion" It was my 1st keyer and I still have > it! ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Vic Rosenthal
Vic K2VCO wrote:
>On 8/12/2012 1:25 PM, stan levandowski wrote: >> For those Listers who don't know what Ultimatic keying is all about - >> and are afraid to ask - here is a description by Chuck Olson WB9KZY and >> some references also: http://wb9kzy.com/ultimat.txt >> >> 73, Stan WB2LQF In a few words: when you squeeze the key, Ultimatic doesn't send alternating dots and dashes - it "interrupts" whichever ones you were already sending, to send the opposite character instead. The Ultimatic logic is "last paddle pressed, always wins". The Ultimatic system is more forgiving of small timing errors because it doesn't ever store a trailing character from the opposite paddle. In most implementations, Ultimatic allows plenty of time to release either paddle (if that's what you need to do) before it takes a fresh look at both paddles. Ultimatic is favored by two very different groups of people: 1. People who can read Morse faster than their fingers will send it, so they are *always* sending at their personal upper limit. 2. Extreme High Speed operators, who are sending at *their* upper limit, too... but for very different reasons. >You guys got me interested, and I have a keyer that supports it, so I tried it. > >Couldn't send C's or K's. Both of which are in my call! > Well, yeah... Ultimatic has got to feel different from the system you're already used to. (If it wasn't different, it would be the same :-) But the main point is that both the K3 and the KX3 offer an extremely limited set of menu options for the built-in CW keyer - which also is the ONLY way to send RTTY or PSK from the paddles. When the $6 K12 keyer chip offers a wider range of options than the K3 and the KX3 do, something is out of balance in the feature list. It is surely time for those additional options (including bug and Ultimatic) to be made available "inside the box". -- 73 from Ian GM3SEK http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |