Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1] 2 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: fldigi Morse Decoder  (Read 1633 times)
AE8RS
Member

Posts: 42




Ignore
« on: November 07, 2017, 01:25:52 PM »

Does anyone have experience using the morse decoder in fldigi? I'm piping my CW into fldigi to practice my sending. I keep reading on this forum the biggest annoyance on the air is poor spacing. When I send into fldigi it's separating all my letters. I don't want to be the guy running my words together trying to get fldigi to put them into nice clean words. So, is it an accurate decoder?
Logged
VK5EEE
Member

Posts: 1041




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: November 07, 2017, 03:50:18 PM »

That's likely nothing to worry about but a "feature" of decoders when they are not locked on exactly to the speed. So long as you can hear a gap in your sending between characters, that's surely fine. Running letters together means there is NO gap. Listen to W1AW or type in some text into LCWO.net or a known working CW keyboard sender, and listen to the rhythm, that is what you would want to ideally emulate, but some variation from it is not going to render your sent CW poor or unintelligible.
Logged

Long Live Real Human CW and wishing you many happy CW QSO - 77 - CW Forever

Support CW and join CW clubs. QTT: FIST#1124, HSC#1437, UFT#728, RCWC#982, SKCC#15007, CWOPS#1714, 30CW#1,
AE8RS
Member

Posts: 42




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: November 07, 2017, 05:42:22 PM »

Thank you! That's tremendously helpful.
Logged
VK5EEE
Member

Posts: 1041




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: November 07, 2017, 06:51:48 PM »

You are welcome. Another fact, is that there are a great many hams now, perhaps due to having learned CW at higher speed with Farnsworth spacing and not ever got the spacing down, who send with exaggerated gaps between letters. It's not a big issue, but in your case, you may be worried about not having enough gaps because of some recent discussions here in the forum. Those MAY also be exaggerated cases, in all honestly, the official gaps of 3 dits between letters and 7 between words (which only decades ago was officially JUST FOUR DITS BETWEEN WORDS, i.e an almost imperceptible difference between inter-letter and inter-word spacing, as regulated by the ITU Morse Code regulation) is often not adhered to: many use less than 3 dits between letters, perhaps 2 dits, and less than 7 between words, perhaps 5 dits, and there is really no problem at all. Morse is a LOT more flexible than many would have you believe!
Logged

Long Live Real Human CW and wishing you many happy CW QSO - 77 - CW Forever

Support CW and join CW clubs. QTT: FIST#1124, HSC#1437, UFT#728, RCWC#982, SKCC#15007, CWOPS#1714, 30CW#1,
VA7CPC
Member

Posts: 2805




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: November 07, 2017, 10:57:46 PM »

. . .  So long as you can hear a gap in your sending between characters, that's surely fine. Running letters together means there is NO gap. Listen to W1AW or type in some text into LCWO.net or a known working CW keyboard sender, and listen to the rhythm, that is what you would want to ideally emulate, but some variation from it is not going to render your sent CW poor or unintelligible.

The danger, of course, is that _you_ will hear the gap (because you know it's supposed to be there), but your listener will not (because he _doesn't_ know, and it's too short to be recognizable as a gap).

Yes, "fldigi" is reliable.  If you can send code that it can understand (no gaps between letters on the decode, and a space between words), you're doing very well.

A question:

. . . What are you sending with?

If you can get fldigi to decode your sending with a straight key, you're doing better than most experienced hams.  It's a lot easier to accomplish with a paddle and keyer.

If your keyer offers "autospacing", turn that on, and see how you do with it.  If you're putting too much space between letters, it'll tell you right away -- each of those too-long, inter-letter gaps will be extended to an inter-word gap.

.      Charles
Logged
AE8RS
Member

Posts: 42




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: November 08, 2017, 04:29:45 AM »

I'm using paddles into a Arduino keyer (K3NG). So, no straight key yet. I'll try turning on the autospace. You're 100% right I've seen the articles about running things together over the last few weeks and wanted to make sure I wasn't trying to get tighter CW at the expense of legibility.
Logged
KD8IIC
Member

Posts: 648




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: November 08, 2017, 05:39:47 AM »

  Thank You for your interest and effort to perfect your fist!
Logged
N3HEE
Member

Posts: 431


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #7 on: November 09, 2017, 05:20:33 AM »

One tool I use with my students to check their sending is to have them record themselves sending.  Then they play it back and see if they can copy it.  This quickly makes them aware of spacing and timing issues without anyone needing to tell them.  We also have a sending drill at the beginning of each class and I give feedback and suggestions.  Sending good quality code is more important than being able to receive code at a higher speed. 
Logged

Joe
N3HEE
CW Academy Advisor (Level II)
KE6EE
Member

Posts: 1842




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: November 09, 2017, 07:22:20 AM »

One tool I use with my students to check their sending is to have them record themselves sending.  Then they play it back and see if they can copy it. 


This very interesting observation suggests that some students do not listen to themselves as they are sending code. Which in turn says to me that their learning is superficial and incomplete.

I think that most of us who learned code without using a contemporary "quickie" method for learning, can hear even minor spacing errors as we send.
Logged
VK5EEE
Member

Posts: 1041




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: November 09, 2017, 07:45:41 AM »

I definitely can hear EXACTLY what I send even to the minutest timing difference, admittedly I'm quite QRQ capable, I wonder if it had anything to do with receiving (approx age 8 to 12) for some years before transmitting? I can't help but feel that one should learn to receive well before sending, but I may well be wrong on that.

I have observed an unusual (to me) phenomena of some who are new to CW being able to send FASTER than they can receive -- in fact MUCH faster. E.g. they may be sending well at 16 WPM but can't receive 14 WPM well. I assume this is because when they know what they want to send they can recall the character, but when hearing it unexpectedly they cannot readily recall it.

It is strange to me as I did spend years listening before first sending at age 12, and when I did get on the key for 8 hours each day for 5 weeks, right from the get go I was a good fist. This is what leads me to think that sending can always come AFTER receiving without any problem, in fact you are eager to send, and when sending you can then hear quite well what you are sending.

From that early age up until even now, I've always been able to receive a lot faster than I can send, but I think this may be in part due to not realising that I should have trained on single lever (and thus non-iambic) as I was unaware of the speed limitation of 45-50WPM in iambic mode, for normal human beings (or perhaps even exceptional ones). Thus I can receive 60-70 or so plain English but send only 45 WPM before too many errors get in (and still, with an iambic keyer but now also with single lever, but haven't had much QRQ practice).

So I'm just not sure about whether it is a good idea to be sending until CW has been mastered, because that mastering does involve being very perceptive to timing and any slight variations in timing. As an aside here, I think a great many seem to think that bug and cootie operators who deliberately swing and create music, and vary from the standard ratios, don't know exactly what we are doing: we do, and I can prove it by repeating any variations twice in a row EXACTLY no matter the length of the word. But, key to this, is knowing exactly what you are sending, and it would appear that those who learn sending along with receiving, or before mastering reception, thus would likely not (unless supervised) know their errors.

So a question to those who are teaching people to send before they have been able to receive CW at above 20WPM, what is your reason for teaching sending early on? To overcome potential boredom of the student or keep them more interested? Or as you believe there is some benefit? I have a suspicion that delaying sending until reception is good, will lead to better sending (sooner), BUT the down side is that may prevent many from going on air at 12WPM and I think it is a GOOD thing that there are more stations on air, no matter how slow or "sloppy" though others will likely disagree.  Smiley

Perhaps it all comes back to, as I think KE6EE has mentioned many times, those now learning these days, overthinking the methods and worrying too much, rather than getting on with it, and having fun, and getting practice on air (reception and, when they feel able, sending). I just did not learn any traditional way, I learned by listening to mostly unmodulated CW in an AM receiver, at speeds above around 18WPM from the get go, and without any instructor, but as a youngster having fun.
« Last Edit: November 09, 2017, 07:49:05 AM by VK5EEE » Logged

Long Live Real Human CW and wishing you many happy CW QSO - 77 - CW Forever

Support CW and join CW clubs. QTT: FIST#1124, HSC#1437, UFT#728, RCWC#982, SKCC#15007, CWOPS#1714, 30CW#1,
OZ8AGB
Member

Posts: 329




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: November 09, 2017, 11:33:49 AM »

Yes interesting. Learned morse 2½ years ago @ age 49. Can send at 23 wpm but to attain > 80% copy I need to receive at <= 15 wpm.
Logged
M0LEP
Member

Posts: 488




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: November 09, 2017, 12:20:40 PM »

At the Essex CW Boot Camp a few weeks back the instructor leading my group insisted that Morse is mostly rhythm, and you can't learn rythm just by listening; you have to repeat it back. Using a key is as good a way to send the rhythm back as any, so learn to send at the same time as you learn to receive.
Logged
VK5EEE
Member

Posts: 1041




Ignore
« Reply #12 on: November 09, 2017, 05:13:19 PM »

Yes interesting. Learned morse 2½ years ago @ age 49. Can send at 23 wpm but to attain > 80% copy I need to receive at <= 15 wpm.
What method(s) did you use to learn, how did you go about it, if possible to explain, both the sending and receiving? I'm not sure everything applies to everyone, only a few things likely do, but it may throw some light on why this is.
Logged

Long Live Real Human CW and wishing you many happy CW QSO - 77 - CW Forever

Support CW and join CW clubs. QTT: FIST#1124, HSC#1437, UFT#728, RCWC#982, SKCC#15007, CWOPS#1714, 30CW#1,
VK5EEE
Member

Posts: 1041




Ignore
« Reply #13 on: November 09, 2017, 07:49:20 PM »

At the Essex CW Boot Camp a few weeks back the instructor leading my group insisted that Morse is mostly rhythm
He is right, musical types (I do come from a musical family but I was only interested in Morse from a young age) are said to have an easier time learning it.
, and you can't learn rythm just by listening; you have to repeat it back.
He said that, or you concluded that?
Repeating back may take place IN YOUR MIND.
Using a key is as good a way to send the rhythm back as any,
He said that, or you concluded that?
I'd assume he did not said that, but that you drew that conclusion. It isn't a good way, because you need someone on hand who knows whether you are doing alright or not, otherwise you will learn hard habits that you cannot undo. I know several hams who have that very problem, and simple as the problems are they are completely UNABLE to undo those bad habits. The only way you can do this YOURSELF is once you have actually mastered the rhythm itself, on receive. Otherwise the outcome is going to be anything from appalling and barely decipherable to at most lackluster.
so learn to send at the same time as you learn to receive.
I really believe that is bad advice. I think listening comes first.

What is also observable is that on this forum advice is being handed out by those who themselves have far from mastered Morse and admitted to not being able to -- after many years of trying different methods -- unable to send or even receive 20WPM. I know it gets shot down as being arrogant or condescending, but it is not: it is a reversal of (as much these days) that advice is best received from the masters who are thus qualified to teach, than students giving such advice -- you did not say "I THINK it may be best to send at the same time as you learn to receive" you said "So learn at the same time as you receive". I did not say "Listening comes first" in spite of my demonstrated expertise in Morse Code, I said "I think listening comes first" at least when it is unsupervised. In a class room setting, on or off air with an experienced teacher, that may well be a different matter.

It's astounding that time and again people come up here, which is understandable, looking for advice, and then every time the same people (we are but a handful) dare to come out and give advice, and the same people always give the good advice (KE6EE, N5HEE and others) and the same people come out and give contrary advice (almost always those who have NOT mastered CW). I say time and again, that the thing that should be at least READ by anyone wanting to learn AND master CW, is Zen and The Art of Radio Telegraphy by OM Carlo IK0YGJ http://www.qsl.net/ik0ygj/enu/ and honestly if you haven't read through that, you should. It's also what anyone should read who wants to learn Morse. There isn't a magic answer on this forum, though KE6EE has clearly many times stated the POSITION that one should take, in learning Morse, and other helpful advice, and then get on with it rather than worry endlessly about conflicting advice without, as I've pointed out before, knowing the qualifications of the doctors.  Roll Eyes

If someone is a CW Academy Advisor, you already know they have a great success rate, and they would be safe to take advice from, as well as those who have extensive experience and qualification and written on the subject such as Carlo IK0YGJ. There isn't any short-cut gimmick to learning Morse or indeed anything else, put time in, but, there are surely a few right ways to do it and many wrong ways.

I can only share what has worked for me and what I have observed in others, and I'm still learning about OTHER people's experiences in learning Morse. There do appear to be some common traits among those who mastered it,  e.g. they enjoy Morse, put the time in (having fun or at least in a relaxed state), and did a lot of listening.

These days on air is hard to find "standard good Morse" as long QSO are rare, broadcasts are almost non-existent and the commercial Morse bands are all but dead. So it's only computer generated Morse, which is not too helpful, though G4FON software without a doubt is one of the recommended "go to" as you cannot, I believe, set the character speed too slow (which IS harmful without ANY doubt) and it also simulates QRM, QRN and/or QSB.
« Last Edit: November 09, 2017, 08:00:39 PM by VK5EEE » Logged

Long Live Real Human CW and wishing you many happy CW QSO - 77 - CW Forever

Support CW and join CW clubs. QTT: FIST#1124, HSC#1437, UFT#728, RCWC#982, SKCC#15007, CWOPS#1714, 30CW#1,
M0LEP
Member

Posts: 488




Ignore
« Reply #14 on: November 09, 2017, 11:07:53 PM »

He said that, or you concluded that?

He said that.

We were in a classrooom situation, and in a class the instructor needs to hear what the students are repeating back or he can't correct them when they're going wrong, so that may have had a bearing on it, but he was quite insistant that we should practice sending right from the start, and to listen to what we sent, and to compare what we sent with what we'd been sent, and to go back round and do it again until we got it right...

(I suppose I should add that, in my extended stumbling attempts to learn Morse by myself, I followed the "Do not send until you can receive" advice for about a year. It's one of those bits of advice that falls firmly into the "contradictory" category, in that some folk will insist you should do one thing, and others will insist that you do the opposite.)
« Last Edit: November 09, 2017, 11:26:35 PM by M0LEP » Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!