Search

Title

Author

Article Body

Manager


Manager - AB7RG
Manager Notes

The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly

Created by Ulrich H. Steinberg, DJ8GO on 2007-05-10

The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly

This is the continuing saga of the advanced memory keyer that I discussed in two previous articles on this site ( see http://www.eham.net/articles/11749 and http://www.eham.net/articles/14970 ). Thanks to suggestions from several operators who responded to those articles and played with prototypes, it meanwhile has progressed to a point where calling it a memory keyer is a severe understatement: it really is a small computer that can run several applications which all incorporate a keyer function, but they go far beyond the functionality of your typical memory keyer.

When I wrote the previous article it wasn't quite clear how and when this device would ever be made available to a larger audience. Meanwhile it has become the Begali CW Machine, and Piero designed a cabinet for it that truly turns it into a spectacular exotic Butterfly:

The functions of the CW Machine keyer firmware that I discussed in my previous articles have been further refined and now include full keyboard keyer capability - just attach a PC keyboard directly to the device, and you have an advanced standalone keyboard keyer with the QSO logging capabilities that were previously described. (Of course you can attach paddles, too, and even a straight key)

But the real metamorphosis got started when Tom, N0SS, and Steve, NN0B, suggested expanding the functionality to include trainer capabilities. (They teach CW classes.) The CW Machine firmware is really intended for operators who are no longer struggling with the basics of CW, and it probably has more bells and whistles than even the most advanced operators would ever need. So, how can it address the needs of beginners?

A main feature of the hardware architecture that is at the basis of the CW Machine is that a user can update the firmware by clicking a few buttons in a Windows program. I had previously used that capability to provide enhancements and bug fixes, but you can of course use it to load a completely different firmware program, and that idea eventually evolved into the CW Trainer.

The CW Trainer firmware, which can be loaded into the device as an alternative to the CW Machine firmware, still has the capability to let you attach a paddle and use it on the air as a "regular" memory keyer. Since your paddle input is decoded and shown on the LCD display, and optionally in a Windows program that I'll describe further down, the CW Trainer also lets you practice your keying skills - if you deviate too much from perfect CW timing you'll immediately see the unintended result :-) But a great deal of work went into an array of features that let you improve your copying skills, no matter what your level of proficiency currently is. (Well, o.k., if you can send and copy 65wpm signals perfectly already this device can't help you any further, but it's still fun to use it as a sparring partner ;-)

All training methods start with using a few characters first, expanding the character set until you eventually know all characters and punctuation signs and prosigns. The CW Trainer firmware supports this approach by taking advantage of the huge amount of memory in the device - more than 75 hours of non-stop CW at 20wpm if you really want to. I have divided that memory into 10 groups ("lessons") of 10 messages each, which you can start with the corresponding key on the numeric keypad. Typically you would probably designate one group for messages with repetitive QSO information, like calling CQ, or sending your name and QTH and other boilerplate text - if you select that group when you are on the air, the CW Trainer behaves like a "regular" memory keyer with ten variable-length messages. You could, of course, have other groups with that same information in a different language, making the CW Trainer a very powerful memory keyer with up to 100 messages of virtually unlimited length.

All that remains is developing the content of the messages and loading them into the device. This is where the CW Trainer Manager program for Windows comes in:

Among other functions it creates training material for you and loads it into the device. You can have it create groups that contain just a few characters, or as many characters as you want, up to the whole character set including prosigns that are supported by the CW Trainer. The code groups can have a selectable fixed length, or they can randomly vary in length. You can also create material that contains a random collection of words from a word list that you can define. The combined total of all messages can be up to 540,000 characters. In the screenshot you see a selection that would generate message 5 in lesson 1, with 500 random groups of 5 letters each, containing all letters except F, L, Q, and Y.

Once the lessons are loaded, you can adjust various parameters that determine how they are played back - one of those parameters obviously is the character speed. Most training methods use an approach where individual characters are sent at a higher speed with longer pauses between characters; this is called Farnsworth timing. It helps avoid the tendency of many beginners to count dots and dashes in characters and lets you hear a character as one aural pattern. The CW Trainer not only lets you adjust the space between characters, but also between words. You can play individual words at high speed with a longer pause between words, helping you develop the skill to copy whole words in your head. Since this ability is essential for high speeds, there is also a mode that I called "flashcard mode". In flashcard mode a complete word is sent but it is not shown on the display character by character right away. After a pause of one second the complete word is flashed on the display for two seconds, and then this cycle is repeated for the next word.

If you are actually copying to paper, the CW Trainer has the ability to delay the start of a message for a few seconds to let you grab your pencil. And, to help you push your speed envelope, it has the capability to let the speed "creep up" over time.

Once you have reached your maximum speed and feel comfortable with CW, there is still some fun to be had from this device. I load newspaper articles into it in the morning and have them read to me in CW on my daily commute... And, of course, you can load the CW Machine firmware into it and have the most advanced stand-alone keyer / logger at your fingertips.

Could there possibly be anything else to keep me busy programming and further exploiting the capabilities of the CW Machine device? You bet, and it will probably be enough for another dip in the sunspot cycle. On the mental drawing board is a QSO simulator that would let you practice QSOs, with the CW Machine assuming the role of other stations, with enough "intelligence" to make the whole exchange life-like. I envision something that, again, is based on flexible material that you load into the device, so that you could practice QSOs in different languages or for specific contest exchanges. That is not an easy project, and I welcome any suggestions to help me refine the specifications. As in the past, I am sure that there are ideas that I would not have on my own, and the feedback from these articles has been an invaluable source of suggestions that have helped me develop and refine this device.

See you on the bands!

N2DE2007-05-22
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Thank you to all of you who went to the trouble of visiting us in Dayton. The success was overwhelming! Piero will need a little time to arrange the logistics for building these devices in Italy (I built the Dayton devices myself), but you can already order them through his website.

NI0C:

The CW Machine firmware has a menu choice to select the band, and a corresponding one-click function in the Windows GUI. That band will be inserted into the log record. The internal log can be exported in ADIF format into practically all logging programs, and ADIF logs created by other programs can be imported into the keyer via the CW Machine Manager for Windows program.
Reply to a comment by : NI0C on 2007-05-22

Ulrich, it was a pleasure to meet you at the Hamvention. Thank you for the demo of the CW machine, and the Begali Sculpture paddles. I have a couple of lingering questions regarding the QSO logging capabiliies. Is there provision for manually adding band/frequency information to the log file? Can the log files be easily converted to other formats (such as .adi) for export to logging programs and ARRL's LOTW? 73, Chuck NI0C
Reply to a comment by : KA0W on 2007-05-18

David, W9ZN did (does) a good pace on his hand key (paddle also). Easy to find him, check the louder signals around 7035. I'm sure you worked him before. Have a great weekend! Ken, KA0W
Reply to a comment by : N1EA on 2007-05-18

I have been searching for a recording of someone sending above 25 wpm on a hand key. I love the Junker keys - but I lost the little gummy pad that is in the knob - it shakes your bones after you get used to the soft insert in the Junker knob! 73 David N1EA
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-17

I haven't forgotten about manual keys - after all I was one of those German ops who could send 30wpm with my trusty Junker key ... ( I have to admit that's a while ago ;-) You can hook up a straight key or mechanical bug to this keyer, but I make no attempt at decoding the signal - so you lose the advanced features that pick log information out of your transmission. But you can use your paddles in bug mode, with full decoding of the signal, and produce the dahs manually. The sound is synthesized using pulse width modulation - so the result is not quite as pleasant as that from a sine wave generator, but it's better than a pure square wave. The output is available at an RCA jack at the back, and it is sufficient to drive a small speaker or headphones, and usually far more than enough to drive amplified speakers. In my own station I reduce the output to millivolt levels and patch it into the audio of my transceiver - the keyer(optionally) doesn't produce sound when keying is enabled, so that you hear your transmitter sidetone in that situation, and you can disable keying by pushing a key, so that you can enter information off the air, and in that case you would hear the keyer sound.
Reply to a comment by : N1EA on 2007-05-17

Hello Ulrich, I seldom use my keyer these days except for a very useful feature that John Curtis, K6KG built into his Curtis Electro Devices keyers and later its semiconductor integrated circuits ("chips") such as the 8043, 8044 and so forth. They had a circuit which eliminated key bounce - basically it "integrated the output by an amount adjustable by the weight control". I run my semi-automatic key, my sideswiper (or cootie) key, and my hand key through my keyer (Curtis EK-430)- it basically fattens the dots on the bug and prevents any "sparking" or "split dits" on the bug. When everyone was sending with hand keys and semi-automatic keys, it was fun to send "perfect" code with a keyer. This is still fun. But when keyboards came along, the code started to feel dull. It was like listening to a computer play Bach - do you remember the recordings of the precisely timed synthesizers? - they lacked soul. So I returned to hand keys and sideswipers and semi-automatics, but I use a keyer also. I hope that your design might include such a feature as well as a pleasent sine wave oscillator for listening to straight keys. One more feature would be to have a 1/8 "stereo" (although the signal would be mono!) output that could be used to record or better yet, to patch into a 2 meter radio to use over FM. Some sort of VOX automatic switching would be nice too! Don't overlook the hand key users - we use keyers also! I remember the German operators who were so very fast on their hand keys - they could send 30 wpm on them - I've never gotten above 23 wpm. The German first class commercial exam for Radio Officers was 28 wpm send and receive for one minute out of five with no errors by hand key amd pen/pencil ONLY - no "automation" allowed either copy or sending! The D stations (ships) and the G stations could really send fast code with a hand key - and beautiful to copy. Be well, 73 David Ring, N1EA
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

That's pretty poor for a self professed straight key guy: it's dit ditditdit dit - dit dit. (never heard of a dita - what the heck is that?) The real thing is ESE, and you even have an annual ESE event where all the ESE suffixers meet. The verbal translation of that pattern usually is "shave and a haircut" - dit dit. OK - you can tell that I have not totally outgrown my straight key roots. But what is sometimes heard these days coming from a straight key would let the great old fists turn in their graves. The timing of CW signals is precisely defined, and that fabled hand made sound that some folks are so fond of is often just a euphemism for a phantasy signal that kind of sounds like CW, and may be fun to send, but is usually not much fun to copy. Compared to those signals I prefer an electronic keyer anytime, and using one expertly does not take less practice than using a handkey, but it certainly creates a readable signal.
Reply to a comment by : KB5DPE on 2007-05-10

Question: When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?" Answer: NEVER! That's what hams do best! If most ham's shacks were half as big as their ego, they'd need a warehouse the size of a football field to hold it all. (And this comment has absolutely nothing to do with CW. Just my opinion.)
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
NI0C2007-05-22
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Ulrich, it was a pleasure to meet you at the Hamvention. Thank you for the demo of the CW machine, and the Begali Sculpture paddles.

I have a couple of lingering questions regarding the QSO logging capabiliies. Is there provision for manually adding band/frequency information to the log file? Can the log files be easily converted to other formats (such as .adi) for export to logging programs and ARRL's LOTW?

73,
Chuck NI0C
Reply to a comment by : KA0W on 2007-05-18

David, W9ZN did (does) a good pace on his hand key (paddle also). Easy to find him, check the louder signals around 7035. I'm sure you worked him before. Have a great weekend! Ken, KA0W
Reply to a comment by : N1EA on 2007-05-18

I have been searching for a recording of someone sending above 25 wpm on a hand key. I love the Junker keys - but I lost the little gummy pad that is in the knob - it shakes your bones after you get used to the soft insert in the Junker knob! 73 David N1EA
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-17

I haven't forgotten about manual keys - after all I was one of those German ops who could send 30wpm with my trusty Junker key ... ( I have to admit that's a while ago ;-) You can hook up a straight key or mechanical bug to this keyer, but I make no attempt at decoding the signal - so you lose the advanced features that pick log information out of your transmission. But you can use your paddles in bug mode, with full decoding of the signal, and produce the dahs manually. The sound is synthesized using pulse width modulation - so the result is not quite as pleasant as that from a sine wave generator, but it's better than a pure square wave. The output is available at an RCA jack at the back, and it is sufficient to drive a small speaker or headphones, and usually far more than enough to drive amplified speakers. In my own station I reduce the output to millivolt levels and patch it into the audio of my transceiver - the keyer(optionally) doesn't produce sound when keying is enabled, so that you hear your transmitter sidetone in that situation, and you can disable keying by pushing a key, so that you can enter information off the air, and in that case you would hear the keyer sound.
Reply to a comment by : N1EA on 2007-05-17

Hello Ulrich, I seldom use my keyer these days except for a very useful feature that John Curtis, K6KG built into his Curtis Electro Devices keyers and later its semiconductor integrated circuits ("chips") such as the 8043, 8044 and so forth. They had a circuit which eliminated key bounce - basically it "integrated the output by an amount adjustable by the weight control". I run my semi-automatic key, my sideswiper (or cootie) key, and my hand key through my keyer (Curtis EK-430)- it basically fattens the dots on the bug and prevents any "sparking" or "split dits" on the bug. When everyone was sending with hand keys and semi-automatic keys, it was fun to send "perfect" code with a keyer. This is still fun. But when keyboards came along, the code started to feel dull. It was like listening to a computer play Bach - do you remember the recordings of the precisely timed synthesizers? - they lacked soul. So I returned to hand keys and sideswipers and semi-automatics, but I use a keyer also. I hope that your design might include such a feature as well as a pleasent sine wave oscillator for listening to straight keys. One more feature would be to have a 1/8 "stereo" (although the signal would be mono!) output that could be used to record or better yet, to patch into a 2 meter radio to use over FM. Some sort of VOX automatic switching would be nice too! Don't overlook the hand key users - we use keyers also! I remember the German operators who were so very fast on their hand keys - they could send 30 wpm on them - I've never gotten above 23 wpm. The German first class commercial exam for Radio Officers was 28 wpm send and receive for one minute out of five with no errors by hand key amd pen/pencil ONLY - no "automation" allowed either copy or sending! The D stations (ships) and the G stations could really send fast code with a hand key - and beautiful to copy. Be well, 73 David Ring, N1EA
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

That's pretty poor for a self professed straight key guy: it's dit ditditdit dit - dit dit. (never heard of a dita - what the heck is that?) The real thing is ESE, and you even have an annual ESE event where all the ESE suffixers meet. The verbal translation of that pattern usually is "shave and a haircut" - dit dit. OK - you can tell that I have not totally outgrown my straight key roots. But what is sometimes heard these days coming from a straight key would let the great old fists turn in their graves. The timing of CW signals is precisely defined, and that fabled hand made sound that some folks are so fond of is often just a euphemism for a phantasy signal that kind of sounds like CW, and may be fun to send, but is usually not much fun to copy. Compared to those signals I prefer an electronic keyer anytime, and using one expertly does not take less practice than using a handkey, but it certainly creates a readable signal.
Reply to a comment by : KB5DPE on 2007-05-10

Question: When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?" Answer: NEVER! That's what hams do best! If most ham's shacks were half as big as their ego, they'd need a warehouse the size of a football field to hold it all. (And this comment has absolutely nothing to do with CW. Just my opinion.)
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
KA0W2007-05-18
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
David,

W9ZN did (does) a good pace on his hand key (paddle also). Easy to find him, check the louder signals around 7035. I'm sure you worked him before.

Have a great weekend!

Ken, KA0W


Reply to a comment by : N1EA on 2007-05-18

I have been searching for a recording of someone sending above 25 wpm on a hand key. I love the Junker keys - but I lost the little gummy pad that is in the knob - it shakes your bones after you get used to the soft insert in the Junker knob! 73 David N1EA
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-17

I haven't forgotten about manual keys - after all I was one of those German ops who could send 30wpm with my trusty Junker key ... ( I have to admit that's a while ago ;-) You can hook up a straight key or mechanical bug to this keyer, but I make no attempt at decoding the signal - so you lose the advanced features that pick log information out of your transmission. But you can use your paddles in bug mode, with full decoding of the signal, and produce the dahs manually. The sound is synthesized using pulse width modulation - so the result is not quite as pleasant as that from a sine wave generator, but it's better than a pure square wave. The output is available at an RCA jack at the back, and it is sufficient to drive a small speaker or headphones, and usually far more than enough to drive amplified speakers. In my own station I reduce the output to millivolt levels and patch it into the audio of my transceiver - the keyer(optionally) doesn't produce sound when keying is enabled, so that you hear your transmitter sidetone in that situation, and you can disable keying by pushing a key, so that you can enter information off the air, and in that case you would hear the keyer sound.
Reply to a comment by : N1EA on 2007-05-17

Hello Ulrich, I seldom use my keyer these days except for a very useful feature that John Curtis, K6KG built into his Curtis Electro Devices keyers and later its semiconductor integrated circuits ("chips") such as the 8043, 8044 and so forth. They had a circuit which eliminated key bounce - basically it "integrated the output by an amount adjustable by the weight control". I run my semi-automatic key, my sideswiper (or cootie) key, and my hand key through my keyer (Curtis EK-430)- it basically fattens the dots on the bug and prevents any "sparking" or "split dits" on the bug. When everyone was sending with hand keys and semi-automatic keys, it was fun to send "perfect" code with a keyer. This is still fun. But when keyboards came along, the code started to feel dull. It was like listening to a computer play Bach - do you remember the recordings of the precisely timed synthesizers? - they lacked soul. So I returned to hand keys and sideswipers and semi-automatics, but I use a keyer also. I hope that your design might include such a feature as well as a pleasent sine wave oscillator for listening to straight keys. One more feature would be to have a 1/8 "stereo" (although the signal would be mono!) output that could be used to record or better yet, to patch into a 2 meter radio to use over FM. Some sort of VOX automatic switching would be nice too! Don't overlook the hand key users - we use keyers also! I remember the German operators who were so very fast on their hand keys - they could send 30 wpm on them - I've never gotten above 23 wpm. The German first class commercial exam for Radio Officers was 28 wpm send and receive for one minute out of five with no errors by hand key amd pen/pencil ONLY - no "automation" allowed either copy or sending! The D stations (ships) and the G stations could really send fast code with a hand key - and beautiful to copy. Be well, 73 David Ring, N1EA
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

That's pretty poor for a self professed straight key guy: it's dit ditditdit dit - dit dit. (never heard of a dita - what the heck is that?) The real thing is ESE, and you even have an annual ESE event where all the ESE suffixers meet. The verbal translation of that pattern usually is "shave and a haircut" - dit dit. OK - you can tell that I have not totally outgrown my straight key roots. But what is sometimes heard these days coming from a straight key would let the great old fists turn in their graves. The timing of CW signals is precisely defined, and that fabled hand made sound that some folks are so fond of is often just a euphemism for a phantasy signal that kind of sounds like CW, and may be fun to send, but is usually not much fun to copy. Compared to those signals I prefer an electronic keyer anytime, and using one expertly does not take less practice than using a handkey, but it certainly creates a readable signal.
Reply to a comment by : KB5DPE on 2007-05-10

Question: When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?" Answer: NEVER! That's what hams do best! If most ham's shacks were half as big as their ego, they'd need a warehouse the size of a football field to hold it all. (And this comment has absolutely nothing to do with CW. Just my opinion.)
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
N1EA2007-05-18
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
I have been searching for a recording of someone sending above 25 wpm on a hand key.

I love the Junker keys - but I lost the little gummy pad that is in the knob - it shakes your bones after you get used to the soft insert in the Junker knob!

73

David N1EA
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-17

I haven't forgotten about manual keys - after all I was one of those German ops who could send 30wpm with my trusty Junker key ... ( I have to admit that's a while ago ;-) You can hook up a straight key or mechanical bug to this keyer, but I make no attempt at decoding the signal - so you lose the advanced features that pick log information out of your transmission. But you can use your paddles in bug mode, with full decoding of the signal, and produce the dahs manually. The sound is synthesized using pulse width modulation - so the result is not quite as pleasant as that from a sine wave generator, but it's better than a pure square wave. The output is available at an RCA jack at the back, and it is sufficient to drive a small speaker or headphones, and usually far more than enough to drive amplified speakers. In my own station I reduce the output to millivolt levels and patch it into the audio of my transceiver - the keyer(optionally) doesn't produce sound when keying is enabled, so that you hear your transmitter sidetone in that situation, and you can disable keying by pushing a key, so that you can enter information off the air, and in that case you would hear the keyer sound.
Reply to a comment by : N1EA on 2007-05-17

Hello Ulrich, I seldom use my keyer these days except for a very useful feature that John Curtis, K6KG built into his Curtis Electro Devices keyers and later its semiconductor integrated circuits ("chips") such as the 8043, 8044 and so forth. They had a circuit which eliminated key bounce - basically it "integrated the output by an amount adjustable by the weight control". I run my semi-automatic key, my sideswiper (or cootie) key, and my hand key through my keyer (Curtis EK-430)- it basically fattens the dots on the bug and prevents any "sparking" or "split dits" on the bug. When everyone was sending with hand keys and semi-automatic keys, it was fun to send "perfect" code with a keyer. This is still fun. But when keyboards came along, the code started to feel dull. It was like listening to a computer play Bach - do you remember the recordings of the precisely timed synthesizers? - they lacked soul. So I returned to hand keys and sideswipers and semi-automatics, but I use a keyer also. I hope that your design might include such a feature as well as a pleasent sine wave oscillator for listening to straight keys. One more feature would be to have a 1/8 "stereo" (although the signal would be mono!) output that could be used to record or better yet, to patch into a 2 meter radio to use over FM. Some sort of VOX automatic switching would be nice too! Don't overlook the hand key users - we use keyers also! I remember the German operators who were so very fast on their hand keys - they could send 30 wpm on them - I've never gotten above 23 wpm. The German first class commercial exam for Radio Officers was 28 wpm send and receive for one minute out of five with no errors by hand key amd pen/pencil ONLY - no "automation" allowed either copy or sending! The D stations (ships) and the G stations could really send fast code with a hand key - and beautiful to copy. Be well, 73 David Ring, N1EA
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

That's pretty poor for a self professed straight key guy: it's dit ditditdit dit - dit dit. (never heard of a dita - what the heck is that?) The real thing is ESE, and you even have an annual ESE event where all the ESE suffixers meet. The verbal translation of that pattern usually is "shave and a haircut" - dit dit. OK - you can tell that I have not totally outgrown my straight key roots. But what is sometimes heard these days coming from a straight key would let the great old fists turn in their graves. The timing of CW signals is precisely defined, and that fabled hand made sound that some folks are so fond of is often just a euphemism for a phantasy signal that kind of sounds like CW, and may be fun to send, but is usually not much fun to copy. Compared to those signals I prefer an electronic keyer anytime, and using one expertly does not take less practice than using a handkey, but it certainly creates a readable signal.
Reply to a comment by : KB5DPE on 2007-05-10

Question: When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?" Answer: NEVER! That's what hams do best! If most ham's shacks were half as big as their ego, they'd need a warehouse the size of a football field to hold it all. (And this comment has absolutely nothing to do with CW. Just my opinion.)
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
N2DE2007-05-17
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
I haven't forgotten about manual keys - after all I was one of those German ops who could send 30wpm with my trusty Junker key ... ( I have to admit that's a while ago ;-)

You can hook up a straight key or mechanical bug to this keyer, but I make no attempt at decoding the signal - so you lose the advanced features that pick log information out of your transmission. But you can use your paddles in bug mode, with full decoding of the signal, and produce the dahs manually.

The sound is synthesized using pulse width modulation - so the result is not quite as pleasant as that from a sine wave generator, but it's better than a pure square wave. The output is available at an RCA jack at the back, and it is sufficient to drive a small speaker or headphones, and usually far more than enough to drive amplified speakers. In my own station I reduce the output to millivolt levels and patch it into the audio of my transceiver - the keyer(optionally) doesn't produce sound when keying is enabled, so that you hear your transmitter sidetone in that situation, and you can disable keying by pushing a key, so that you can enter information off the air, and in that case you would hear the keyer sound.
Reply to a comment by : N1EA on 2007-05-17

Hello Ulrich, I seldom use my keyer these days except for a very useful feature that John Curtis, K6KG built into his Curtis Electro Devices keyers and later its semiconductor integrated circuits ("chips") such as the 8043, 8044 and so forth. They had a circuit which eliminated key bounce - basically it "integrated the output by an amount adjustable by the weight control". I run my semi-automatic key, my sideswiper (or cootie) key, and my hand key through my keyer (Curtis EK-430)- it basically fattens the dots on the bug and prevents any "sparking" or "split dits" on the bug. When everyone was sending with hand keys and semi-automatic keys, it was fun to send "perfect" code with a keyer. This is still fun. But when keyboards came along, the code started to feel dull. It was like listening to a computer play Bach - do you remember the recordings of the precisely timed synthesizers? - they lacked soul. So I returned to hand keys and sideswipers and semi-automatics, but I use a keyer also. I hope that your design might include such a feature as well as a pleasent sine wave oscillator for listening to straight keys. One more feature would be to have a 1/8 "stereo" (although the signal would be mono!) output that could be used to record or better yet, to patch into a 2 meter radio to use over FM. Some sort of VOX automatic switching would be nice too! Don't overlook the hand key users - we use keyers also! I remember the German operators who were so very fast on their hand keys - they could send 30 wpm on them - I've never gotten above 23 wpm. The German first class commercial exam for Radio Officers was 28 wpm send and receive for one minute out of five with no errors by hand key amd pen/pencil ONLY - no "automation" allowed either copy or sending! The D stations (ships) and the G stations could really send fast code with a hand key - and beautiful to copy. Be well, 73 David Ring, N1EA
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

That's pretty poor for a self professed straight key guy: it's dit ditditdit dit - dit dit. (never heard of a dita - what the heck is that?) The real thing is ESE, and you even have an annual ESE event where all the ESE suffixers meet. The verbal translation of that pattern usually is "shave and a haircut" - dit dit. OK - you can tell that I have not totally outgrown my straight key roots. But what is sometimes heard these days coming from a straight key would let the great old fists turn in their graves. The timing of CW signals is precisely defined, and that fabled hand made sound that some folks are so fond of is often just a euphemism for a phantasy signal that kind of sounds like CW, and may be fun to send, but is usually not much fun to copy. Compared to those signals I prefer an electronic keyer anytime, and using one expertly does not take less practice than using a handkey, but it certainly creates a readable signal.
Reply to a comment by : KB5DPE on 2007-05-10

Question: When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?" Answer: NEVER! That's what hams do best! If most ham's shacks were half as big as their ego, they'd need a warehouse the size of a football field to hold it all. (And this comment has absolutely nothing to do with CW. Just my opinion.)
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
N1EA2007-05-17
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Hello Ulrich,

I seldom use my keyer these days except for a very useful feature that John Curtis, K6KG built into his Curtis Electro Devices keyers and later its semiconductor integrated circuits ("chips") such as the 8043, 8044 and so forth. They had a circuit which eliminated key bounce - basically it "integrated the output by an amount adjustable by the weight control".

I run my semi-automatic key, my sideswiper (or cootie) key, and my hand key through my keyer (Curtis EK-430)- it basically fattens the dots on the bug and prevents any "sparking" or "split dits" on the bug.

When everyone was sending with hand keys and semi-automatic keys, it was fun to send "perfect" code with a keyer. This is still fun.

But when keyboards came along, the code started to feel dull. It was like listening to a computer play Bach - do you remember the recordings of the precisely timed synthesizers? - they lacked soul. So I returned to hand keys and sideswipers and semi-automatics, but I use a keyer also.

I hope that your design might include such a feature as well as a pleasent sine wave oscillator for listening to straight keys.

One more feature would be to have a 1/8 "stereo" (although the signal would be mono!) output that could be used to record or better yet, to patch into a 2 meter radio to use over FM. Some sort of VOX automatic switching would be nice too!

Don't overlook the hand key users - we use keyers also!

I remember the German operators who were so very fast on their hand keys - they could send 30 wpm on them - I've never gotten above 23 wpm. The German first class commercial exam for Radio Officers was 28 wpm send and receive for one minute out of five with no errors by hand key amd pen/pencil ONLY - no "automation" allowed either copy or sending!

The D stations (ships) and the G stations could really send fast code with a hand key - and beautiful to copy.

Be well,

73

David Ring, N1EA
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

That's pretty poor for a self professed straight key guy: it's dit ditditdit dit - dit dit. (never heard of a dita - what the heck is that?) The real thing is ESE, and you even have an annual ESE event where all the ESE suffixers meet. The verbal translation of that pattern usually is "shave and a haircut" - dit dit. OK - you can tell that I have not totally outgrown my straight key roots. But what is sometimes heard these days coming from a straight key would let the great old fists turn in their graves. The timing of CW signals is precisely defined, and that fabled hand made sound that some folks are so fond of is often just a euphemism for a phantasy signal that kind of sounds like CW, and may be fun to send, but is usually not much fun to copy. Compared to those signals I prefer an electronic keyer anytime, and using one expertly does not take less practice than using a handkey, but it certainly creates a readable signal.
Reply to a comment by : KB5DPE on 2007-05-10

Question: When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?" Answer: NEVER! That's what hams do best! If most ham's shacks were half as big as their ego, they'd need a warehouse the size of a football field to hold it all. (And this comment has absolutely nothing to do with CW. Just my opinion.)
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
VK6XH2007-05-15
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
I suggest you try a Begali key sometime, with this extra unit and the collaboration between the designers it will be awesome, and anything from MFJ is as its been known here in Oz for years, Made from Junk.
I know I have been caught out a few times.
Please dont criticise what you know nothing about, I mean they aren't even available yet !!
Positive thoughts until proved negative.Smile somtimes !
73
Keith
Reply to a comment by : KB6REY on 2007-05-12

Wow it sure is pretty, but if you have a key in your hand that makes “you” the ultimate cw machine. Just another gadget that is over priced and eventually will collect dust, but it would make a great paper-weight. MFJ makes a better unit for a lot less. I still don’t get it? Machines for cw, why? What happened to the old fashion method of sending and receiving? Yeah I know – it’s a new day and it’s new technology blah blah blah. Cul on cw, leave the machine at home.
LU1DZ2007-05-14
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Many thanks Ulrich.

73
Alberto LU1DZ
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-14

No, you don't need a computer to change configuration settings - everything is accessible through a menu structure that uses the LCD display and the joystick of the device.
Reply to a comment by : LU1DZ on 2007-05-14

Dear Ulrich DJ8GO: Many thanks for your fast answer. I´m focusing to use this machine with out a PC during portable, moble or fixed operation. OK, the small speaker on the Butterfly board it¨s enough because I dont want to patch anything with my RX when QSO. OK we need an external amp for trainning. "The volume can be adjusted through a menu function or a "slider" in the Windows software" Do we need the PC conection to change tone/monitor volume?,I´m thinking to use an external amp with out PC for trainning. I will read manual again. 73 Alberto LU1DZ
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-14

There is a small speaker on the Butterfly board that is loud enough when you sit next to it. That sound is amplified by a driver transistor with an output on the back panel, sufficient to drive a small external speaker or headphones or some amplified speaker like the ones you use for a computer soundcard. If you use the keyer with your station you usually want to patch the sound into your receiver audio, and you don't want the keyer to create a sound when you are on the air, because you'll have your transmitter sidetone to monitor your signal - so normally not a lot of sound output is required. If you use the device for training purposes with a larger audience, the small amplified computer speakers that you can buy for less than $20 are sufficient even for a big class room. The volume can be adjusted through a menu function or a "slider" in the Windows software, but there is no physical potentiometer. I didn't consider that necessary because you will typcially run your sound output through a device with a volume control, like your receiver or amplified speakers.
Reply to a comment by : LU1DZ on 2007-05-14

Dear OM Ulrich DJ8GO: It is enough space in the cabinet for a small speaker...? It´s there any posibility to change the monitor volume with a pot...? 73 Alberto LU1DZ
Reply to a comment by : N2EY on 2007-05-13

KD7YVV writes: "I've tried calling CQ a few times in the CW portions of the bands, and haven't gotten an answer as of late." Sorry to hear that. What frequencies? What time of day? What are you using for a rig and antenna? "I do hear people sending a lot faster than I can copy at the moment, but I'm willing to learn and apply." Excellent! "It'll take practice and time to build speed up, but for now, I've passed the 5 wpm, and am happy with that. I'm sure as I use CW more, my speed will increase over time, but for now, I'm having fun." Sometimes it takes more than one CQ to raise somebody. Don't be discouraged. Another poster suggested that you try "the Novice parts of the bands". But they don't really exist anymore, at least not the way they did before the latest rules changes. So just go where the activity is and have at it. 73 de Jim, N2EY
Reply to a comment by : KD7YVV on 2007-05-10

I've tried calling CQ a few times in the CW portions of the bands, and haven't gotten an answer as of late. I do hear people sending a lot faster than I can copy at the moment, but I'm willing to learn and apply. It'll take practice and time to build speed up, but for now, I've passed the 5 wpm, and am happy with that. I'm sure as I use CW more, my speed will increase over time, but for now, I'm having fun. --KD7YVV, Kirkland, WA
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

Let's not make this into the usual code/no-code thread, which has been repeated ad nauseam on this site. Although 5wpm is not fast enough to normally make for a fun QSO, it is a little too fast to look it up on your boy scout decoder chart, and it still requires some determination to get to that point. And with this type of device, and a bit of stamina, you can get to realistic speeds, and beyond, much faster than you ever could in the good old days. I, for one, think that CW is fun and a non-trivial skill that I enjoy for it's own sake. For me it's not primarily about communication (I do that with my cell phone), and all these discussions about an "outmoded" form of communication are completely missing the point. "My" kind of CW is not a dying art - it's like contesting or setting up an EME station, something that is done because you enjoy the challenge, and it can't be discussed in terms of how practical it is to get a message from A to B. "My" kind of CW is not an endangered art, and it can even require you to explore the leading edge of technology, as this device shows.
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
N2DE2007-05-14
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
No, you don't need a computer to change configuration settings - everything is accessible through a menu structure that uses the LCD display and the joystick of the device.
Reply to a comment by : LU1DZ on 2007-05-14

Dear Ulrich DJ8GO: Many thanks for your fast answer. I´m focusing to use this machine with out a PC during portable, moble or fixed operation. OK, the small speaker on the Butterfly board it¨s enough because I dont want to patch anything with my RX when QSO. OK we need an external amp for trainning. "The volume can be adjusted through a menu function or a "slider" in the Windows software" Do we need the PC conection to change tone/monitor volume?,I´m thinking to use an external amp with out PC for trainning. I will read manual again. 73 Alberto LU1DZ
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-14

There is a small speaker on the Butterfly board that is loud enough when you sit next to it. That sound is amplified by a driver transistor with an output on the back panel, sufficient to drive a small external speaker or headphones or some amplified speaker like the ones you use for a computer soundcard. If you use the keyer with your station you usually want to patch the sound into your receiver audio, and you don't want the keyer to create a sound when you are on the air, because you'll have your transmitter sidetone to monitor your signal - so normally not a lot of sound output is required. If you use the device for training purposes with a larger audience, the small amplified computer speakers that you can buy for less than $20 are sufficient even for a big class room. The volume can be adjusted through a menu function or a "slider" in the Windows software, but there is no physical potentiometer. I didn't consider that necessary because you will typcially run your sound output through a device with a volume control, like your receiver or amplified speakers.
Reply to a comment by : LU1DZ on 2007-05-14

Dear OM Ulrich DJ8GO: It is enough space in the cabinet for a small speaker...? It´s there any posibility to change the monitor volume with a pot...? 73 Alberto LU1DZ
Reply to a comment by : N2EY on 2007-05-13

KD7YVV writes: "I've tried calling CQ a few times in the CW portions of the bands, and haven't gotten an answer as of late." Sorry to hear that. What frequencies? What time of day? What are you using for a rig and antenna? "I do hear people sending a lot faster than I can copy at the moment, but I'm willing to learn and apply." Excellent! "It'll take practice and time to build speed up, but for now, I've passed the 5 wpm, and am happy with that. I'm sure as I use CW more, my speed will increase over time, but for now, I'm having fun." Sometimes it takes more than one CQ to raise somebody. Don't be discouraged. Another poster suggested that you try "the Novice parts of the bands". But they don't really exist anymore, at least not the way they did before the latest rules changes. So just go where the activity is and have at it. 73 de Jim, N2EY
Reply to a comment by : KD7YVV on 2007-05-10

I've tried calling CQ a few times in the CW portions of the bands, and haven't gotten an answer as of late. I do hear people sending a lot faster than I can copy at the moment, but I'm willing to learn and apply. It'll take practice and time to build speed up, but for now, I've passed the 5 wpm, and am happy with that. I'm sure as I use CW more, my speed will increase over time, but for now, I'm having fun. --KD7YVV, Kirkland, WA
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

Let's not make this into the usual code/no-code thread, which has been repeated ad nauseam on this site. Although 5wpm is not fast enough to normally make for a fun QSO, it is a little too fast to look it up on your boy scout decoder chart, and it still requires some determination to get to that point. And with this type of device, and a bit of stamina, you can get to realistic speeds, and beyond, much faster than you ever could in the good old days. I, for one, think that CW is fun and a non-trivial skill that I enjoy for it's own sake. For me it's not primarily about communication (I do that with my cell phone), and all these discussions about an "outmoded" form of communication are completely missing the point. "My" kind of CW is not a dying art - it's like contesting or setting up an EME station, something that is done because you enjoy the challenge, and it can't be discussed in terms of how practical it is to get a message from A to B. "My" kind of CW is not an endangered art, and it can even require you to explore the leading edge of technology, as this device shows.
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
LU1DZ2007-05-14
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Dear Ulrich DJ8GO:

Many thanks for your fast answer.

I´m focusing to use this machine with out a PC during portable, moble or fixed operation.

OK, the small speaker on the Butterfly board it¨s enough because I dont want to patch anything with my RX when QSO.

OK we need an external amp for trainning.

"The volume can be adjusted through a menu function or a "slider" in the Windows software"

Do we need the PC conection to change tone/monitor volume?,I´m thinking to use an external amp with out PC for trainning.

I will read manual again.

73
Alberto LU1DZ



Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-14

There is a small speaker on the Butterfly board that is loud enough when you sit next to it. That sound is amplified by a driver transistor with an output on the back panel, sufficient to drive a small external speaker or headphones or some amplified speaker like the ones you use for a computer soundcard. If you use the keyer with your station you usually want to patch the sound into your receiver audio, and you don't want the keyer to create a sound when you are on the air, because you'll have your transmitter sidetone to monitor your signal - so normally not a lot of sound output is required. If you use the device for training purposes with a larger audience, the small amplified computer speakers that you can buy for less than $20 are sufficient even for a big class room. The volume can be adjusted through a menu function or a "slider" in the Windows software, but there is no physical potentiometer. I didn't consider that necessary because you will typcially run your sound output through a device with a volume control, like your receiver or amplified speakers.
Reply to a comment by : LU1DZ on 2007-05-14

Dear OM Ulrich DJ8GO: It is enough space in the cabinet for a small speaker...? It´s there any posibility to change the monitor volume with a pot...? 73 Alberto LU1DZ
Reply to a comment by : N2EY on 2007-05-13

KD7YVV writes: "I've tried calling CQ a few times in the CW portions of the bands, and haven't gotten an answer as of late." Sorry to hear that. What frequencies? What time of day? What are you using for a rig and antenna? "I do hear people sending a lot faster than I can copy at the moment, but I'm willing to learn and apply." Excellent! "It'll take practice and time to build speed up, but for now, I've passed the 5 wpm, and am happy with that. I'm sure as I use CW more, my speed will increase over time, but for now, I'm having fun." Sometimes it takes more than one CQ to raise somebody. Don't be discouraged. Another poster suggested that you try "the Novice parts of the bands". But they don't really exist anymore, at least not the way they did before the latest rules changes. So just go where the activity is and have at it. 73 de Jim, N2EY
Reply to a comment by : KD7YVV on 2007-05-10

I've tried calling CQ a few times in the CW portions of the bands, and haven't gotten an answer as of late. I do hear people sending a lot faster than I can copy at the moment, but I'm willing to learn and apply. It'll take practice and time to build speed up, but for now, I've passed the 5 wpm, and am happy with that. I'm sure as I use CW more, my speed will increase over time, but for now, I'm having fun. --KD7YVV, Kirkland, WA
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

Let's not make this into the usual code/no-code thread, which has been repeated ad nauseam on this site. Although 5wpm is not fast enough to normally make for a fun QSO, it is a little too fast to look it up on your boy scout decoder chart, and it still requires some determination to get to that point. And with this type of device, and a bit of stamina, you can get to realistic speeds, and beyond, much faster than you ever could in the good old days. I, for one, think that CW is fun and a non-trivial skill that I enjoy for it's own sake. For me it's not primarily about communication (I do that with my cell phone), and all these discussions about an "outmoded" form of communication are completely missing the point. "My" kind of CW is not a dying art - it's like contesting or setting up an EME station, something that is done because you enjoy the challenge, and it can't be discussed in terms of how practical it is to get a message from A to B. "My" kind of CW is not an endangered art, and it can even require you to explore the leading edge of technology, as this device shows.
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
N2DE2007-05-14
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
There is a small speaker on the Butterfly board that is loud enough when you sit next to it. That sound is amplified by a driver transistor with an output on the back panel, sufficient to drive a small external speaker or headphones or some amplified speaker like the ones you use for a computer soundcard. If you use the keyer with your station you usually want to patch the sound into your receiver audio, and you don't want the keyer to create a sound when you are on the air, because you'll have your transmitter sidetone to monitor your signal - so normally not a lot of sound output is required.

If you use the device for training purposes with a larger audience, the small amplified computer speakers that you can buy for less than $20 are sufficient even for a big class room.

The volume can be adjusted through a menu function or a "slider" in the Windows software, but there is no physical potentiometer. I didn't consider that necessary because you will typcially run your sound output through a device with a volume control, like your receiver or amplified speakers.
Reply to a comment by : LU1DZ on 2007-05-14

Dear OM Ulrich DJ8GO: It is enough space in the cabinet for a small speaker...? It´s there any posibility to change the monitor volume with a pot...? 73 Alberto LU1DZ
Reply to a comment by : N2EY on 2007-05-13

KD7YVV writes: "I've tried calling CQ a few times in the CW portions of the bands, and haven't gotten an answer as of late." Sorry to hear that. What frequencies? What time of day? What are you using for a rig and antenna? "I do hear people sending a lot faster than I can copy at the moment, but I'm willing to learn and apply." Excellent! "It'll take practice and time to build speed up, but for now, I've passed the 5 wpm, and am happy with that. I'm sure as I use CW more, my speed will increase over time, but for now, I'm having fun." Sometimes it takes more than one CQ to raise somebody. Don't be discouraged. Another poster suggested that you try "the Novice parts of the bands". But they don't really exist anymore, at least not the way they did before the latest rules changes. So just go where the activity is and have at it. 73 de Jim, N2EY
Reply to a comment by : KD7YVV on 2007-05-10

I've tried calling CQ a few times in the CW portions of the bands, and haven't gotten an answer as of late. I do hear people sending a lot faster than I can copy at the moment, but I'm willing to learn and apply. It'll take practice and time to build speed up, but for now, I've passed the 5 wpm, and am happy with that. I'm sure as I use CW more, my speed will increase over time, but for now, I'm having fun. --KD7YVV, Kirkland, WA
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

Let's not make this into the usual code/no-code thread, which has been repeated ad nauseam on this site. Although 5wpm is not fast enough to normally make for a fun QSO, it is a little too fast to look it up on your boy scout decoder chart, and it still requires some determination to get to that point. And with this type of device, and a bit of stamina, you can get to realistic speeds, and beyond, much faster than you ever could in the good old days. I, for one, think that CW is fun and a non-trivial skill that I enjoy for it's own sake. For me it's not primarily about communication (I do that with my cell phone), and all these discussions about an "outmoded" form of communication are completely missing the point. "My" kind of CW is not a dying art - it's like contesting or setting up an EME station, something that is done because you enjoy the challenge, and it can't be discussed in terms of how practical it is to get a message from A to B. "My" kind of CW is not an endangered art, and it can even require you to explore the leading edge of technology, as this device shows.
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
LU1DZ2007-05-14
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Dear OM Ulrich DJ8GO:

It is enough space in the cabinet for a small speaker...?

It´s there any posibility to change the monitor volume with a pot...?

73
Alberto LU1DZ

Reply to a comment by : N2EY on 2007-05-13

KD7YVV writes: "I've tried calling CQ a few times in the CW portions of the bands, and haven't gotten an answer as of late." Sorry to hear that. What frequencies? What time of day? What are you using for a rig and antenna? "I do hear people sending a lot faster than I can copy at the moment, but I'm willing to learn and apply." Excellent! "It'll take practice and time to build speed up, but for now, I've passed the 5 wpm, and am happy with that. I'm sure as I use CW more, my speed will increase over time, but for now, I'm having fun." Sometimes it takes more than one CQ to raise somebody. Don't be discouraged. Another poster suggested that you try "the Novice parts of the bands". But they don't really exist anymore, at least not the way they did before the latest rules changes. So just go where the activity is and have at it. 73 de Jim, N2EY
Reply to a comment by : KD7YVV on 2007-05-10

I've tried calling CQ a few times in the CW portions of the bands, and haven't gotten an answer as of late. I do hear people sending a lot faster than I can copy at the moment, but I'm willing to learn and apply. It'll take practice and time to build speed up, but for now, I've passed the 5 wpm, and am happy with that. I'm sure as I use CW more, my speed will increase over time, but for now, I'm having fun. --KD7YVV, Kirkland, WA
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

Let's not make this into the usual code/no-code thread, which has been repeated ad nauseam on this site. Although 5wpm is not fast enough to normally make for a fun QSO, it is a little too fast to look it up on your boy scout decoder chart, and it still requires some determination to get to that point. And with this type of device, and a bit of stamina, you can get to realistic speeds, and beyond, much faster than you ever could in the good old days. I, for one, think that CW is fun and a non-trivial skill that I enjoy for it's own sake. For me it's not primarily about communication (I do that with my cell phone), and all these discussions about an "outmoded" form of communication are completely missing the point. "My" kind of CW is not a dying art - it's like contesting or setting up an EME station, something that is done because you enjoy the challenge, and it can't be discussed in terms of how practical it is to get a message from A to B. "My" kind of CW is not an endangered art, and it can even require you to explore the leading edge of technology, as this device shows.
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
N2EY2007-05-13
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
KD7YVV writes:

"I've tried calling CQ a few times in the CW portions
of the bands, and haven't gotten an answer as of late."

Sorry to hear that.

What frequencies? What time of day?

What are you using for a rig and antenna?

"I do hear people sending a lot faster than I can copy
at the moment, but I'm willing to learn and apply."

Excellent!

"It'll take practice and time to build speed up, but
for now, I've passed the 5 wpm, and am happy with that.
I'm sure as I use CW more, my speed will increase over
time, but for now, I'm having fun."

Sometimes it takes more than one CQ to raise somebody.
Don't be discouraged.

Another poster suggested that you try "the Novice parts of the bands". But they don't really exist anymore, at least not the way they did before the latest rules changes. So just go where the activity is and have at it.

73 de Jim, N2EY


Reply to a comment by : KD7YVV on 2007-05-10

I've tried calling CQ a few times in the CW portions of the bands, and haven't gotten an answer as of late. I do hear people sending a lot faster than I can copy at the moment, but I'm willing to learn and apply. It'll take practice and time to build speed up, but for now, I've passed the 5 wpm, and am happy with that. I'm sure as I use CW more, my speed will increase over time, but for now, I'm having fun. --KD7YVV, Kirkland, WA
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

Let's not make this into the usual code/no-code thread, which has been repeated ad nauseam on this site. Although 5wpm is not fast enough to normally make for a fun QSO, it is a little too fast to look it up on your boy scout decoder chart, and it still requires some determination to get to that point. And with this type of device, and a bit of stamina, you can get to realistic speeds, and beyond, much faster than you ever could in the good old days. I, for one, think that CW is fun and a non-trivial skill that I enjoy for it's own sake. For me it's not primarily about communication (I do that with my cell phone), and all these discussions about an "outmoded" form of communication are completely missing the point. "My" kind of CW is not a dying art - it's like contesting or setting up an EME station, something that is done because you enjoy the challenge, and it can't be discussed in terms of how practical it is to get a message from A to B. "My" kind of CW is not an endangered art, and it can even require you to explore the leading edge of technology, as this device shows.
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
AE6RO2007-05-12
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Was der Bauer nicht kennt, frist er nicht. 73, AE6RO
Reply to a comment by : AE6RO on 2007-05-11

Bis dahin fliest noch viel Wasser dem Rhein herunter. 73, AE6RO
Reply to a comment by : KC8VWM on 2007-05-10

Flame on: Please feel free to pass along my condolences to those that are turning over in their graves while I operate CW on 40 meters. Say Horacio Caine, before you start blowing yet another triode over listening to not so perfect CW on the bands, you might consider investigating why any Tech might possibly prefer actually experimenting and using CW instead of just memorizing a remedial school Extra class examination pool in a matter of only a few hours and start using SSB fone instead. A most perplexing case to solve isn't it Horacio? I sincerely hope to hear you in all your superior and professional 150 wpm Western Union CW glory on the bands in the future. I am sure your comments are a true inspiration to all new hams who are using straightkeys everywhere. Until then Horacio Caine, 73 from the "sweaty ol shakey fist" of KC8VWM. Flame off.
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

That's pretty poor for a self professed straight key guy: it's dit ditditdit dit - dit dit. (never heard of a dita - what the heck is that?) The real thing is ESE, and you even have an annual ESE event where all the ESE suffixers meet. The verbal translation of that pattern usually is "shave and a haircut" - dit dit. OK - you can tell that I have not totally outgrown my straight key roots. But what is sometimes heard these days coming from a straight key would let the great old fists turn in their graves. The timing of CW signals is precisely defined, and that fabled hand made sound that some folks are so fond of is often just a euphemism for a phantasy signal that kind of sounds like CW, and may be fun to send, but is usually not much fun to copy. Compared to those signals I prefer an electronic keyer anytime, and using one expertly does not take less practice than using a handkey, but it certainly creates a readable signal.
Reply to a comment by : KB5DPE on 2007-05-10

Question: When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?" Answer: NEVER! That's what hams do best! If most ham's shacks were half as big as their ego, they'd need a warehouse the size of a football field to hold it all. (And this comment has absolutely nothing to do with CW. Just my opinion.)
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
WA2JJH2007-05-12
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
I still have a J-38 brass pounder I got in 1968.
I paid a wopping $4.99 for it from radio sack.
Radio shack sold a metal and plastic straigt key for
79 cents!!!
They did make good keyer paddles if you got 2 of them.
Mount them sideways, back to back.
Shazzzam...paddles for $1.59.
Reply to a comment by : KB6REY on 2007-05-12

Wow it sure is pretty, but if you have a key in your hand that makes “you” the ultimate cw machine. Just another gadget that is over priced and eventually will collect dust, but it would make a great paper-weight. MFJ makes a better unit for a lot less. I still don’t get it? Machines for cw, why? What happened to the old fashion method of sending and receiving? Yeah I know – it’s a new day and it’s new technology blah blah blah. Cul on cw, leave the machine at home.
KB6REY2007-05-12
The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Wow it sure is pretty, but if you have a key in your hand that makes “you” the ultimate cw machine.

Just another gadget that is over priced and eventually will collect dust, but it would make a great paper-weight. MFJ makes a better unit for a lot less.

I still don’t get it? Machines for cw, why? What happened to the old fashion method of sending and receiving?

Yeah I know – it’s a new day and it’s new technology blah blah blah.

Cul on cw, leave the machine at home.
WA2JJH2007-05-12
RE: The amorphosopestist and serotic liver lovers.
CHARLES, WHATS UP!!. I will send you my photos' I took when I was in Thailand for a month.
Did you know the Thai aphabet only has 46 letters in it?
Pattaya City really rocks! I will send you some pictures I took. Perhaps you will come to understand, what type of Hidden agenda can be found in some posts on this tread.

Read this backwards and replace every S with a T.
Also ignore certain vowels. Some Languages do not use vowels.

Number 9 Number 9 Number 9 hope ur fine.

Forget te crytology...wait for the photos.

98xray
Reply to a comment by : WA2JJH on 2007-05-12

SRI for multipost. Wireless card is wacky in my PC
Reply to a comment by : WA2JJH on 2007-05-12

TNX FER UR FB ARTCL OM! I love to homebrew too. I like to design my own revisions and added funtions. As another poster pointed out, it is a too bad that many newbie's will miss out. They will miss out on building all the "GIZMOS" for their shack. There are MANY other things to do in Ham Radio. Just chit chatting on 20M with 1500W, is not the "TROPHY" you win. 73 DE MIKE WA2JJH
Reply to a comment by : KC8VWM on 2007-05-10

STRAIGHTKEY on May 10, 2007 "I am a straight key kinda guy myself" Me too :-) ----------- d[-_-]b ...I hear ya. dit dita dit dit dit dit. :P
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"I am a straight key kinda guy myself" Me too :-)
Reply to a comment by : KC8VWM on 2007-05-10

Excellent. I recall reading about the earlier prototype and it seems to have come a long way since that time. I am a straight key kinda guy myself, but I do like the idea of using this particular keyer because for one thing it can be used with a straight key "and" it has so many capabilities and built it functions that are far beyond other boring keyers, this would make for a great and fun toy! In fact, I am looking around here right now and am thinking it would look especially good sitting on my shack bench right next to my W2IHY equipment. Perhaps I can take it along camping and connect it to my FT 817ND for QRP fun? In either case, when can I get one exactly? :) Very nice and much needed device. Haven't seen or heard anything else like it. 73 de Charles - KC8VWM
Reply to a comment by : LNXAUTHOR on 2007-05-10

- where's the link for more info? (or would that be considered advertising?).. - OK, here's the eham review link: http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/6670 - but it appears that so far, this product is vaporware for consumers unless you're one of the lucky ones to get one of the prototypes to be offered at Dayton? <sigh>
WA2JJH2007-05-12
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
SRI for multipost. Wireless card is wacky in my PC
Reply to a comment by : WA2JJH on 2007-05-12

TNX FER UR FB ARTCL OM! I love to homebrew too. I like to design my own revisions and added funtions. As another poster pointed out, it is a too bad that many newbie's will miss out. They will miss out on building all the "GIZMOS" for their shack. There are MANY other things to do in Ham Radio. Just chit chatting on 20M with 1500W, is not the "TROPHY" you win. 73 DE MIKE WA2JJH
Reply to a comment by : KC8VWM on 2007-05-10

STRAIGHTKEY on May 10, 2007 "I am a straight key kinda guy myself" Me too :-) ----------- d[-_-]b ...I hear ya. dit dita dit dit dit dit. :P
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"I am a straight key kinda guy myself" Me too :-)
Reply to a comment by : KC8VWM on 2007-05-10

Excellent. I recall reading about the earlier prototype and it seems to have come a long way since that time. I am a straight key kinda guy myself, but I do like the idea of using this particular keyer because for one thing it can be used with a straight key "and" it has so many capabilities and built it functions that are far beyond other boring keyers, this would make for a great and fun toy! In fact, I am looking around here right now and am thinking it would look especially good sitting on my shack bench right next to my W2IHY equipment. Perhaps I can take it along camping and connect it to my FT 817ND for QRP fun? In either case, when can I get one exactly? :) Very nice and much needed device. Haven't seen or heard anything else like it. 73 de Charles - KC8VWM
Reply to a comment by : LNXAUTHOR on 2007-05-10

- where's the link for more info? (or would that be considered advertising?).. - OK, here's the eham review link: http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/6670 - but it appears that so far, this product is vaporware for consumers unless you're one of the lucky ones to get one of the prototypes to be offered at Dayton? <sigh>
WA2JJH2007-05-12
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
TNX FER UR FB ARTCL OM!

I love to homebrew too. I like to design my own revisions and added funtions.

As another poster pointed out, it is a too bad that many newbie's will miss out. They will miss out on building all the "GIZMOS" for their shack.

There are MANY other things to do in Ham Radio.

Just chit chatting on 20M with 1500W, is not the "TROPHY" you win.

73 DE MIKE WA2JJH

Reply to a comment by : K0BG on 2007-05-10

Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication. Alan, KØBG www.k0bg.com
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

No, this is not vaporware - the dozen devices in Dayton are quite real, and so are the firmware and Windows software. Neither Piero nor I have a good idea what the demand for this device may be, so we were a bit reluctant to produce a lot more. But you can drop him a friendly email to be put on his list, like some folks have already done, and you should have one soon after he's back from Dayton.
WA2JJH2007-05-12
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
TNX FER UR FB ARTCL OM!

I love to homebrew too. I like to design my own revisions and added funtions.

As another poster pointed out, it is a too bad that many newbie's will miss out. They will miss out on building all the "GIZMOS" for their shack.

There are MANY other things to do in Ham Radio.

Just chit chatting on 20M with 1500W, is not the "TROPHY" you win.

73 DE MIKE WA2JJH
Reply to a comment by : KC8VWM on 2007-05-10

STRAIGHTKEY on May 10, 2007 "I am a straight key kinda guy myself" Me too :-) ----------- d[-_-]b ...I hear ya. dit dita dit dit dit dit. :P
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"I am a straight key kinda guy myself" Me too :-)
Reply to a comment by : KC8VWM on 2007-05-10

Excellent. I recall reading about the earlier prototype and it seems to have come a long way since that time. I am a straight key kinda guy myself, but I do like the idea of using this particular keyer because for one thing it can be used with a straight key "and" it has so many capabilities and built it functions that are far beyond other boring keyers, this would make for a great and fun toy! In fact, I am looking around here right now and am thinking it would look especially good sitting on my shack bench right next to my W2IHY equipment. Perhaps I can take it along camping and connect it to my FT 817ND for QRP fun? In either case, when can I get one exactly? :) Very nice and much needed device. Haven't seen or heard anything else like it. 73 de Charles - KC8VWM
Reply to a comment by : LNXAUTHOR on 2007-05-10

- where's the link for more info? (or would that be considered advertising?).. - OK, here's the eham review link: http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/6670 - but it appears that so far, this product is vaporware for consumers unless you're one of the lucky ones to get one of the prototypes to be offered at Dayton? <sigh>
WA2JJH2007-05-12
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
TNX FER UR FB ARTCL OM!

I love to homebrew too. I like to design my own revisions and added funtions.

As another poster pointed out, it is a too bad that many newbie's will miss out. They will miss out on building all the "GIZMOS" for their shack.

There are MANY other things to do in Ham Radio.

Just chit chatting on 20M with 1500W, is not the "TROPHY" you win.

73 DE MIKE WA2JJH
Reply to a comment by : KC8VWM on 2007-05-10

STRAIGHTKEY on May 10, 2007 "I am a straight key kinda guy myself" Me too :-) ----------- d[-_-]b ...I hear ya. dit dita dit dit dit dit. :P
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"I am a straight key kinda guy myself" Me too :-)
Reply to a comment by : KC8VWM on 2007-05-10

Excellent. I recall reading about the earlier prototype and it seems to have come a long way since that time. I am a straight key kinda guy myself, but I do like the idea of using this particular keyer because for one thing it can be used with a straight key "and" it has so many capabilities and built it functions that are far beyond other boring keyers, this would make for a great and fun toy! In fact, I am looking around here right now and am thinking it would look especially good sitting on my shack bench right next to my W2IHY equipment. Perhaps I can take it along camping and connect it to my FT 817ND for QRP fun? In either case, when can I get one exactly? :) Very nice and much needed device. Haven't seen or heard anything else like it. 73 de Charles - KC8VWM
Reply to a comment by : LNXAUTHOR on 2007-05-10

- where's the link for more info? (or would that be considered advertising?).. - OK, here's the eham review link: http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/6670 - but it appears that so far, this product is vaporware for consumers unless you're one of the lucky ones to get one of the prototypes to be offered at Dayton? <sigh>
N2DE2007-05-11
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
... ungefähr 4 Wochen lang ;-) For those of you who don't read German: I think that the documentation for the CW Trainer Manager will be ready in about 4 weeks, with the major delay caused by the Dayton Hamvention. The program itself is finished, and actually it is intuitive enough that you probably wouldn't need any documentation. My target of having it ready for prime time in June is not in jeopardy. Stop by at the Begali booth in Dayton, and you can see it in operation.
Reply to a comment by : AE6RO on 2007-05-11

Bis dahin fliest noch viel Wasser dem Rhein herunter. 73, AE6RO
Reply to a comment by : KC8VWM on 2007-05-10

Flame on: Please feel free to pass along my condolences to those that are turning over in their graves while I operate CW on 40 meters. Say Horacio Caine, before you start blowing yet another triode over listening to not so perfect CW on the bands, you might consider investigating why any Tech might possibly prefer actually experimenting and using CW instead of just memorizing a remedial school Extra class examination pool in a matter of only a few hours and start using SSB fone instead. A most perplexing case to solve isn't it Horacio? I sincerely hope to hear you in all your superior and professional 150 wpm Western Union CW glory on the bands in the future. I am sure your comments are a true inspiration to all new hams who are using straightkeys everywhere. Until then Horacio Caine, 73 from the "sweaty ol shakey fist" of KC8VWM. Flame off.
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

That's pretty poor for a self professed straight key guy: it's dit ditditdit dit - dit dit. (never heard of a dita - what the heck is that?) The real thing is ESE, and you even have an annual ESE event where all the ESE suffixers meet. The verbal translation of that pattern usually is "shave and a haircut" - dit dit. OK - you can tell that I have not totally outgrown my straight key roots. But what is sometimes heard these days coming from a straight key would let the great old fists turn in their graves. The timing of CW signals is precisely defined, and that fabled hand made sound that some folks are so fond of is often just a euphemism for a phantasy signal that kind of sounds like CW, and may be fun to send, but is usually not much fun to copy. Compared to those signals I prefer an electronic keyer anytime, and using one expertly does not take less practice than using a handkey, but it certainly creates a readable signal.
Reply to a comment by : KB5DPE on 2007-05-10

Question: When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?" Answer: NEVER! That's what hams do best! If most ham's shacks were half as big as their ego, they'd need a warehouse the size of a football field to hold it all. (And this comment has absolutely nothing to do with CW. Just my opinion.)
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
WB9QEL2007-05-11
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
I've tried calling CQ a few times in the CW portions
of the bands, and haven't gotten an answer as of late.
I do hear people sending a lot faster than I can copy
at the moment, but I'm willing to learn and apply.
It'll take practice and time to build speed up, but
for now, I've passed the 5 wpm, and am happy with that.
I'm sure as I use CW more, my speed will increase over
time, but for now, I'm having fun.

--KD7YVV, Kirkland, WA

--------------------------

I'm sorry Sir, I had to look your call up just to see if you were that new to Ham Radio. You are an EXTRA? You tried calling CQ but have had no luck at making a contact on CW yet? You have never made a contact on CW at all? Or are you just answering CQ's made by other hams on CW?

If you are new to CW, even though you are an EXTRA, stay out of the EXTRA Band area when working CW. If you tune around the CW areas of the bands you can see the difference in speeds.

Try calling CQ in the Novice CW portions of the bands. Send only as fast as you can copy, take it slow, and be patient. It's not speed, it's proficiency, and enjoyment. You keep that in mind and your speed will increase as well as your enjoyment.

Hope that helps.

W9ZXT
Reply to a comment by : KD7YVV on 2007-05-10

I've tried calling CQ a few times in the CW portions of the bands, and haven't gotten an answer as of late. I do hear people sending a lot faster than I can copy at the moment, but I'm willing to learn and apply. It'll take practice and time to build speed up, but for now, I've passed the 5 wpm, and am happy with that. I'm sure as I use CW more, my speed will increase over time, but for now, I'm having fun. --KD7YVV, Kirkland, WA
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

Let's not make this into the usual code/no-code thread, which has been repeated ad nauseam on this site. Although 5wpm is not fast enough to normally make for a fun QSO, it is a little too fast to look it up on your boy scout decoder chart, and it still requires some determination to get to that point. And with this type of device, and a bit of stamina, you can get to realistic speeds, and beyond, much faster than you ever could in the good old days. I, for one, think that CW is fun and a non-trivial skill that I enjoy for it's own sake. For me it's not primarily about communication (I do that with my cell phone), and all these discussions about an "outmoded" form of communication are completely missing the point. "My" kind of CW is not a dying art - it's like contesting or setting up an EME station, something that is done because you enjoy the challenge, and it can't be discussed in terms of how practical it is to get a message from A to B. "My" kind of CW is not an endangered art, and it can even require you to explore the leading edge of technology, as this device shows.
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
AE6RO2007-05-11
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Bis dahin fliest noch viel Wasser dem Rhein herunter.
73, AE6RO
Reply to a comment by : KC8VWM on 2007-05-10

Flame on: Please feel free to pass along my condolences to those that are turning over in their graves while I operate CW on 40 meters. Say Horacio Caine, before you start blowing yet another triode over listening to not so perfect CW on the bands, you might consider investigating why any Tech might possibly prefer actually experimenting and using CW instead of just memorizing a remedial school Extra class examination pool in a matter of only a few hours and start using SSB fone instead. A most perplexing case to solve isn't it Horacio? I sincerely hope to hear you in all your superior and professional 150 wpm Western Union CW glory on the bands in the future. I am sure your comments are a true inspiration to all new hams who are using straightkeys everywhere. Until then Horacio Caine, 73 from the "sweaty ol shakey fist" of KC8VWM. Flame off.
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

That's pretty poor for a self professed straight key guy: it's dit ditditdit dit - dit dit. (never heard of a dita - what the heck is that?) The real thing is ESE, and you even have an annual ESE event where all the ESE suffixers meet. The verbal translation of that pattern usually is "shave and a haircut" - dit dit. OK - you can tell that I have not totally outgrown my straight key roots. But what is sometimes heard these days coming from a straight key would let the great old fists turn in their graves. The timing of CW signals is precisely defined, and that fabled hand made sound that some folks are so fond of is often just a euphemism for a phantasy signal that kind of sounds like CW, and may be fun to send, but is usually not much fun to copy. Compared to those signals I prefer an electronic keyer anytime, and using one expertly does not take less practice than using a handkey, but it certainly creates a readable signal.
Reply to a comment by : KB5DPE on 2007-05-10

Question: When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?" Answer: NEVER! That's what hams do best! If most ham's shacks were half as big as their ego, they'd need a warehouse the size of a football field to hold it all. (And this comment has absolutely nothing to do with CW. Just my opinion.)
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
N2DE2007-05-11
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Several folks have emailed me for more technical detail. Actually, the complete documentation is available online:

http://www.i2rtf.com/docs/CWMachine.pdf
http://www.i2rtf.com/docs/CWMachineManager.pdf
http://www.i2rtf.com/docs/CWMachineHardware.pdf

There is also a preliminary documentation for the Trainer firmware, which may see minor changes:

http://www.i2rtf.com/docs/CWTrainer.pdf

The documentation for the Windows GUI of the CW Trainer is not yet ready. But when it is, it will be posted at:

http://www.i2rtf.com/docs/CWTrainerManager.pdf
Reply to a comment by : LU1DZ on 2007-05-11

Very Good...!!! Piero answer my email very fast and now I´m in the list for the CW Machine. I find this proyect very interesting. + I can use it for logging QSOs, when I´m going Mobil or portable. + I will gain more space at operating desk moving my PC to other place. + I will cut RFI high power problems with keyboard and/or PC. + I will reduce the PC generating noise in my RX. + I will use Straigth Key, single paddle and/or keyboard. (I dont like keyboard very much). + This proyect is under the experimental side of the ITU Amateur Radio Service, it´s GREAT and real. May be it will cost more than I can afford, but I will spend my money very happy and losse some weigth, hi hi.
Reply to a comment by : KC8VWM on 2007-05-11

DJ8GO, Here's a much needed public relations tip to consider. Don't write and submit articles on a website and then openly attack and criticize those that have complimented your submission. In light of these facts, I will NOT be placing your product on my bench next to my W2IHY products as I have previously indicated in my earlier post. You should really brush up on your people skills. Yup, that's my opinion alright and no you are not cool. I'm done now. Cya around. Charles - KC8VWM
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

That's pretty poor for a self professed straight key guy: it's dit ditditdit dit - dit dit. (never heard of a dita - what the heck is that?) The real thing is ESE, and you even have an annual ESE event where all the ESE suffixers meet. The verbal translation of that pattern usually is "shave and a haircut" - dit dit. OK - you can tell that I have not totally outgrown my straight key roots. But what is sometimes heard these days coming from a straight key would let the great old fists turn in their graves. The timing of CW signals is precisely defined, and that fabled hand made sound that some folks are so fond of is often just a euphemism for a phantasy signal that kind of sounds like CW, and may be fun to send, but is usually not much fun to copy. Compared to those signals I prefer an electronic keyer anytime, and using one expertly does not take less practice than using a handkey, but it certainly creates a readable signal.
Reply to a comment by : KB5DPE on 2007-05-10

Question: When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?" Answer: NEVER! That's what hams do best! If most ham's shacks were half as big as their ego, they'd need a warehouse the size of a football field to hold it all. (And this comment has absolutely nothing to do with CW. Just my opinion.)
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
LU1DZ2007-05-11
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Very Good...!!!

Piero answer my email very fast and now I´m in the list for the CW Machine.

I find this proyect very interesting.

+ I can use it for logging QSOs, when I´m going Mobil or portable.

+ I will gain more space at operating desk moving my PC to other place.

+ I will cut RFI high power problems with keyboard and/or PC.

+ I will reduce the PC generating noise in my RX.

+ I will use Straigth Key, single paddle and/or keyboard. (I dont like keyboard very much).

+ This proyect is under the experimental side of the ITU Amateur Radio Service, it´s GREAT and real.

May be it will cost more than I can afford, but I will spend my money very happy and losse some weigth, hi hi.



Reply to a comment by : KC8VWM on 2007-05-11

DJ8GO, Here's a much needed public relations tip to consider. Don't write and submit articles on a website and then openly attack and criticize those that have complimented your submission. In light of these facts, I will NOT be placing your product on my bench next to my W2IHY products as I have previously indicated in my earlier post. You should really brush up on your people skills. Yup, that's my opinion alright and no you are not cool. I'm done now. Cya around. Charles - KC8VWM
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

That's pretty poor for a self professed straight key guy: it's dit ditditdit dit - dit dit. (never heard of a dita - what the heck is that?) The real thing is ESE, and you even have an annual ESE event where all the ESE suffixers meet. The verbal translation of that pattern usually is "shave and a haircut" - dit dit. OK - you can tell that I have not totally outgrown my straight key roots. But what is sometimes heard these days coming from a straight key would let the great old fists turn in their graves. The timing of CW signals is precisely defined, and that fabled hand made sound that some folks are so fond of is often just a euphemism for a phantasy signal that kind of sounds like CW, and may be fun to send, but is usually not much fun to copy. Compared to those signals I prefer an electronic keyer anytime, and using one expertly does not take less practice than using a handkey, but it certainly creates a readable signal.
Reply to a comment by : KB5DPE on 2007-05-10

Question: When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?" Answer: NEVER! That's what hams do best! If most ham's shacks were half as big as their ego, they'd need a warehouse the size of a football field to hold it all. (And this comment has absolutely nothing to do with CW. Just my opinion.)
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
KC8VWM2007-05-11
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
DJ8GO,

Here's a much needed public relations tip to consider.

Don't write and submit articles on a website and then openly attack and criticize those that have complimented your submission.

In light of these facts, I will NOT be placing your product on my bench next to my W2IHY products as I have previously indicated in my earlier post.

You should really brush up on your people skills.

Yup, that's my opinion alright and no you are not cool.

I'm done now.

Cya around.

Charles - KC8VWM
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

That's pretty poor for a self professed straight key guy: it's dit ditditdit dit - dit dit. (never heard of a dita - what the heck is that?) The real thing is ESE, and you even have an annual ESE event where all the ESE suffixers meet. The verbal translation of that pattern usually is "shave and a haircut" - dit dit. OK - you can tell that I have not totally outgrown my straight key roots. But what is sometimes heard these days coming from a straight key would let the great old fists turn in their graves. The timing of CW signals is precisely defined, and that fabled hand made sound that some folks are so fond of is often just a euphemism for a phantasy signal that kind of sounds like CW, and may be fun to send, but is usually not much fun to copy. Compared to those signals I prefer an electronic keyer anytime, and using one expertly does not take less practice than using a handkey, but it certainly creates a readable signal.
Reply to a comment by : KB5DPE on 2007-05-10

Question: When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?" Answer: NEVER! That's what hams do best! If most ham's shacks were half as big as their ego, they'd need a warehouse the size of a football field to hold it all. (And this comment has absolutely nothing to do with CW. Just my opinion.)
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
KC5CQD2007-05-10
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
"I've tried calling CQ a few times in the CW portions
of the bands, and haven't gotten an answer as of late.
I do hear people sending a lot faster than I can copy
at the moment, but I'm willing to learn and apply.
It'll take practice and time to build speed up, but
for now, I've passed the 5 wpm, and am happy with that.
I'm sure as I use CW more, my speed will increase over
time, but for now, I'm having fun.

--KD7YVV, Kirkland, WA"



What? What kind of antenna are you using? I'm not trying to be sarcastic. I'm just shocked that you haven't received an answer to a CW CQ!

In the past month I've called CQ on 40 meter/CW with 3 watts from my K1 and a random hunk of wire thrown up in a tree and received responses.

Just the other night I turned the Pro III down to 5 watts and called CQ into a Double Zepp up only 25' and had response after response. I could have stayed out there all night talking to people. Now....I'm sure my rigs are good and my antenna is decent but....they're not so good that they can pull out signals any better than your station!!!

Call CQ on CW a little more often and be a tad more patient....OR....look into a better antenna. Maybe a Double Zepp!!! hihi!
Reply to a comment by : KD7YVV on 2007-05-10

I've tried calling CQ a few times in the CW portions of the bands, and haven't gotten an answer as of late. I do hear people sending a lot faster than I can copy at the moment, but I'm willing to learn and apply. It'll take practice and time to build speed up, but for now, I've passed the 5 wpm, and am happy with that. I'm sure as I use CW more, my speed will increase over time, but for now, I'm having fun. --KD7YVV, Kirkland, WA
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

Let's not make this into the usual code/no-code thread, which has been repeated ad nauseam on this site. Although 5wpm is not fast enough to normally make for a fun QSO, it is a little too fast to look it up on your boy scout decoder chart, and it still requires some determination to get to that point. And with this type of device, and a bit of stamina, you can get to realistic speeds, and beyond, much faster than you ever could in the good old days. I, for one, think that CW is fun and a non-trivial skill that I enjoy for it's own sake. For me it's not primarily about communication (I do that with my cell phone), and all these discussions about an "outmoded" form of communication are completely missing the point. "My" kind of CW is not a dying art - it's like contesting or setting up an EME station, something that is done because you enjoy the challenge, and it can't be discussed in terms of how practical it is to get a message from A to B. "My" kind of CW is not an endangered art, and it can even require you to explore the leading edge of technology, as this device shows.
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
KC8VWM2007-05-10
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Flame on:

Please feel free to pass along my condolences to those that are turning over in their graves while I operate CW on 40 meters.

Say Horacio Caine, before you start blowing yet another triode over listening to not so perfect CW on the bands, you might consider investigating why any Tech might possibly prefer actually experimenting and using CW instead of just memorizing a remedial school Extra class examination pool in a matter of only a few hours and start using SSB fone instead.

A most perplexing case to solve isn't it Horacio?

I sincerely hope to hear you in all your superior and professional 150 wpm Western Union CW glory on the bands in the future. I am sure your comments are a true inspiration to all new hams who are using straightkeys everywhere.

Until then Horacio Caine,

73 from the "sweaty ol shakey fist" of KC8VWM.

Flame off.
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

That's pretty poor for a self professed straight key guy: it's dit ditditdit dit - dit dit. (never heard of a dita - what the heck is that?) The real thing is ESE, and you even have an annual ESE event where all the ESE suffixers meet. The verbal translation of that pattern usually is "shave and a haircut" - dit dit. OK - you can tell that I have not totally outgrown my straight key roots. But what is sometimes heard these days coming from a straight key would let the great old fists turn in their graves. The timing of CW signals is precisely defined, and that fabled hand made sound that some folks are so fond of is often just a euphemism for a phantasy signal that kind of sounds like CW, and may be fun to send, but is usually not much fun to copy. Compared to those signals I prefer an electronic keyer anytime, and using one expertly does not take less practice than using a handkey, but it certainly creates a readable signal.
Reply to a comment by : KB5DPE on 2007-05-10

Question: When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?" Answer: NEVER! That's what hams do best! If most ham's shacks were half as big as their ego, they'd need a warehouse the size of a football field to hold it all. (And this comment has absolutely nothing to do with CW. Just my opinion.)
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
N2DE2007-05-10
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
That's pretty poor for a self professed straight key guy: it's dit ditditdit dit - dit dit. (never heard of a dita - what the heck is that?) The real thing is ESE, and you even have an annual ESE event where all the ESE suffixers meet. The verbal translation of that pattern usually is "shave and a haircut" - dit dit.

OK - you can tell that I have not totally outgrown my straight key roots. But what is sometimes heard these days coming from a straight key would let the great old fists turn in their graves. The timing of CW signals is precisely defined, and that fabled hand made sound that some folks are so fond of is often just a euphemism for a phantasy signal that kind of sounds like CW, and may be fun to send, but is usually not much fun to copy. Compared to those signals I prefer an electronic keyer anytime, and using one expertly does not take less practice than using a handkey, but it certainly creates a readable signal.

Reply to a comment by : KB5DPE on 2007-05-10

Question: When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?" Answer: NEVER! That's what hams do best! If most ham's shacks were half as big as their ego, they'd need a warehouse the size of a football field to hold it all. (And this comment has absolutely nothing to do with CW. Just my opinion.)
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
KB5DPE2007-05-10
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Question: When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?"

Answer: NEVER! That's what hams do best! If most ham's shacks were half as big as their ego, they'd need a warehouse the size of a football field to hold it all. (And this comment has absolutely nothing to do with CW. Just my opinion.)
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
KC8VWM2007-05-10
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
STRAIGHTKEY on May 10, 2007

"I am a straight key kinda guy myself"

Me too :-)

-----------

d[-_-]b

...I hear ya.

dit dita dit dit
dit dit.

:P
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"I am a straight key kinda guy myself" Me too :-)
Reply to a comment by : KC8VWM on 2007-05-10

Excellent. I recall reading about the earlier prototype and it seems to have come a long way since that time. I am a straight key kinda guy myself, but I do like the idea of using this particular keyer because for one thing it can be used with a straight key "and" it has so many capabilities and built it functions that are far beyond other boring keyers, this would make for a great and fun toy! In fact, I am looking around here right now and am thinking it would look especially good sitting on my shack bench right next to my W2IHY equipment. Perhaps I can take it along camping and connect it to my FT 817ND for QRP fun? In either case, when can I get one exactly? :) Very nice and much needed device. Haven't seen or heard anything else like it. 73 de Charles - KC8VWM
Reply to a comment by : LNXAUTHOR on 2007-05-10

- where's the link for more info? (or would that be considered advertising?).. - OK, here's the eham review link: http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/6670 - but it appears that so far, this product is vaporware for consumers unless you're one of the lucky ones to get one of the prototypes to be offered at Dayton? <sigh>
N2DE2007-05-10
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
"Any plans for a Mac or Linux version of the training software" ...

No, not really. However, loading text into the device and monitoring its output requires just a terminal program. (which of course doesn't help you in creating training material) If you want to write something similar to the Windows GUI for some other platform, you can have the protocoll specification that tells you exactly how to communicate with the firmware.
Reply to a comment by : KC9HTV on 2007-05-10

Any plans for a Mac or Linux version of the training software?
STRAIGHTKEY2007-05-10
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
"I am a straight key kinda guy myself"

Me too :-)
Reply to a comment by : KC8VWM on 2007-05-10

Excellent. I recall reading about the earlier prototype and it seems to have come a long way since that time. I am a straight key kinda guy myself, but I do like the idea of using this particular keyer because for one thing it can be used with a straight key "and" it has so many capabilities and built it functions that are far beyond other boring keyers, this would make for a great and fun toy! In fact, I am looking around here right now and am thinking it would look especially good sitting on my shack bench right next to my W2IHY equipment. Perhaps I can take it along camping and connect it to my FT 817ND for QRP fun? In either case, when can I get one exactly? :) Very nice and much needed device. Haven't seen or heard anything else like it. 73 de Charles - KC8VWM
Reply to a comment by : LNXAUTHOR on 2007-05-10

- where's the link for more info? (or would that be considered advertising?).. - OK, here's the eham review link: http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/6670 - but it appears that so far, this product is vaporware for consumers unless you're one of the lucky ones to get one of the prototypes to be offered at Dayton? <sigh>
KASSY2007-05-10
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Well, as usual, I'm the odd (wo)man out.

My love of CW is the simplicity. I love the direct connection between my fingers and the bug paddles. The joy of CW is that it needs no computer, no processors, no digital circuits. A fully analog old radio is adequate.

A "CW machine" is like...well...like mass-produced beer compared to homebrew.

My very best wishes in the launch of the commercial venture, but I'll keep my beady eyes looking out for purer forms.

- k
Reply to a comment by : W7ETA on 2007-05-10

Great prose. Nice article. Looks like a FUN addition. 'Bout the only way to improve it would be to have some nice lookin tubes stickin out of the top. :-)) 73 Bob
Reply to a comment by : KC9HTV on 2007-05-10

Any plans for a Mac or Linux version of the training software?
W7ETA2007-05-10
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Great prose.
Nice article.
Looks like a FUN addition.
'Bout the only way to improve it would be to have some nice lookin tubes stickin out of the top. :-))
73
Bob
Reply to a comment by : KC9HTV on 2007-05-10

Any plans for a Mac or Linux version of the training software?
KC9HTV2007-05-10
The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Any plans for a Mac or Linux version of the training software?
NT4XT2007-05-10
The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Way Cool. I like the stand alone keyboard feature.
Also the upload/program via Windows feature.

Another great Training tool for beginners or high speed and up, is Nu Morse Pro.

If you convert any .txt into the Nu-Morse Font that comes with the program, you can effectively play any text you want, fast, slow, and- it mimics QRN, QSB according to your specification. You can specify hard or soft keying and characteristics in between.

Well worth it. Train at your pace and whenever/wherever you want (if you have a Notebook and earbuds/cans).
KC8VWM2007-05-10
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Excellent.

I recall reading about the earlier prototype and it seems to have come a long way since that time.

I am a straight key kinda guy myself, but I do like the idea of using this particular keyer because for one thing it can be used with a straight key "and" it has so many capabilities and built it functions that are far beyond other boring keyers, this would make for a great and fun toy!

In fact, I am looking around here right now and am thinking it would look especially good sitting on my shack bench right next to my W2IHY equipment. Perhaps I can take it along camping and connect it to my FT 817ND for QRP fun? In either case, when can I get one exactly? :)

Very nice and much needed device. Haven't seen or heard anything else like it.

73 de Charles - KC8VWM
Reply to a comment by : LNXAUTHOR on 2007-05-10

- where's the link for more info? (or would that be considered advertising?).. - OK, here's the eham review link: http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/6670 - but it appears that so far, this product is vaporware for consumers unless you're one of the lucky ones to get one of the prototypes to be offered at Dayton? <sigh>
KD7YVV2007-05-10
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
I've tried calling CQ a few times in the CW portions
of the bands, and haven't gotten an answer as of late.
I do hear people sending a lot faster than I can copy
at the moment, but I'm willing to learn and apply.
It'll take practice and time to build speed up, but
for now, I've passed the 5 wpm, and am happy with that.
I'm sure as I use CW more, my speed will increase over
time, but for now, I'm having fun.

--KD7YVV, Kirkland, WA

Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

Let's not make this into the usual code/no-code thread, which has been repeated ad nauseam on this site. Although 5wpm is not fast enough to normally make for a fun QSO, it is a little too fast to look it up on your boy scout decoder chart, and it still requires some determination to get to that point. And with this type of device, and a bit of stamina, you can get to realistic speeds, and beyond, much faster than you ever could in the good old days. I, for one, think that CW is fun and a non-trivial skill that I enjoy for it's own sake. For me it's not primarily about communication (I do that with my cell phone), and all these discussions about an "outmoded" form of communication are completely missing the point. "My" kind of CW is not a dying art - it's like contesting or setting up an EME station, something that is done because you enjoy the challenge, and it can't be discussed in terms of how practical it is to get a message from A to B. "My" kind of CW is not an endangered art, and it can even require you to explore the leading edge of technology, as this device shows.
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
N2DE2007-05-10
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Let's not make this into the usual code/no-code thread, which has been repeated ad nauseam on this site. Although 5wpm is not fast enough to normally make for a fun QSO, it is a little too fast to look it up on your boy scout decoder chart, and it still requires some determination to get to that point. And with this type of device, and a bit of stamina, you can get to realistic speeds, and beyond, much faster than you ever could in the good old days. I, for one, think that CW is fun and a non-trivial skill that I enjoy for it's own sake. For me it's not primarily about communication (I do that with my cell phone), and all these discussions about an "outmoded" form of communication are completely missing the point. "My" kind of CW is not a dying art - it's like contesting or setting up an EME station, something that is done because you enjoy the challenge, and it can't be discussed in terms of how practical it is to get a message from A to B. "My" kind of CW is not an endangered art, and it can even require you to explore the leading edge of technology, as this device shows.
Reply to a comment by : STRAIGHTKEY on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
K9OSC2007-05-10
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Outstanding article. Look forward to learning more about it. Thanks!
Reply to a comment by : WS4Y on 2007-05-10

Very cool. I bet you guys sell out in Dayton. Thanks for the article.
STRAIGHTKEY2007-05-10
The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication."

This statement/fallacy illustrates the problem with mainstream views on CW today. The test was removed, not proficiency, and the testing that was in effect never insured proficiency in the first place. And few people who were in favor of eliminating the CW test ever thought CW wasn't alive and well. But unfortunately we seem to be stuck in this mental trap where testing, proficiency, and CW usage are forever connected, much to the frustration of those who really want to see CW continue without further division of our ranks into coders and no-coders. When will the fallacies, verbal digs, and classification of who's better than who stop?
KA0W2007-05-10
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
With all the paddles, keys, bugs, & keyers currently available, CW must be the way to go! More Morse gear to choose from than there was 30 years ago. Will have to try the new toy out.
Reply to a comment by : N3EF on 2007-05-10

"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication." pro·fi·cient –adjective 1. well-advanced or competent in any art, science, or subject; skilled: –noun 2. an expert. Passing a 5wpm code test is not a sign of proficiency at morse code. Eric N3EF
Reply to a comment by : K0BG on 2007-05-10

Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication. Alan, KØBG www.k0bg.com
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

No, this is not vaporware - the dozen devices in Dayton are quite real, and so are the firmware and Windows software. Neither Piero nor I have a good idea what the demand for this device may be, so we were a bit reluctant to produce a lot more. But you can drop him a friendly email to be put on his list, like some folks have already done, and you should have one soon after he's back from Dayton.
N3EF2007-05-10
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
"Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication."

pro·fi·cient
–adjective 1. well-advanced or competent in any art, science, or subject; skilled:
–noun 2. an expert.

Passing a 5wpm code test is not a sign of proficiency at morse code.

Eric N3EF

Reply to a comment by : K0BG on 2007-05-10

Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication. Alan, KØBG www.k0bg.com
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

No, this is not vaporware - the dozen devices in Dayton are quite real, and so are the firmware and Windows software. Neither Piero nor I have a good idea what the demand for this device may be, so we were a bit reluctant to produce a lot more. But you can drop him a friendly email to be put on his list, like some folks have already done, and you should have one soon after he's back from Dayton.
W3FLH2007-05-10
The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Ulrich,

Another great article. Very nice job on the CW Machine, and teaming with Begali is icing on the proverbial cake.

Have you set a price for this yet? Even if you just let us know what you'll be asking at Dayton, and we can assume a slight increase from there....

Look forward to more from you.

de Tony, W3FLH
73
LU1DZ2007-05-10
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Vy fine job Ulrich DJ8GO.
Many thanks for your development effort.
I send a msg to Pietro to be in the list.

Muchos saludos
Best regards
Alberto U. Silva LU1DZ
WWSA Contest Manager
http://www.geocities.com/lu1dz
http://gacw.no-ip.org
http://ar.groups.yahoo.com/group/wwsatest/
http://wwsa.cabanova.ro/
http://www.geocities.com/eetecar
http://ar.groups.yahoo.com/group/uranito/
Reply to a comment by : WS4Y on 2007-05-10

Very cool. I bet you guys sell out in Dayton. Thanks for the article.
WS4Y2007-05-10
The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Very cool. I bet you guys sell out in Dayton.
Thanks for the article.
K0BG2007-05-10
RE: The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
Well, it's nice to know there are a few folks who think CW is still alive and well, in spite of the recent proficiency eradication.

Alan, KØBG
www.k0bg.com
Reply to a comment by : N2DE on 2007-05-10

No, this is not vaporware - the dozen devices in Dayton are quite real, and so are the firmware and Windows software. Neither Piero nor I have a good idea what the demand for this device may be, so we were a bit reluctant to produce a lot more. But you can drop him a friendly email to be put on his list, like some folks have already done, and you should have one soon after he's back from Dayton.
N2DE2007-05-10
The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
No, this is not vaporware - the dozen devices in Dayton are quite real, and so are the firmware and Windows software. Neither Piero nor I have a good idea what the demand for this device may be, so we were a bit reluctant to produce a lot more. But you can drop him a friendly email to be put on his list, like some folks have already done, and you should have one soon after he's back from Dayton.
LNXAUTHOR2007-05-10
The Metamorphosis of the Butterfly
- where's the link for more info? (or would that be considered advertising?)..

- OK, here's the eham review link:

http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/6670

- but it appears that so far, this product is vaporware for consumers unless you're one of the lucky ones to get one of the prototypes to be offered at Dayton?

<sigh>