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

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1] 2 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: What do you think of the Code-Quick program?  (Read 2706 times)
K7SGV
Member

Posts: 1




Ignore
« on: June 06, 2003, 12:08:27 AM »

H, I was considering the code quick program to try to sink the code into my thick skull. The expense of the program is not a problem since after I am done with the program, my wife will also get use of it to learn the code. What are it's pro's/con's? 73, Steve
Logged
K1ZC
Member

Posts: 113




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: June 06, 2003, 02:01:16 PM »

The pro is that it seems to help many people get up to 5 WPM and pass the test.  The con is that the Code Quick method creates a look-up table in your head.

The human brain works fast enough that a look-up table of sounds (D sounds like "dog did it" for example) is just great for the test since the Farnsworth spacing built into the test gives just enough extra time to decode the message this way.  However, if you plan to use code to actually communicate on the air at a usable speed, the lookup approach is not feasible and you will have to unlearn some bad habits.

The better approach, if you are serious about this, is to learn the Koch method.  Koch lessons go full speed with just two letters until you can copy 90% correctly.  Then you advance to three letters and practice until you can copy 90%, and so on.  By the time you are done, you will know all 43 characters and can copy at a usable 15-20 WPM.

There are two computer programs that I know that provide Koch lessons.  

http://www.qsl.net/g4fon/
http://www.nu-ware.com

The G4FON program is free and NuMorse Pro is $35.  I have NuMorse and can hihgly recommend it.  I have not tried the G4FON program, but I have read nothing but good reviews.  If I were you, I would download them both and take them for a test drive.
Logged
W7WHM
Member

Posts: 23




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: June 07, 2003, 01:27:01 AM »


I'm probably not a good one to answer this since I haven't finished yet, but I am using CodeQuick to get ready for the 5wpm test.  I'm through the alphabet, finishing up the numbers and getting ready to start the punctuation and prosigns, so it's getting close.

What K1ZC said about creating a lookup table in your head is true, but I'm not convinced it is as bad as it sounds.  What I have been doing is using the CQ2K "soundalikes" only to get the feel of the rhythm of the character, and then trying to ignore it after I start recognizing the character.  As I progressed through the alphabet I spent less and less time using the soundalikes, and more time just trying to write the character as I heard it.  Some of the soundalikes fit the character so naturally that it is hard to get them out of your mind, but I am still writing the character on paper slightly ahead of "hearing" the soundalike - which means I'm not really using the lookup table even though it is there - if that makes any sense.

I started with CQ2K because several people on this forum were having good luck with it at the time I was trying to make a decision.  I was concerned about the lookup table argument, but I wasn't aware of the G4FON program at the time or I would have definitely tried it.  At this point I'm going to stick with CodeQuick until I take the test but the soundalikes will be permanently turned off for after-test speed building practice.  The soundalikes are completely optional.

I could be wrong, but I don't think learning to bypass the lookup table will be too big of an issue, but I would still suggest you start out by downloading the G4FON program and trying it first.  If that doesn't seem to be doing it then try CQ2K.  Oh, and sort of a gripe, even though I have CQ2K for Win XP it doesn't really follow the Windows conventions, and in some respects is very clunky.  As a program I don't like it, but it seems to be doing the job getting me ready for the test.

Wally
Logged
AG4LH
Member

Posts: 5




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: June 09, 2003, 06:41:44 PM »

I looked at the ads and did a lot of reading about programs and methods. This is the best info by far of anything that I have seen;
http://www.qsl.net/k7qo/code.html
Get the arrl cd and listen, don't memorize lists, Ron.
Logged
ADAM12
Member

Posts: 28




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: June 13, 2003, 03:45:30 PM »

Code Quick works great and is actually fun.

I passed 5, 13 and 20wpm extra exam using only Code Quick 2000 software. There are reviews of Code Quick 2000 in the reviews section of eHam.

Most of the people who criticize CQ2K have never used it!
Logged
W6OJ
Member

Posts: 18




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: July 04, 2003, 01:48:46 AM »

Another good software program for Macintosh is Morse Mania and runs on OS9 or OSX. The software has all the needed features including Farnsworth and Koch systems support. It is shareware and costs $19.99. I have used it and learning 15+ wpm is easy with Koch. Here's the website:

http://www.blackcatsystems.com/software/morsemania.html

Good luck.
Logged
KF0W
Member

Posts: 22


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #6 on: July 06, 2003, 01:13:02 PM »

Hi to fellow CW neophytes.  I used Code-Quick.  I also used Morse Academy, G4FON (a Koch program), aa9pw.com morse code practice on the internet, and hours and hours and hours of practice.  They all have their pros and cons.  Code-Quick helped me learn some of the characters I was having trouble with, but anyone can figure out the mnemonics to correspond with a CW character, i.e., "shave and a hair cut" for the "/" punctuation character.  I don't know if CQ "worked" to speed up my learning process.  I did pass the code test on 6/14 at 5 wpm, and I am kinda stuck at 5 wpm, but working on it with live QSOs on the air and just trying to copy on the novice bands. I wouldn't spend the $40 for CQ if I had it to do again. I was already doing what CQ teaches without knowing it. It just took me a really long time to get my copy speed up to about 6 wpm so I could pass the test.  When I took the test, I got the first 25 characters correct, and the rest of the QSO too.  It just took me about 4 months to get there. The claims that CQ will have you copying 5 wpm in a week (or whatever) might work for some but it sure didn't work for me. Anybody who could learn 5 wpm in a week using CQ could learn it just as fast using something else. Don't get me wrong, I am not critical of CQ.  I still use it from time to time for practice, but there are several free programs out there that can help even the most difficult learner, like me, to get through this.  The real key is practice, practice, and more practice, and practice, and practice again until you drill it in until the characters are automatic. I'm still not where I want to be, but I am working on it. Sorry, I got off subject.  One of the things I did not care for in the CQ program was the practice tests.  They are all exactly the same format, call sign, tnx for call, rst, qth, rig, antenna, wx, "how copy?", with answers for variation.  I got more out of the ARRL CD, but soon memorized the CD and then it was not copying the code but just writing down the characters from memory. Hope this helps.
73 and good luck
Sidney  KC0OSB
Logged
N8UZE
Member

Posts: 1524




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: July 12, 2003, 10:47:33 PM »

While there are some people who can pass the code with only a few hours of study, they are the EXCEPTION, not the rule.  It's unfortunate that such statements are used to promote various training methods as it causes the average person to think there is something wrong with them if they can't do the same quick study.

According to the book, "Morse Code, The Essential Language", the average person needs 30 hours of study and practice to get to 5wpm.  Practicing should be done every day or nearly every day.  The book, "The Art and Skill of Radiotelegraphy", gives excellent guidelines on how to practice.  It also is quite encouraging as it describes how any normal person can get to the 20 to 25wpm level.
Logged
N5LOU
Member

Posts: 2


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #8 on: July 15, 2003, 11:50:19 AM »

I have been using Code Quick for about a month and will be taking my General this weekend.  It is the first method I have tried that has actually worked.  I can copy 5WPM with no problem and do relatively well at 10.  I don't know how difficult it will be to copy at higher speeds.
Right now I am just glad to have mastered my 5WPM.
Lou
N5LOU
Logged
K5SPR
Member

Posts: 2




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: August 21, 2003, 12:02:31 AM »

I purchased CQ yesterday, and after 2 evenings of practice (about 45 mins each) I can accurately copy the entire alphabet (no #'s yet) at about 6 WPM.  I agree with W7WHM that after a bit of practice the "look up table" feeling goes away and the letters just pop into your head.  I think I can instantly recognize about 40% of the alphabet that way after only two sessions.  I'm not trying to brag or anything, I'm just trying to illustrate that this was a very good way for me to learn.

The important thing is to try 3 or 4 methods and choose the one that is best for you.
Logged
N3JIY
Member

Posts: 16




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: November 02, 2011, 07:57:27 PM »

I used Code Quick to pass the 20 wpm test.   I haven't used Morse code on the air simply because I don't have access to HF gear.    However, I do recommend Code Quick.   LIke the 26-letter Roman alphabet we use in the USA, it is something you can learn once and use for the rest of your life.        Code Quick makes the ten numerals easy.
Logged
VA7CPC
Member

Posts: 2375




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: November 03, 2011, 05:57:26 AM »

Another way to get code practice, via the Internet, is "Learn CW Online":

http://lcwo.net/

          Charles
Logged
AE4RV
Member

Posts: 948


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #12 on: November 03, 2011, 06:20:58 AM »

This thread will be legal to vote in ten years.
Logged
KC9TNH
Member

Posts: 304




Ignore
« Reply #13 on: November 03, 2011, 07:22:51 AM »

This thread will be legal to vote in ten years.
You owe me a cup of coffee, and a box of wipes for my monitor.  Grin

Holy necropost Bugman!
Logged

73
Wes -KC9TNH
"Don't get treed by a chihuahua." - Pete
AE4RV
Member

Posts: 948


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #14 on: November 03, 2011, 07:41:16 AM »

 Cool
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!