Elecraft

Wayne's Story - "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs

Classic

List

Threaded

32 messages Options

Jim Ewing

Wayne's Story - "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs

Relevant to what Wayne said is this quote from Pirsig:

*“That's all the motorcycle is, a system of concepts worked out in steel.
There's no part in it, no shape in it, that is not out of someone's mind
[...] I've noticed that people who have never worked with steel have
trouble seeing this—that the motorcycle is primarily a mental phenomenon.*
They associate metal with given shapes—pipes, rods, girders, tools,
parts—all of them fixed and inviolable., and think of it as primarily
physical. But a person who does machining or foundry work or forger work or
welding sees "steel" as having no shape at all. Steel can be any shape you
want if you are skilled enough, and any shape but the one you want if you
are not. Shapes, like this tappet, are what you arrive at, what you give to
the steel. Steel has no more shape than this old pile of dirt on the engine
here. *These shapes are all of someone's mind. That's important to see.*
The steel? Hell, even the steel is out of someone's mind. There's no steel
in nature. Anyone from the Bronze Age could have told you that. All nature
has is a potential for steel. There's nothing else there.”
― Robert M. Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry
Into Values <https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/175720>

So, it's important to see a main reason why these radios are so excellent;
because they come from the minds of people who can express their love and
talent for cw in radio circuits, just as eloquently as Wayne does in his
story.

Jim N4TMM
______________________________________________________________
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]

ke9uw

Re: Wayne's Story - "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs

I've been riding a motorcycle for 50 years...now I know why.
I did read Pirsig's book when it was first published, but didn't remember this. I did remember that his friend rode a BMW and Pirsig made shims for the BMW's handlebar mounts out of a beer can, but was careful to never tell his friend, John I think, where the shims came from.

Jack BMW Motorcycles
Chuck KE9UW
[hidden email]

Sent from my iPad

> On Jul 12, 2020, at 3:51 PM, Jim Ewing <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Relevant to what Wayne said is this quote from Pirsig:
>
> *“That's all the motorcycle is, a system of concepts worked out in steel.
> There's no part in it, no shape in it, that is not out of someone's mind
> [...] I've noticed that people who have never worked with steel have
> trouble seeing this—that the motorcycle is primarily a mental phenomenon.*
> They associate metal with given shapes—pipes, rods, girders, tools,
> parts—all of them fixed and inviolable., and think of it as primarily
> physical. But a person who does machining or foundry work or forger work or
> welding sees "steel" as having no shape at all. Steel can be any shape you
> want if you are skilled enough, and any shape but the one you want if you
> are not. Shapes, like this tappet, are what you arrive at, what you give to
> the steel. Steel has no more shape than this old pile of dirt on the engine
> here. *These shapes are all of someone's mind. That's important to see.*
> The steel? Hell, even the steel is out of someone's mind. There's no steel
> in nature. Anyone from the Bronze Age could have told you that. All nature
> has is a potential for steel. There's nothing else there.”
> ― Robert M. Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry
> Into Values <https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/175720>
>
> So, it's important to see a main reason why these radios are so excellent;
> because they come from the minds of people who can express their love and
> talent for cw in radio circuits, just as eloquently as Wayne does in his
> story.
>
> Jim N4TMM
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]

Chuck, KE9UW

Tony Estep

Re: Wayne's Story - "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs

In reply to this post by Jim Ewing

On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 3:52 PM Jim Ewing <[hidden email]> wrote:

> ...people who can express their love and
> talent for cw...

=============
Yep. Well, we all have a life history with radio. Mine began with a
real-life crystal set, the kind with a chunk of galena and a whisker and a
coil wound over an oatmeal box. Later, a Meissner regen receiver. Still
later, my first transmitter was all home-brew, 6146 final -- worked the
world with it and a Hallicrafters SX-96.
I've tried FT8 and even WiresX, but neither one seems much like radio. The
digital qso via an internet gateway seems particularly pointless, sorta
like a zoom call with a completely random person. I guess I'm just old.
73,
Tony KT0NY
______________________________________________________________
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]

wayne burdick

Re: Wayne's Story - "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"

Administrator

Hi Tony,

> Tony Estep wrote:
>
> I've tried FT8 and even WiresX, but neither one seems much like radio. The
> digital qso via an internet gateway seems particularly pointless, sorta
> like a zoom call with a completely random person.

Now there's a new one. It'll take me awhile to shake this image :)

The argument for digital modes like FT8 is that they're reliable at or below the noise floor, making it possible to work lots of DX even if solar conditions are very poor. Simplicity of protocol is a side effect of this design.

But it begs the question: Is nearly effortless DXing all ham radio is about?

If at least some part of your on-air time is more visceral, more tangible, then -- some of us argue -- the overall experience can be more fulfilling.

Wayne
N6KR

-------

Elecraft: Full-contact ham radio

______________________________________________________________
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]

Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT-4

Re: Wayne's Story - "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"

Yeah, great, reliable at or below the noise floor, but if all you're
doing is meeting the somewhat arbitrary minimum that defines a QSO,
what's the point?

I mean seriously, can you even ask about the weather? Just say "hi?"

Meh.

I'm fine with typing, but I want a real live person typing back, and if
we can type back and forth for an hour, that's great.

73 -- Lynn

On 7/12/20 2:33 PM, Wayne Burdick wrote:
> The argument for digital modes like FT8 is that they're reliable at or below the noise floor, making it possible to work lots of DX even if solar conditions are very poor. Simplicity of protocol is a side effect of this design.
______________________________________________________________
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]

Jim Rhodes-2

Re: Wayne's Story - "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"

The truly great thing about amateur radio is that there are so very many
things that an operator can do. Since I retired and downsized to an
apartment with no tower or beam in an urban environment I find myself using
those very weak signal modes. Still have the KPA500 and KAT500, but using
that kind of power in an apartment is just not "neighbor friendly" so I am
saving them in case I decide to move back to a less congested area or find
a place I can set up a remote station. In the mean time there are those
digital modes that I can get on and make some Qs on. Please do not
denigrate these modes because there are a lot of people in similar
situations. Yes, I would love to crank up the juice, spin the beam around
and pound the green keys in plain old RTTY, but it just ain't happening
right now. So let me make a few Qs now and then and remember when I had a
"real ham station" making "real contacts". And if you don't like it I don't
give a (insert your least favorite term here) what you think. Have a nice
day.

On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 18:54 Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Yeah, great, reliable at or below the noise floor, but if all you're
> doing is meeting the somewhat arbitrary minimum that defines a QSO,
> what's the point?
>
> I mean seriously, can you even ask about the weather? Just say "hi?"
>
> Meh.
>
> I'm fine with typing, but I want a real live person typing back, and if
> we can type back and forth for an hour, that's great.
>
> 73 -- Lynn
>
> On 7/12/20 2:33 PM, Wayne Burdick wrote:
> > The argument for digital modes like FT8 is that they're reliable at or
> below the noise floor, making it possible to work lots of DX even if solar
> conditions are very poor. Simplicity of protocol is a side effect of this
> design.
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]
>

Rick Bates, NK7I

Re: Wayne's Story - "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"

In reply to this post by Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT-4

You’ve just defined the vast majority of DX (and DXpedition in particular) contacts.

That doesn’t make less a part of ham radio.

Rick NK7I

Email spiel Czech corruptions happen

> On Jul 12, 2020, at 4:54 PM, Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> ... but if all you're doing is meeting the somewhat arbitrary minimum that defines a QSO, what's the point?
______________________________________________________________
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]

David Gilbert-2

FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"

In reply to this post by Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT-4

Well, the fact is that the coding and processing behind modes like FT8
doesn't have to be as rigid as is implemented in WSJT-X. It only
requires that information be sent and received in time frames, and those
time frames are simply a function of three variables ... bandwidth,
rate, and number of characters in the message frame. It would be
possible to change any of those, such as widening the bandwidth to
increase the number of characters for the same time frame.

It would also be possible to send text but have it converted to CW on
the other end. Or even to key CW that gets converted to text before
transmission ... i.e., CW to CW except with significantly better S/N
performance. If the user was willing to live with a narrow bandwidth
single conversation format, clock synchronization isn't even really
needed. And if we were willing to live with a single conversation
format, there would be no point in cramming everyone into 2.4 KHz and we
could spread out like we do for every other mode.

I'm no expert, but I think that the coding could have enough error
checking to allow busted message frames to be printed (or converted to
CW) ... although of course with errors. The extra error processing
would reduce the character count, though, all other things being equal.

The point is that the digital signal processing behind FT8 is extremely
powerful and could be adapted to other user formats with a lot more
flexibility than we have with FT8. The hams who just dismiss FT8 out of
hand really don't understand the broader weak signal applicability of it.

73,
Dave AB7E

On 7/12/2020 4:53 PM, Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT wrote:

> Yeah, great, reliable at or below the noise floor, but if all you're
> doing is meeting the somewhat arbitrary minimum that defines a QSO,
> what's the point?
>
> I mean seriously, can you even ask about the weather? Just say "hi?"
>
> Meh.
>
> I'm fine with typing, but I want a real live person typing back, and
> if we can type back and forth for an hour, that's great.
>
> 73 -- Lynn
>
> On 7/12/20 2:33 PM, Wayne Burdick wrote:
>> The argument for digital modes like FT8 is that they're reliable at
>> or below the noise floor, making it possible to work lots of DX even
>> if solar conditions are very poor. Simplicity of protocol is a side
>> effect of this design.
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]

Lyn WØLEN

Re: FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"

Enter JS8Call.

All the technology of FT8, plus all of the conversationality of CW, RTTY and SSB rolled into one.

If you haven't tried it, you really should. It's developer, Jordan Sherer (KN4CRD) has done a terrific job with it and I am honored to have been a part of the beta team almost since day one.

http://js8call.com/

73
Lyn, W0LEN

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of David Gilbert
Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2020 7:40 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [Elecraft] FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"

Well, the fact is that the coding and processing behind modes like FT8
doesn't have to be as rigid as is implemented in WSJT-X. It only
requires that information be sent and received in time frames, and those
time frames are simply a function of three variables ... bandwidth,
rate, and number of characters in the message frame. It would be
possible to change any of those, such as widening the bandwidth to
increase the number of characters for the same time frame.

It would also be possible to send text but have it converted to CW on
the other end. Or even to key CW that gets converted to text before
transmission ... i.e., CW to CW except with significantly better S/N
performance. If the user was willing to live with a narrow bandwidth
single conversation format, clock synchronization isn't even really
needed. And if we were willing to live with a single conversation
format, there would be no point in cramming everyone into 2.4 KHz and we
could spread out like we do for every other mode.

I'm no expert, but I think that the coding could have enough error
checking to allow busted message frames to be printed (or converted to
CW) ... although of course with errors. The extra error processing
would reduce the character count, though, all other things being equal.

The point is that the digital signal processing behind FT8 is extremely
powerful and could be adapted to other user formats with a lot more
flexibility than we have with FT8. The hams who just dismiss FT8 out of
hand really don't understand the broader weak signal applicability of it.

73,
Dave AB7E

On 7/12/2020 4:53 PM, Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT wrote:

> Yeah, great, reliable at or below the noise floor, but if all you're
> doing is meeting the somewhat arbitrary minimum that defines a QSO,
> what's the point?
>
> I mean seriously, can you even ask about the weather? Just say "hi?"
>
> Meh.
>
> I'm fine with typing, but I want a real live person typing back, and
> if we can type back and forth for an hour, that's great.
>
> 73 -- Lynn
>
> On 7/12/20 2:33 PM, Wayne Burdick wrote:
>> The argument for digital modes like FT8 is that they're reliable at
>> or below the noise floor, making it possible to work lots of DX even
>> if solar conditions are very poor. Simplicity of protocol is a side
>> effect of this design.
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]

______________________________________________________________
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]

Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT-4

Re: Wayne's Story - "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"

In reply to this post by Rick Bates, NK7I

With all due respect, Rick, that argument works both ways.

I see why people would want to go on a DXpedition. It's quite an adventure.

I can understand certificate hunting, DXCC and all of that.

I get the people who are totally into linking VHF/UHF via the Internet.

There is a vast amount of fun building radios, and there are similar
"homebrew" opportunities. I know, I've done a lot of homebrew software.

Then there is slow-scan TV, and in some metropolitan areas, fast-scan TV.

I spent many an evening Transmitter Hunting, but to many driving around
on a rainy night with a 4 element 2m quad sticking out the window is
excessive.

I got my Extra so I could become a Volunteer Examiner.

I know I've left out a lot, but it's all important to the hobby. Every
single niche and variation.

I'm simply not attracted to FT-8.

I understand that someone has taken the ideas behind the low bandwidth
encoding and etc. and turned it into something you can chat through, and
that sounds like fun to me.

As usually, YMMV.

73 -- Lynn

On 7/12/20 5:32 PM, Rick NK7I wrote:

> You’ve just defined the vast majority of DX (and DXpedition in particular) contacts.
>
> That doesn’t make less a part of ham radio.
>
> Rick NK7I
>
> Email spiel Czech corruptions happen
>
>> On Jul 12, 2020, at 4:54 PM, Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> ... but if all you're doing is meeting the somewhat arbitrary minimum that defines a QSO, what's the point?

Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT-4

Re: FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"

In reply to this post by Lyn WØLEN

I was trying to remember JS8CALL -- thanks for the reminder.

The best thing about this hobby is that there are so many options and so
many different things you can do.

David, in my off-list message, I was thinking of JS8CALL.

73 -- Lynn

On 7/12/20 6:18 PM, Lyn Norstad wrote:

> Enter JS8Call.
>
> All the technology of FT8, plus all of the conversationality of CW, RTTY and SSB rolled into one.
>
> If you haven't tried it, you really should. It's developer, Jordan Sherer (KN4CRD) has done a terrific job with it and I am honored to have been a part of the beta team almost since day one.
>
> http://js8call.com/
>
> 73
> Lyn, W0LEN
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of David Gilbert
> Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2020 7:40 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: [Elecraft] FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"
>
>
> Well, the fact is that the coding and processing behind modes like FT8
> doesn't have to be as rigid as is implemented in WSJT-X. It only
> requires that information be sent and received in time frames, and those
> time frames are simply a function of three variables ... bandwidth,
> rate, and number of characters in the message frame. It would be
> possible to change any of those, such as widening the bandwidth to
> increase the number of characters for the same time frame.
>
> It would also be possible to send text but have it converted to CW on
> the other end. Or even to key CW that gets converted to text before
> transmission ... i.e., CW to CW except with significantly better S/N
> performance. If the user was willing to live with a narrow bandwidth
> single conversation format, clock synchronization isn't even really
> needed. And if we were willing to live with a single conversation
> format, there would be no point in cramming everyone into 2.4 KHz and we
> could spread out like we do for every other mode.
>
> I'm no expert, but I think that the coding could have enough error
> checking to allow busted message frames to be printed (or converted to
> CW) ... although of course with errors. The extra error processing
> would reduce the character count, though, all other things being equal.
>
> The point is that the digital signal processing behind FT8 is extremely
> powerful and could be adapted to other user formats with a lot more
> flexibility than we have with FT8. The hams who just dismiss FT8 out of
> hand really don't understand the broader weak signal applicability of it.
>
> 73,
> Dave AB7E

David Gilbert-2

Re: FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"

In reply to this post by Lyn WØLEN

Not quite. I'm aware of JS8 and tried it more than a year ago, but it
still has much of the rigidity of the WSJT-X user interface and isn't as
basic as I think would be desirable.

Think of it this way ... CW works fine as both a contest mode, DXing
mode, and conversational mode. Underlaying CW with a well configured
digital signal processing scheme like that which is under FT8, except
with a different user interface than either WSJT-X or JS8, could be
equally versatile but with maybe 6-8 db better S/N ... possibly by an
even greater margin if the decoding allowed errors instead of being all
or nothing.

I'm not saying text-to-CW is the only way to reap the benefit of modern
digital signal processing ... only using it as an example.

People only interested in a contact will probably always prefer
WSJT-X/FT8 because it does that very well, but both contesting and rag
chewing could really use a different (simpler) structure while still
utilizing the superior weak signal peformance of modern digital signal
processing. I guarantee that it is possible to do so.

73,
Dave AB7E

On 7/12/2020 6:18 PM, Lyn Norstad wrote:

wayne burdick

Re: FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"

Administrator

> On Jul 12, 2020, at 6:57 PM, David Gilbert <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Think of it this way ... CW works fine as both a contest mode, DXing mode, and conversational mode. Underlaying CW with a well configured digital signal processing scheme like that which is under FT8, except with a different user interface than either WSJT-X or JS8, could be equally versatile but with maybe 6-8 db better S/N ... possibly by an even greater margin if the decoding allowed errors instead of being all or nothing.

Except that (a) you don't have to know CW, and (b) you don't need a key. There goes 73% of its charm :)

Wayne
N6KR

______________________________________________________________
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]

WILLIE BABER

Re: FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"

There is a way to improve the signal to noise of the CW signal. It is called the yagi or beam antenna.
The tower, guy system, beam, feedline, connectors, and switching, all have considerable appeal for some of us, the same as a good paddle, or a K3 radio.
My four towers and yagis were built by me--solo on the tower--and I do relate to my antenna system in the same way I do to my German-crafted cw paddle (even though I did not build it).
The details about how to do anything is subject to standards about how, exactly, to do it (and without harming yourself or others).
Of course you could decide that an egg is an egg no matter what you do to it (I have seen some tower systems that I would not climb).
I had several tower Elmers starting with Dave Bunte, k9fn, who put up my first tower, a BX tower, at the tall height of 32 feet. I was fearful of that 32 foot tower. Now I routinely go above 100 feet with two towers at 130 feet. I turn 70 years old in September.
If I had more than 4 acres I would have gone to 160 feet, for the sake of 80 meters.
We all have our limitations (4 acres in my case but a ponderosa compared to many others) as well as our different ways of making art but, like a good omelet, the love of art is what makes life so pleasant, and far less dangerous.
73, Will, wj9b

CWops #1085
CWA Advisor levels II and III
http://cwops.org/

On Sunday, July 12, 2020, 7:07:32 PM PDT, Wayne Burdick <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Jul 12, 2020, at 6:57 PM, David Gilbert <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Think of it this way ... CW works fine as both a contest mode, DXing mode, and conversational mode. Underlaying CW with a well configured digital signal processing scheme like that which is under FT8, except with a different user interface than either WSJT-X or JS8, could be equally versatile but with maybe 6-8 db better S/N ... possibly by an even greater margin if the decoding allowed errors instead of being all or nothing.

Except that (a) you don't have to know CW, and (b) you don't need a key. There goes 73% of its charm :)

Wayne
N6KR

______________________________________________________________
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]

David Gilbert-2

Re: FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"

First of all, there is no comparison between the cost of what you just
described and the cost of the software required to provide what I
hypothesized. Secondly, what I hypothesized would stack on top of what
you described without conflict.

So I'm afraid I really don't understand the point of your post.

73,
Dave AB7E

On 7/12/2020 8:47 PM, WILLIE BABER wrote:

> There is a way to improve the signal to noise of the CW signal. It is
> called the yagi or beam antenna.
>
> The tower, guy system, beam, feedline, connectors, and switching, all
> have considerable appeal for some of us, the same as a good paddle, or
> a K3 radio.
>
> My four towers and yagis were built by me--solo on the tower--and I do
> relate to my antenna system in the same way I do to my German-crafted
> cw paddle (even though I did not build it).
>
> The details about how to do anything is subject to standards about
> how, exactly, to do it (and without harming yourself or others).
>
> Of course you could decide that an egg is an egg no matter what you do
> to it (I have seen some tower systems that I would not climb).
>
> I had several tower Elmers starting with Dave Bunte, k9fn, who put up
> my first tower, a BX tower, at the tall height of 32 feet.
> I was fearful of that 32 foot tower. Now I routinely go above 100
> feet with two towers at 130 feet. I turn 70 years old in September.
>
> If I had more than 4 acres I would have gone to 160 feet, for the sake
> of 80 meters.
>
> We all have our limitations (4 acres in my case but a ponderosa
> compared to many others) as well as our different ways of making art
> but, like a good omelet, the love of art is what makes life so
> pleasant, and far less dangerous.
>
> 73, Will, wj9b
>
>
>
>
>
> CWops #1085
> CWA Advisor levels II and III
> http://cwops.org/
>
>
> On Sunday, July 12, 2020, 7:07:32 PM PDT, Wayne Burdick
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 12, 2020, at 6:57 PM, David Gilbert <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
> >
> > Think of it this way ... CW works fine as both a contest mode, DXing
> mode, and conversational mode. Underlaying CW with a well configured
> digital signal processing scheme like that which is under FT8, except
> with a different user interface than either WSJT-X or JS8, could be
> equally versatile but with maybe 6-8 db better S/N ... possibly by an
> even greater margin if the decoding allowed errors instead of being
> all or nothing.
>
>
> Except that (a) you don't have to know CW, and (b) you don't need a
> key. There goes 73% of its charm :)
>
> Wayne
> N6KR
>
>

Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT-4

Re: FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"

In reply to this post by Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT-4

But apparently, according to other posts on this list, DXing and CW is
Amateur Radio, and if you don't have fun doing that, you aren't really a
ham.

Oh well.

73 -- Lynn

On 7/12/20 6:32 PM, Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT wrote:

> I was trying to remember JS8CALL -- thanks for the reminder.
>
> The best thing about this hobby is that there are so many options and so
> many different things you can do.
>
> David, in my off-list message, I was thinking of JS8CALL.
>
> 73 -- Lynn
>
> On 7/12/20 6:18 PM, Lyn Norstad wrote:
>> Enter JS8Call.
>>
>> All the technology of FT8, plus all of the conversationality of CW,
>> RTTY and SSB rolled into one.
>>
>> If you haven't tried it, you really should. It's developer, Jordan
>> Sherer (KN4CRD) has done a terrific job with it and I am honored to
>> have been a part of the beta team almost since day one.
>>
>> http://js8call.com/
>>
>> 73
>> Lyn, W0LEN
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [hidden email]
>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of David Gilbert
>> Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2020 7:40 PM
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Subject: [Elecraft] FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"
>>
>>
>> Well, the fact is that the coding and processing behind modes like FT8
>> doesn't have to be as rigid as is implemented in WSJT-X. It only
>> requires that information be sent and received in time frames, and those
>> time frames are simply a function of three variables ... bandwidth,
>> rate, and number of characters in the message frame. It would be
>> possible to change any of those, such as widening the bandwidth to
>> increase the number of characters for the same time frame.
>>
>> It would also be possible to send text but have it converted to CW on
>> the other end. Or even to key CW that gets converted to text before
>> transmission ... i.e., CW to CW except with significantly better S/N
>> performance. If the user was willing to live with a narrow bandwidth
>> single conversation format, clock synchronization isn't even really
>> needed. And if we were willing to live with a single conversation
>> format, there would be no point in cramming everyone into 2.4 KHz and we
>> could spread out like we do for every other mode.
>>
>> I'm no expert, but I think that the coding could have enough error
>> checking to allow busted message frames to be printed (or converted to
>> CW) ... although of course with errors. The extra error processing
>> would reduce the character count, though, all other things being equal.
>>
>> The point is that the digital signal processing behind FT8 is extremely
>> powerful and could be adapted to other user formats with a lot more
>> flexibility than we have with FT8. The hams who just dismiss FT8 out of
>> hand really don't understand the broader weak signal applicability of it.
>>
>> 73,
>> Dave AB7E
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]

Vic Rosenthal

Re: FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"

In reply to this post by wayne burdick

For me, it's simple.

When I make a CW contact, even if its total content is "ENN TU", I am
connected to history, to Jack Phillips on the Titanic, to all of the
military traffic men and airborne radio operators of WWII, to the
operators on the merchant ships on the high seas and the Great Lakes,
and to all the hams of the past, even Mr. Marconi, the first ham.

I like hearing the propagation change with my own ears and struggling to
capture an ESP-level call. I like the feel of the key and the sound of
the code. I like the idea that there is another person like me at the
other end with his or her hand on a key.

I consider myself extremely lucky to have caught the bug at a young age
and developed the skill needed to make CW as transparent to me as my
mother tongue. I see how hard it is for those who begin to learn at
middle age or older. They shouldn't give up -- it's worth it.

73,
Victor, 4X6GP
Rehovot, Israel
Formerly K2VCO
CWops no. 5
http://www.qsl.net/k2vco/
.
On 13/07/2020 5:06, Wayne Burdick wrote:

>
>> On Jul 12, 2020, at 6:57 PM, David Gilbert <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Think of it this way ... CW works fine as both a contest mode,
>> DXing mode, and conversational mode. Underlaying CW with a well
>> configured digital signal processing scheme like that which is
>> under FT8, except with a different user interface than either
>> WSJT-X or JS8, could be equally versatile but with maybe 6-8 db
>> better S/N ... possibly by an even greater margin if the decoding
>> allowed errors instead of being all or nothing.
>
>
> Except that (a) you don't have to know CW, and (b) you don't need a
> key. There goes 73% of its charm :)
>
> Wayne N6KR

David Gilbert-2

Re: FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"

In reply to this post by Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT-4

No, those other posts didn't say that.

I don't know why some hams insist on fabricating controversy where there
is none. It seems like the bulk of our American society is determined
to be as tribal as possible. Sorry times we live in.

Dave AB7E

On 7/12/2020 9:09 PM, Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT wrote:
> But apparently, according to other posts on this list, DXing and CW is
> Amateur Radio, and if you don't have fun doing that, you aren't really
> a ham.
>
> Oh well.
>
> 73 -- Lynn

______________________________________________________________
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]

David Gilbert-2

Re: FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"

In reply to this post by Vic Rosenthal

Fine, but that demarcation is pretty arbitrary. You could just as
easily go back to tube gear with crystal controlled transmitters and
regenerative receivers., but I'd be a lot of money you don't. The gear
you operate compares little in form, fit or function to anything those
folks used back then. Your current radio almost certainly has a lot of
digital signal processing already, and I'll bet you use a keyer instead
of a hand key. Quite frankly, I can just as easily imagine somebody at
his keyboard on the other end as I could if he was operating a paddle.
Most DXing and almost all contesting is already somebody simply pounding
on a function key on a keyboard.

And like I said before, it is entirely possible to preserve the bulk of
everything you mention and still use modern signal processing to make
human connections more achievable. WSJT-X just doesn't happen to be
that at this point, but that doesn't mean something else couldn't be.

Dave AB7E

On 7/13/2020 12:41 AM, Victor Rosenthal 4X6GP wrote:

> For me, it's simple.
>
> When I make a CW contact, even if its total content is "ENN TU", I am
> connected to history, to Jack Phillips on the Titanic, to all of the
> military traffic men and airborne radio operators of WWII, to the
> operators on the merchant ships on the high seas and the Great Lakes,
> and to all the hams of the past, even Mr. Marconi, the first ham.
>
> I like hearing the propagation change with my own ears and struggling
> to capture an ESP-level call. I like the feel of the key and the sound
> of the code. I like the idea that there is another person like me at
> the other end with his or her hand on a key.
>
> I consider myself extremely lucky to have caught the bug at a young
> age and developed the skill needed to make CW as transparent to me as
> my mother tongue. I see how hard it is for those who begin to learn at
> middle age or older. They shouldn't give up -- it's worth it.
>
> 73,
> Victor, 4X6GP
> Rehovot, Israel
> Formerly K2VCO
> CWops no. 5
> http://www.qsl.net/k2vco/
> .
> On 13/07/2020 5:06, Wayne Burdick wrote:
>>
>>> On Jul 12, 2020, at 6:57 PM, David Gilbert <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Think of it this way ... CW works fine as both a contest mode,
>>> DXing mode, and conversational mode. Underlaying CW with a well
>>> configured digital signal processing scheme like that which is
>>> under FT8, except with a different user interface than either
>>> WSJT-X or JS8, could be equally versatile but with maybe 6-8 db
>>> better S/N ... possibly by an even greater margin if the decoding
>>> allowed errors instead of being all or nothing.
>>
>>
>> Except that (a) you don't have to know CW, and (b) you don't need a
>> key. There goes 73% of its charm :)
>>
>> Wayne N6KR
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]

Vic Rosenthal

Re: FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"

Actually, I'm building a regenerative receiver now. I have to use JFETs
because I got rid of all my tube stuff due to lack of room. But of
course I will continue to benefit from the DSP in my K3, and its keyer
(although I have a bug that I use once in a while).

But those things don't take away the connection to history, they make it
better. The point for me isn't to use the same gear as they did in 1912,
but to enter the Morse space as they did. If I can do it with equipment
that is more stable and effective, so much the better.

After all, a modern sailboat is very much more sophisticated than an old
one, but sailing is still sailing.

73,
Victor, 4X6GP
Rehovot, Israel
Formerly K2VCO
CWops no. 5
http://www.qsl.net/k2vco/
.
On 13/07/2020 10:59, David Gilbert wrote:

>
> Fine, but that demarcation is pretty arbitrary. You could just as
> easily go back to tube gear with crystal controlled transmitters and
> regenerative receivers., but I'd be a lot of money you don't. The gear
> you operate compares little in form, fit or function to anything those
> folks used back then. Your current radio almost certainly has a lot of
> digital signal processing already, and I'll bet you use a keyer instead
> of a hand key. Quite frankly, I can just as easily imagine somebody at
> his keyboard on the other end as I could if he was operating a paddle.
> Most DXing and almost all contesting is already somebody simply pounding
> on a function key on a keyboard.
>
> And like I said before, it is entirely possible to preserve the bulk of
> everything you mention and still use modern signal processing to make
> human connections more achievable. WSJT-X just doesn't happen to be
> that at this point, but that doesn't mean something else couldn't be.
>
> Dave AB7E
>
>
>
>
> On 7/13/2020 12:41 AM, Victor Rosenthal 4X6GP wrote:
>> For me, it's simple.
>>
>> When I make a CW contact, even if its total content is "ENN TU", I am
>> connected to history, to Jack Phillips on the Titanic, to all of the
>> military traffic men and airborne radio operators of WWII, to the
>> operators on the merchant ships on the high seas and the Great Lakes,
>> and to all the hams of the past, even Mr. Marconi, the first ham.
>>
>> I like hearing the propagation change with my own ears and struggling
>> to capture an ESP-level call. I like the feel of the key and the sound
>> of the code. I like the idea that there is another person like me at
>> the other end with his or her hand on a key.
>>
>> I consider myself extremely lucky to have caught the bug at a young
>> age and developed the skill needed to make CW as transparent to me as
>> my mother tongue. I see how hard it is for those who begin to learn at
>> middle age or older. They shouldn't give up -- it's worth it.
>>
>> 73,
>> Victor, 4X6GP
>> Rehovot, Israel
>> Formerly K2VCO
>> CWops no. 5
>> http://www.qsl.net/k2vco/
>> .
>> On 13/07/2020 5:06, Wayne Burdick wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jul 12, 2020, at 6:57 PM, David Gilbert <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Think of it this way ... CW works fine as both a contest mode,
>>>> DXing mode, and conversational mode. Underlaying CW with a well
>>>> configured digital signal processing scheme like that which is
>>>> under FT8, except with a different user interface than either
>>>> WSJT-X or JS8, could be equally versatile but with maybe 6-8 db
>>>> better S/N ... possibly by an even greater margin if the decoding
>>>> allowed errors instead of being all or nothing.
>>>
>>>
>>> Except that (a) you don't have to know CW, and (b) you don't need a
>>> key. There goes 73% of its charm :)
>>>
>>> Wayne N6KR
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> 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]