Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9   Go Down

Author Topic: Bad CW  (Read 34846 times)

W7ASA

  • Member
  • Posts: 562
RE: Bad CW
« Reply #60 on: March 28, 2017, 10:08:51 PM »

Example of a strawman argument: "Many here seem to enjoy and in fact revel in sending bad CW"  & etc. Nonsense. Where in these columns of text does it say that?  

"Their skill is obviously far greater than mine." Likely, but irrelevant to the idea that it's a matter of what qualifies as 'close enough' to 1:3 to make it 'good' sending.  

-...-

Al - your thoughts are worth a lot to me, because frankly - I know that you've spent your time in the real world ingesting Morse that was unfit for human consumption, and it's great fuel for conversation :-)  If we lived closer, I know a great place to enjoy a pint or two.


73 de Ray  ..._  ._

« Last Edit: March 28, 2017, 10:29:29 PM by W7ASA »
Logged

G3EDM

  • Member
  • Posts: 1456
RE: Bad CW
« Reply #61 on: March 29, 2017, 05:27:14 AM »

It is surprising how sensitive the human ear/brain combination can be, in terms of picking out small rhythmic irregularities. Of course this is not news to musicians!

Over the past few days I have been practicing my sending, prior to getting on the air for the first time next month. I'm using PCW Fistcheck, which gives you a visual picture of your sending so you can tell how close it comes to the ideal.

Here is what my "Q" looks like, at the best of times:



If you look at the red "ruler" underneath the code, you can see that I am reasonably close to the ideal: 1 unit for the dit, 3 units for the dahs, 1 unit for the gaps (although the last dah is about a half-unit short). But to the ear, it sounds very imperfect. PCW Fistcheck is able to "copy" my Q with no problem (it recognizes it as the right letter) so I'm not doing too badly. Still, hearing my rather approximate code increases my admiration for the best code that I hear on the air.

By far the biggest tentation when sending is to lengthen the dahs, if they appear at the end of characters, words, or sentences. I'm using a straight key (the Ameco K-4, which is a J-38 clone) but I most often hear this "long dah" issue on the air when copying what I believe to be code sent with a bug (the dits are near-uniform but the dahs vary).

As a learner, I appreciate code that is as close to "standard" as possible. But I can see that possibly, a more "human" variant is fine too. In real life I am a typographer and graphic designer. One of the things some of us do when designing fonts is to introduce deliberate imperfections, so that the printed result looks less "computer-generated." This has its limitations (because with digital fonts, the imperfections introduced into a character are identical each time the character is printed) but there is some evidence that it reduces "reader fatigue."

I enjoy copying the ARRL code-practice transmissions, but one is also extremely aware that it is being generated by a machine! The slight imperfections (deliberate or accidental) that you can hear in code sent by even the best human ops is in a way reassuring, since you know that it is human-generated (and using a key, not a keyboard).

Here is my "B" (I am practicing my callsign):



Edited to add: BTW, great thread !

73 de Martin, KB1WSY
« Last Edit: March 29, 2017, 05:46:58 AM by KB1WSY »
Logged

K0UA

  • Member
  • Posts: 9589
RE: Bad CW
« Reply #62 on: March 29, 2017, 06:59:23 AM »

Quote
>>> For me personally, I loathe, but tolerate machine generated Morse, but that is my taste.

For my tastes I prefer machine code! 

Quote
you think that you've heard bad Morse, it's far worse sitting a circuit filled with those who hate their jobs and using bottom of the barrel equipment in rough/tough conditions and YOU ( the receiving Op) are held personally responsible for letter perfect copy - not him. That makes 99.9% of ham sending sound easy on the ears. So yes, it's a hobby - move on.

I've had my fill of this and simply like to hear perfect code.

One other thing I'd like to mention....seldom does one hear "perfect" code from a hand key, bug or even a keyer.  But that's OK and to be expected but in my opinion to deliberately create a "swing" or other stupid crap to sound "cool" is unacceptable!

Go over and listen to 11 meters for a while and listen to the voice equivalent and then what I am trying to say will become a bit more clear.


And again Amen brother.   We all send less than perfect code because we are not machines. But we should strive to send the best code we can.  And again to Revel in sending code with a "swing, or jazz"  just seems stupid to me. Why try to make the code more difficult to copy?  Yes, the 11 meter analogy was a very good one.
Logged
73  James K0UA

K8AXW

  • Posts: 7391
    • HomeURL
RE: Bad CW
« Reply #63 on: March 29, 2017, 08:59:50 AM »

W7ASA, Ray.  Glad you understand where I'm coming from.  I would indeed enjoy meeting you but the "pints", nicht! 

Had too many in Germany and they were taking hold and I couldn't let that happen. I started to spend too much time trying to find my car.

I'm now "dry."

 Dasvedanya
Logged
A Pessimist is Never Disappointed!

N9FB

  • Member
  • Posts: 2702
RE: Bad CW
« Reply #64 on: March 29, 2017, 10:26:34 AM »

to Revel in sending code with a "swing, or jazz"  just seems stupid to me.

equating all variance from sending by a 'perfect' mechanical keyer with slop, is a very crude approach, and it filters out the incredible human capacity for art.    
the equivalent would be to equate all piano (or drum) play not made by a machine as inferior.  
noone with an ear for music would choose a machine over some of the most gifted drummers and pianists in the world.

to lump all swing or jazz into the same category is like lumping all drumers and pianists together.
perhaps hearing you or me on a drum or keyboard would hurt the ears and a machine would be preferable, but are you really going to suggest that is true for all drummers or piano players?

a straight key or a bug or a sideswiper/cootie in the hands of a skilled sender is no different than a musical instrument in the hands of a gifted player.  
please stop using the ridiculously bad piano-player in your family as the premise for why all piano play should be left to machines  ;)
. .  
« Last Edit: March 29, 2017, 10:29:57 AM by N9KX »
Logged
"When you throw dirt, you lose ground."

AC2EU

  • Member
  • Posts: 2793
    • McVey Electronics
RE: Bad CW
« Reply #65 on: March 29, 2017, 11:02:24 AM »

to Revel in sending code with a "swing, or jazz"  just seems stupid to me.

equating all variance from sending by a 'perfect' mechanical keyer with slop, is a very crude approach, and it filters out the incredible human capacity for art.    
the equivalent would be to equate all piano (or drum) play not made by a machine as inferior.  
noone with an ear for music would choose a machine over some of the most gifted drummers and pianists in the world.

to lump all swing or jazz into the same category is like lumping all drumers and pianists together.
perhaps hearing you or me on a drum or keyboard would hurt the ears and a machine would be preferable, but are you really going to suggest that is true for all drummers or piano players?

a straight key or a bug or a sideswiper/cootie in the hands of a skilled sender is no different than a musical instrument in the hands of a gifted player.  
please stop using the ridiculously bad piano-player in your family as the premise for why all piano play should be left to machines  ;)
. .  

I don't think that's what is being said .
Simply stated, a properly "played" bug would not be any different than any other key that is being operated near standards.
It can be done, and that was the intent of the original design.
Any bug that is blatantly obvious as a bug is just bad fisting or someone trying to "be different".
Not all 'differences" are good, IMO.

Seems that bug ops like their Morse "twin speak" . As long as there enough like minded OPs, I guess they will have someone to talk to, but it won't be me! I have enough trouble keeping up with real Morse code, let alone interpreting someone's Slop.

The problem seems to be that bug owners either don't know how to adjust the the thing ,or they THINK they send faster than they do.
Continuing the musical instrument analogy,  it's like a musician who has no ryhtmn and plays 'out of time' or does dot respect the timing of the notes on the sheet.
A competent "player" should hear the discrepancy and get back into cadence.

I know a musician who uses straight key. The OPs on the other end are often surprised when he tells them that it's a straight key, because his fist is very consistent and maintains the the proper ratios -just like music!



N9FB

  • Member
  • Posts: 2702
RE: Bad CW
« Reply #66 on: March 29, 2017, 11:27:32 AM »

Quote from: AC2EU
Simply stated, a properly "played" bug would not be any different than any other key that is being operated near standards.
It can be done, and that was the intent of the original design.
Any bug that is blatantly obvious as a bug is just bad fisting or someone trying to "be different".

being near standards is obviously key to any great play of an instrument -- be it a key or a piano
but it is the variance from mechanical play that makes it music vs noise
bad swing is clearly inferior to machine-generated keying; but skilled subtle swing -- which is what enables one (with an ear for it) to instantly distinguish between a keyer vs a key or a drum machine vs a human drummer -- is superior for those with ears to hear

Quote from: AC2EU

I know a musician who uses straight key. The OPs on the other end are often surprised when he tells them that it's a straight key, because his fist is very consistent and maintains the the proper ratios -just like music!


please distinguish between those who prefer good sending from a bug, cootie, or straight key by a human -- and therefore with some inevitable swing though it may be extremely subtle  -- from the notion that they endorse bad or over-done swing
many it seems have little ear for music.  but if you had them listen to a recording of the above sending you cite, and then the same information sent with a machine -- they could learn to hear and appreciate the difference.

while the instructor rightly points out timing should be precise,  check out the great, subtle swing of this Army fist :) -- 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgT7aJKsek0

Logged
"When you throw dirt, you lose ground."

GW3OQK

  • Member
  • Posts: 469
RE: Bad CW
« Reply #67 on: March 29, 2017, 12:24:28 PM »

AC2EU, I'm a musician. What do you make of my fist in reply #43? I used to be better.

ALL, Here is some "fast" (?) but staccato morse I just recorded on 80m. I deleted the callsigns. I found it quite unpleasant to read when it could have been sent with proper timing. www.v-d-r.net/images/STACATTO.mp3

I wonder how and why they send like that
73, Andrew
Logged

W7ASA

  • Member
  • Posts: 562
RE: Bad CW
« Reply #68 on: March 29, 2017, 12:39:19 PM »

Without measuring this graphically to be certain , by ear it sounds like keyboarding with the char speed too high compared to actual word/phrase throughput.  This means no type-ahead buffer so that the raw " hunt and peck" keyboard produces that spastic, uneven staccato as each char is found. Those bursts of speed/pause - again- indicate hunt and peck typing, but I can't prove it.  

Is it copiable - yes BUT ,it's hideous. As a ham, I'd tune right past it.


Good posting -


73 de Ray ..._  ._
« Last Edit: March 29, 2017, 12:41:40 PM by W7ASA »
Logged

W6MK

  • Posts: 4095
    • HomeURL
RE: Bad CW
« Reply #69 on: March 29, 2017, 12:51:42 PM »

Here is some "fast" (?) but staccato morse I just recorded on 80m...I found it quite unpleasant to read when it could have been sent with proper timing.

This brings up some interesting points.

I agree that the staccato Morse has a very irritating sound. I do not know whether the dit to dah ratio or the weighting is
correct (whatever that is). I don't know whether the RX setup or some other aspect of what has been sent or recorded causes
the harsh, unpleasant sound.

What seems particularly relevant is that if weighting, ratios and spacings are fully adjustable at any sending speed, as they are with a bug, then there may be a range of adjustments that maximize the aesthetic quality of the sound for each particular speed.

In other words that staccato Morse might sound much better with a 1:2 dah to dit ratio, if indeed it is 1:3 or 1:4.

There is also the possibility that quite fast code is inherently unpleasant to listen to because of the necessary shortness of dits. Depending on how quite fast code is generated, as with a bug, contact bounce may contribute to a harsh, unpleasant sound.

Last, I think it relevant that for most of the historical use of Morse Code for practical long-distance communication purposes speeds were largely in the range of 20 to 25 wpm. In this range, or slightly below, the sound can be very sweetly musical to those
with appropriate ears.

I don't know the history of higher-speed telegraphy for practical communication. It seems to me that only a few ops have really had an interest in or capacity for performing well at 30 wpm and upwards. There were speed contests for which the object was not so much one of beauty or enjoyment.
Logged

AC2EU

  • Member
  • Posts: 2793
    • McVey Electronics
RE: Bad CW
« Reply #70 on: March 29, 2017, 01:28:49 PM »

AC2EU, I'm a musician. What do you make of my fist in reply #43? I used to be better.

ALL, Here is some "fast" (?) but staccato morse I just recorded on 80m. I deleted the callsigns. I found it quite unpleasant to read when it could have been sent with proper timing. www.v-d-r.net/images/STACATTO.mp3

I wonder how and why they send like that
73, Andrew


Your You tube video in reply #43 sounds OK to me .

However, the "staccato" is:
1) too fast for me at this point in my cw learning.
2) irritating to listen to
3) very uneven
 

This is one of those fists that take copious amounts of  concentration for me to copy, but I don't want to listen to it anyway.
Time to spin the big knob past that one.


K3STX

  • Member
  • Posts: 1697
RE: Bad CW
« Reply #71 on: March 29, 2017, 02:08:28 PM »

AC2EU, I'm a musician. What do you make of my fist in reply #43? I used to be better.

ALL, Here is some "fast" (?) but staccato morse I just recorded on 80m. I deleted the callsigns. I found it quite unpleasant to read when it could have been sent with proper timing. www.v-d-r.net/images/STACATTO.mp3

I wonder how and why they send like that
73, Andrew


It is a "bit" staccato, but I don't mind the letters. But the dot/dash spacing seems perfect for each letter. As others have mentioned, it seems like keyboard CW without a buffer so individual words are not sent, but instead individual letters with someone hunting and pecking.

paul
Logged

K0UA

  • Member
  • Posts: 9589
RE: Bad CW
« Reply #72 on: March 29, 2017, 02:41:25 PM »

to Revel in sending code with a "swing, or jazz"  just seems stupid to me.

equating all variance from sending by a 'perfect' mechanical keyer with slop, is a very crude approach, and it filters out the incredible human capacity for art.    
the equivalent would be to equate all piano (or drum) play not made by a machine as inferior.  
noone with an ear for music would choose a machine over some of the most gifted drummers and pianists in the world.

to lump all swing or jazz into the same category is like lumping all drumers and pianists together.
perhaps hearing you or me on a drum or keyboard would hurt the ears and a machine would be preferable, but are you really going to suggest that is true for all drummers or piano players?

a straight key or a bug or a sideswiper/cootie in the hands of a skilled sender is no different than a musical instrument in the hands of a gifted player.  
please stop using the ridiculously bad piano-player in your family as the premise for why all piano play should be left to machines  ;)
. .  

I don't think that's what is being said .
Simply stated, a properly "played" bug would not be any different than any other key that is being operated near standards.
It can be done, and that was the intent of the original design.
Any bug that is blatantly obvious as a bug is just bad fisting or someone trying to "be different".
Not all 'differences" are good, IMO.

Seems that bug ops like their Morse "twin speak" . As long as there enough like minded OPs, I guess they will have someone to talk to, but it won't be me! I have enough trouble keeping up with real Morse code, let alone interpreting someone's Slop.

The problem seems to be that bug owners either don't know how to adjust the the thing ,or they THINK they send faster than they do.
Continuing the musical instrument analogy,  it's like a musician who has no ryhtmn and plays 'out of time' or does dot respect the timing of the notes on the sheet.
A competent "player" should hear the discrepancy and get back into cadence.

I know a musician who uses straight key. The OPs on the other end are often surprised when he tells them that it's a straight key, because his fist is very consistent and maintains the the proper ratios -just like music!





You said it far better than I did or could.  But yes That is what I meant.  A properly adjusted bug operated properly sounds great.  I hear lots of bugs that are not adjusted properly.
Logged
73  James K0UA

K8AXW

  • Posts: 7391
    • HomeURL
RE: Bad CW
« Reply #73 on: March 29, 2017, 09:40:04 PM »

QKO:
Quote
Your You tube video in reply #43 sounds OK to me

I did not initially listen to the #43 post link but after reading this I went back and had a listen.....

First, I will compliment you on sending identically on all three keys.  However, even though your speed is well withing my head copy range, I found your fist very difficult to read because you ran all of the characters together.  In other words, you had little if any spacing between the characters and my brain had to do the separating which quite often caused me to miss subsequent characters.

If you would put in the proper character spacing your fist would be a pleasure to copy.

Bottom line:  I would spin the big knob after listening to your fist.  Sorry but honest, IMO.
Logged
A Pessimist is Never Disappointed!

K8AXW

  • Posts: 7391
    • HomeURL
RE: Bad CW
« Reply #74 on: March 29, 2017, 10:51:22 PM »

OQK:  In my haste to get to bed I made a couple errors in my response to you.  One is your call which was error No: 1 and I apologize for that.

The second was I said your characters were run together which really wasn't that bad....but I really meant to say "words".....the spacing between the words wasn't there.  During your "transmissions" I got lost several times trying to form the sentences in my head.  Sorry.  Now off to bed at 01.50h!

Logged
A Pessimist is Never Disappointed!
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9   Go Up