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: Prev 1 [2] 3 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: New guys ... do us all a favor ...  (Read 8633 times)
N3QE
Member

Posts: 2159




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: June 17, 2012, 05:23:05 AM »

The long streams of dits and dashes? Not all of them are new guys!!!!

There are several oldtimers, I have been hearing for years, who reliably send a "4" with 8 to 10 dits, and a "V" with 6 to 9 dits.
Logged
NK6Q
Member

Posts: 202




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: June 17, 2012, 08:07:08 AM »

AB9NZ:

That's funny!!

Regarding this thread, refer to my topic of "sloppy CW, I Hate it!"
Logged
KG6IRW
Member

Posts: 40




Ignore
« Reply #17 on: June 17, 2012, 08:59:46 AM »

I've been working on my code, now, for about 18 months and can copy 12 wpm reliably when the code is sent with good spacing and pacing.  I do not get on the air as much as I'd like mainly because I am not comfortable trying to cope with an OP on the other end that isn't spacing too well.  Yeah, I know, that's a cop out but it is real for a newbie who is just trying to do the right kind of sending.  I will respond to a CQ when it is clear that the sender is sending copyable (at least for me) code.  I do not send CQ to avoid having to deal with poorly spaced copy.

Thanks to those folks who haunt the old Novice CW bands on 20 and 40M, though, I have had some very nice QSOs, though, that created a very good sense of how fun CW can be.   They are a resource that needs to be recognized as those who are doing positive things to keep CW viable as a hobby.

The thing I _really_ would appreciate is more feedback on how they and others copy my own code.  I've only recently discovered, via CWGet and my rig, how lousy my sending actually is.  I've since taken to more time off-line with it to work on my sending and, hence am not on the air as much.  I have invited a number of my former contacts to do this via email but, frankly, haven't gotten as much as I'd like.

I, like others I'm sure, tended to get to 5 wpm then jump on the air in the Novice bands and see what happened.  Yes, my copy speed rose rather quickly but I really didn't pay attention to sending quality and speed.  I now know that this needs work, too.

Lastly, when I started, I used a straight key but quickly found that my sending is worse than using a keyer to help with the spacing.  Rather than try to beat it out with a straight key, I've spent my practice time using a keyer and key either single lever or iambic.  This gives me the ability to learn one well rather than learn 2 less well.

I want to send at a quality level that I would want to receive.  Getting there is still a challenge but I've enjoyed the journey as much as anything else, thanks to those who have indulged my learning at their expense.

Hope that makes sense.

Cheers,

David
Logged
AC4RD
Member

Posts: 1236




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: June 17, 2012, 09:44:33 AM »

when I started, I used a straight key but quickly found that my sending is worse than using a keyer to help with the spacing.  Rather than try to beat it out with a straight key, I've spent my practice time using a keyer and key either single lever or iambic. 

David, I think that's very wise of you.  I've just been tuning around 20m, and one of the few strong signals I hear is someone using a straight key.  Lots of people can use straight keys well, but it takes WORK and practice to do it.  This guy I'm hearing (little after noon eastern US, local time) is sending CQ but I can't tell what his call is--it's hard to tell dots from dashes, hard to tell when one character ends and another begins.  Unless you WORK at it, sending with a straight key can be very sloppy.  This guy on 20m right now is a perfect example of it.  With paddles and a keyer, you'll send perfect code with very little work.  Get good at that first and you can play with a straight key later, if you want.  :-)  You've made a wise choice, IMO.  73 GL!
Logged
PA0BLAH
Member

Posts: 0




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: June 18, 2012, 05:13:05 AM »

When you are transmitting with a straight key, that is OK. When computer decoders fail, the human mind just is fit to understand what his fellow ham is transmitting at the straight key speed..

However, when you think you are the big gun by buying a Begali sculpture high polished numbered and signature engraved paddle, limited edition, produced by very old craftsman 30% of the time busy with changing glasses, hanging with a cord around their neck , with a dust cover for ONLY 500 bucks extra, baseplate of surgical messing with a secret protective coating , produced part by part with passion , blah blah, then the problem starts. The passion is for their purse, hence  not a lie.

Please don't use that, a lot of guys with a printed circuit board home made paddles make better code and the world champion has some sloppy home build paddle without the s. Badly copied by Begali as a HST model and discontinued. And copies of the original Belarussian home brew for sale with the sloppy flea market components for abt $300 in Belarussia.

Increase your home loan and you can afford it. OR realise that skill can't be purchased.

There are several excellent methods mentioned in this forum about measuring the quality of your own fist. Read back.

When you want to make perfect code, use a keyboard, I prefer that on the receiving side, because your code generated with a keyboard flows over 40 wpm in my mind, just sitting back and relaxed, eyes closed,  as the Holy Words of God spoken via the mouth of a Reverend are flowing in the mind of a Shaker.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2012, 05:45:29 AM by PA0BLAH » Logged
KB9ILT
Member

Posts: 3




Ignore
« Reply #20 on: June 18, 2012, 06:36:26 AM »

I've been working on my code...

The thing I _really_ would appreciate is more feedback on how they and others copy my own code. 

I want to send at a quality level that I would want to receive. 

Same here. I've been seriously trying to improve my code proficiency for the past 6 months. Interpreting feedback from other ops is difficult because I'm never sure if they are being honest.  I guess you'll know your code is bad if all of your QSOs are short with the other ops ending them quickly.

I've been thinking about methods to get honest feedback for some time now and started working on an idea last week. It's in it's early stages now and I could use some feedback on it. It's a website called continuouswave.org which allows for anonymous evaluations of other ops code sending proficiency. Basically, it's a CW club focused on two things: improving one's CW and friendship among members. You're welcome to take a look and join if you wish.

Logged
N3PDT
Member

Posts: 75




Ignore
« Reply #21 on: June 18, 2012, 08:28:48 AM »


I've been thinking about methods to get honest feedback for some time now and started working on an idea last week. It's in it's early stages now and I could use some feedback on it. It's a website called continuouswave.org which allows for anonymous evaluations of other ops code sending proficiency. Basically, it's a CW club focused on two things: improving one's CW and friendship among members. You're welcome to take a look and join if you wish.


Hmm, interesting idea. Anonymizing  critique might work for some, but it seem a bit impersonal. You might first try asking the other op specific questions about your sending. I admit to blindly encouraging any new, shaky, operator without offering much true critique. However, when someone asks me directly how their spacing is, I tell them exactly what I'm hearing. I find that the same courtesy is extended to me when I ask specific questions on my sending, dit/dah quality, etc. I've found that on the air, CW ops are friendly and helpful. Maybe it's just hard to be snarky at 10wpm. Wink
Logged
KB9ILT
Member

Posts: 3




Ignore
« Reply #22 on: June 18, 2012, 09:02:40 AM »

Actually, anonymity is an only an option and one can even evaluate someone he heard in QSO with someone else. The whole idea is to help others improve their proficiency while improving yours at the same time. Setting up skeds with other members at the same speed as you and having discussions in the forums are part of the process. Take a look at the site and you'll see what I'm trying to accomplish. It's early in development and your input is welcome. continuouswave.org
Logged
LA9XSA
Member

Posts: 376




Ignore
« Reply #23 on: June 19, 2012, 01:28:09 AM »

Another way to practice QSOs and get your code critiqued without causing on-air frustration (and technically illegal transmissions) is to use CWirc; send CW through internet chat. No RF involved, unlimited "frequency" space and people are pretty forgiving.
Logged
PA0BLAH
Member

Posts: 0




Ignore
« Reply #24 on: June 19, 2012, 03:25:54 AM »

Reports of other amateurs have to be severally distrusted. Majority of them are nitwits, proud they got their license, which proud feelings are an indication of their intellectual level. Unable to build (let it be design..) something more then a two wire appliance cord with 2 connectors.

The only thing left from the pioneers in the past is operation. Home brewing is dead. Kit building is the same like warming up a deep frozen meal in the magnetron oven. Task  a 4 year old kid is able to perform. Kits are tested before release by a class of mentally handicapped idiots, in order to be sure there will not be too much problems when hams are doing it.
And those kit building hams are very proud when they finish the job without the aid of others. Mostly they need help, because they interchange resistors, put half of the electrolytic capacitors in reverse polarity, turn IC's 180 degrees before soldering them in the board and connect neighbouring traces on the pre-drilled silk screened PC board by solder bridges, and worse of all: they don't understand the circuit diagram.

So best thing you can do is measure your code yourself. Record it with your PC, listen to it. After that look at the sound file with a program like Audacy freeware. You get a time ruler and can watch the length of dits dashes and spaces.

Listen to machine generated code every day, www.lcwo.net , or G4FON s program etc. NOT to 5 wpm rubbish on the band. Then you know how it has to sound. And you imitate it automatically, just like the way you develop a Texas accent in speech when your classmates in school and your parents have it.

« Last Edit: June 19, 2012, 03:46:49 AM by PA0BLAH » Logged
W2RI
Member

Posts: 54




Ignore
« Reply #25 on: June 19, 2012, 10:17:04 AM »

The only thing left from the pioneers in the past is operation. Home brewing is dead. Kit building is the same like warming up a deep frozen meal in the magnetron oven. Task  a 4 year old kid is able to perform. Kits are tested before release by a class of mentally handicapped idiots, in order to be sure there will not be too much problems when hams are doing it.
And those kit building hams are very proud when they finish the job without the aid of others. Mostly they need help, because they interchange resistors, put half of the electrolytic capacitors in reverse polarity, turn IC's 180 degrees before soldering them in the board and connect neighbouring traces on the pre-drilled silk screened PC board by solder bridges, and worse of all: they don't understand the circuit diagram.
Really, Bob, why do you associate here with lesser mortals? Very few of us can do what you do - mine our own galena to make a cat's whisker, refine our own copper to make wire, forge steel or brass for our straight keys, melt sand and blow our own tubes, not to mention making bakelite enclosures for our radios.

Of course, if today's amateurs are lazy and ignorant, is it their fault? Or is it the fault of your generation who never instilled in your children and your children's children an appreciation of hard work?

 
Logged
KF4ZGZ
Member

Posts: 281


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #26 on: June 19, 2012, 05:36:53 PM »

Reports of other amateurs have to be severally distrusted. Majority of them are nitwits, proud they got their license, which proud feelings are an indication of their intellectual level. Unable to build (let it be design..) something more then a two wire appliance cord with 2 connectors.

The only thing left from the pioneers in the past is operation. Home brewing is dead. Kit building is the same like warming up a deep frozen meal in the magnetron oven. Task  a 4 year old kid is able to perform. Kits are tested before release by a class of mentally handicapped idiots, in order to be sure there will not be too much problems when hams are doing it.
And those kit building hams are very proud when they finish the job without the aid of others. Mostly they need help, because they interchange resistors, put half of the electrolytic capacitors in reverse polarity, turn IC's 180 degrees before soldering them in the board and connect neighbouring traces on the pre-drilled silk screened PC board by solder bridges, and worse of all: they don't understand the circuit diagram.

So best thing you can do is measure your code yourself. Record it with your PC, listen to it. After that look at the sound file with a program like Audacy freeware. You get a time ruler and can watch the length of dits dashes and spaces.

Listen to machine generated code every day, www.lcwo.net , or G4FON s program etc. NOT to 5 wpm rubbish on the band. Then you know how it has to sound. And you imitate it automatically, just like the way you develop a Texas accent in speech when your classmates in school and your parents have it.



So you're saying that unless we can build our own gear from scratch such as you obviously can with your[god-ham status, we shouldn't even be hams?

Do me a favor and tell me where you operate so I won't embarrass myself by being in your airspace ... I'll just bask in your glow from the sidelines.

BTW- since you are a ham .... in your own words your are to be mis-trusted, and you are a nitwit. ( I think we agree on one thing anyway)

And why shouldn't one be proud to have a license?

Matt  
« Last Edit: June 19, 2012, 05:39:06 PM by KF4ZGZ » Logged
KF4ZGZ
Member

Posts: 281


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #27 on: June 19, 2012, 05:39:34 PM »


Reports of other amateurs have to be severally distrusted. Majority of them are nitwits, proud they got their license, which proud feelings are an indication of their intellectual level. Unable to build (let it be design..) something more then a two wire appliance cord with 2 connectors.

The only thing left from the pioneers in the past is operation. Home brewing is dead. Kit building is the same like warming up a deep frozen meal in the magnetron oven. Task  a 4 year old kid is able to perform. Kits are tested before release by a class of mentally handicapped idiots, in order to be sure there will not be too much problems when hams are doing it.
And those kit building hams are very proud when they finish the job without the aid of others. Mostly they need help, because they interchange resistors, put half of the electrolytic capacitors in reverse polarity, turn IC's 180 degrees before soldering them in the board and connect neighbouring traces on the pre-drilled silk screened PC board by solder bridges, and worse of all: they don't understand the circuit diagram.

So best thing you can do is measure your code yourself. Record it with your PC, listen to it. After that look at the sound file with a program like Audacy freeware. You get a time ruler and can watch the length of dits dashes and spaces.

Listen to machine generated code every day, www.lcwo.net , or G4FON s program etc. NOT to 5 wpm rubbish on the band. Then you know how it has to sound. And you imitate it automatically, just like the way you develop a Texas accent in speech when your classmates in school and your parents have it.



So you're saying that unless we can build our own gear from scratch such as you obviously can with your god-ham status, we shouldn't even be hams?

Do me a favor and tell me where you operate so I won't embarrass myself by being in your airspace ... I'll just bask in your glow from the sidelines.

BTW- since you are a ham .... in your own words your are to be mis-trusted, and you are a nitwit. ( I think we agree on one thing anyway)

And why shouldn't one be proud to have a license?

Matt  
Logged
K3STX
Member

Posts: 973




Ignore
« Reply #28 on: June 19, 2012, 07:22:56 PM »

If you want to know how easy it is for others to copy your code you should see how easy it is for YOU to copy your own code. Get a tape recorder and send some text out of QST or the newspaper, or... Wait a day or two and play it back to yourself; how easy was it to copy?

Easy.

paul
Logged
PA0BLAH
Member

Posts: 0




Ignore
« Reply #29 on: June 20, 2012, 05:49:11 AM »



So you're saying that unless we can build our own gear from scratch such as you obviously can with your god-ham status, we shouldn't even be hams?

Do me a favor and tell me where you operate so I won't embarrass myself by being in your airspace ... I'll just bask in your glow from the sidelines.

BTW- since you are a ham .... in your own words your are to be mis-trusted, and you are a nitwit. ( I think we agree on one thing anyway)

And why shouldn't one be proud to have a license?

Matt  


QUOD ERAT DEMONSTRANDUM (that is Latin ....  .. )

Thanks for presenting an excellent example for my statements.

PA0BLAH
« Last Edit: June 20, 2012, 06:45:25 AM by PA0BLAH » Logged
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 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!