++++++++++++++++++ See also CW Proficiency +++++++++++++++++++ Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 11:05:16 -0500 (EST) From: Nicholas Garner To: Jeff Stout Cc: Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Learning CW I used Code Quick and loved it. It makes you look somewhat ridiculous, waving your hands in the air and drawing imaginary characters on tables but it works great. The system associates a character with a phrase, for example, D -.., would be "Dog did it". I tried the ARRL tapes and would find my mind wandering while listening to letters repeatedly. It is somewhat expensive but I would say that it is worth it. The system promises 20 wpm in 30 days with 12 days dedicated to getting you to 5 wpm. I started 12 days before a local General upgrade exam and hit 5 wpm the day of the exam. My K2 came in the mail the day before the test and I opened the package after I passed. The next wednesday, 4 days later, I made my first contact. I love this rig. 73 and hope this helps, Nick KG4KFY On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Jeff Stout wrote: > > My New Year's Resolution: > > After having been subscribed to the list almost since it's inception, I finally have the time and inclination to upgrade from TECH to GENERAL and maybe even EXTRA! I have been reading and learning about the great Elecraft products, and I intend to purchase and build one this year. However, I'm using my upgrade in license class as my incentive, and the K1 as my reward... > > Knowing the reponse from the list, I'll probably get about 25 different avenues to pursue, but I can narrow down which is best for me...so here goes: Is there a good/better/best/preferred/proven way to learn CW accurately and quickly? Tapes? CD? Online Study Practice Sessions? Or even a local (to DFW) class or tutor? Also, is a Code practice oscillator/generator worth purchasing? And should I practice sending and receiving to pass the test...does sending help receiving? Obviously I need to learn both, but what is most important to learn first? I have always heard it is assumed you can probably send accurately if you can receive reliably. -- snip -- +++++++++++++++++++ Date: 20 Feb 2002 08:16:56 -0800 From: "Jim and Kate" To: "'Jeff Stout'" , " " Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Learning CW Hi Jeff: You're correct. You will receive zillions of answers to your query about learning CW. I think, as do many, that CW is a new language. You learn a language through usage. Read the mail on CW QSO's that is pushing your personal envelope just a bit and, for heaven's sake, be playful about learning. I'm 72 years old. I copy most CW down by hand but, finally, I'm beginning to enjoy it. It is a learned skill. Sure, practice sending, by all means. It'll help. The MFJ Morse Code Tutor is a good method too if you can afford it. Exposure and go easy on yourself is my suggestion. But, as I say, there are a zillion more ideas on this reflector. 73 and God speed, Jim K7JIH #1302 K2 ++++++++++++++++++ From: "Alva Anderson W5VCJ" To: Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Learning CW Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 10:20:47 -0600 It would be difficult to say there is a "right" or "preferred" way, because everyone learns in their own way. I also heard the call, and tried several methods. Here is what has worked for me. You need to learn the basic characters. There are several programs to help you do this, two stand out as best: Code Master V (www.morsex.com) and NuMorse (you'll have to use www.google.com or something to find this one). CM-V is runs under DOS or Windows, but runs in a "DOS box" under windows. NuMorse is Windows based and can use your sound card. I never could get CM-V to use it, but that was probably due to my computer config, not a problem with CM-V. As a plus, CM-V guarantees that you will go from 0-20 WPM in 90 days or your money back, and all you need is 15-20 per day. Something I found VERY helpful is the MFJ-418, since I could take it to work and listen over lunch. It is very versatile, and one of the best tools you can have for learning/brushing up/increasing your code speed....to a point. Here is the caveat I found to all these methods: They are not the "real thing". What I mean be this is that they send perfect code (which, of course, you want to learn with) -- and there is no background noise, etc. After learning the code, I started listening to W1AW (see QST magazine for times), and found that I could hardly read the code the first few times. This was due to fading, background noise, etc. IOW, "the real world"...almost. As you listen around the bands, you suddenly realize that some code that is sent is pretty much unreadable; the characters are not even, the inter-character and inter-word timing is atrocious, etc. But, that is the real world, and one we have to work with, so try spending as much time listening to actual conversations as possible. Finally, don't do what I did. I got to a point where I could consistently read 20 WPM, sometimes a bit faster, but I had never learned to SEND. This was a BIG mistake on several levels. First, when I finally started practicing the sending part, I realized that it is the "other half" of the equation. It is like learning to listen without learning to speak: You don't really know the language until you converse, and you cannot converse unless you can send and receive. So, once you get to 5 WPM -- which you will find out is painfully slow -- start practicing the sending. When you can send with any confidence at all, get on the air and talk to people! I did not do this, and it has set me back 3 or 4 times. A final note: learning the code was painful for me. They say that it is easy if you have musical ability, so I must have none. Whatever you do, do not become discouraged, and do not buy a "short cut" program that guarantees you will pass the CW test in 12 days. The gimmicks used will get you there, but if you want to USE the code, they will haunt you like a bad reputation! I am STILL trying to get over the gimmicks used for the letters Z, L, and F, and it really hurts your enjoyment of the code. Andy W5VCJ ++++++++++++++++++ Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 11:32:56 -0500 From: "David A. Belsley" To: Nicholas Garner , Jeff Stout Cc: Elecraft at mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Learning CW I was going to stay out of this one -- I've seen this thread come around=20 here and there for the last 50 years. But I felt it important to add a=20 strong negative reaction to any method that "associates a character with a=20 phrase, for example, D -.., "Dog did it." Such methods may indeed produce=20 quick returns to getting to 5 wpm. But they become a real liability when=20 trying to pick the speed up. The only thing you should be associating -..=20 with is the letter D! And it should become a direct association. Anything = else adds another step in the process -.. -> phrase -> letter D, and has=20 got to slow things up. For the same reason, you should not count dashes or = dots, as some are prone to do, particularly with numbers. Let the pattern=20 become the character in your mind -- a direct association. Also, start early learning to copy in your head. This is one of those=20 elements that is essential for fast copy, and it is one that is learned=20 only with practice. But it really comes fairly quickly if you work at it.=20 Unfortunately, you also have to learn to copy on paper to pass the exam. best wishes, dave belsley ++++++++++++++++++++ Reply-To: "WA5PB" From: "WA5PB" To: "Jeff Stout" , Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Learning CW Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 10:34:58 -0600 Jeff, Since you are going to reward yourself with the purchase of a K1, please don't study in a way to just "pass the test". You might as well really learn the code on a usefull basis. I urge you to check out the links below. You will not regret it. :-) Seriously entertain the thought of purchasing the MFJ 418 Code Tutor, also. 73, WA5PB, Bill Allen K2#1068 Look at this link first: http://www.sdc.org/~finley/finley.morse.html Now go to this one. FREE BOOK! The following is a must have for everyone who loves CW. http://www.qsl.net/n9bor/n0hff.htm The Art & Skill of Radio Telegraphy 3rd Edition A Manual For Learning, Using, Mastering And Enjoying The International Morse Code As A Means Of Communication William G. Pierpont N0HFF "What Hath God Wrought!" "For those who are interested in telegraphy, for those who would like to learn it, for those who love it, and for those who want to improve their skills in it." Below you will see various options for downloading this book. Last edit: October 27, 2001 http://www.qsl.net/n9bor/n0hff.htm +++++++++++++++++++ Reply-To: From: "Ron D' Eau Claire" To: Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Learning CW Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 08:44:00 -0800 Jeff Stout/W5JFS wrote: > Obviously I need to learn both, but what is most > important to learn first? I have always heard it is assumed you > can probably send accurately if you can receive reliably. Congratulations on making the decision, Jeff. Yes, you will no doubt get a lot of answers. I learned CW over 50 years ago, so I will leave the suggestions about the latest and best methods for learning up to those who have done it more recently. I have four observations that may help you though: First and most importantly, the line I quoted from your message above. No! You will not automatically know how to send. At least not if you are using a manual key. In listening on the air and talking with new ops today, one of the biggest frustrations is a brand new license and no ability to send. Sure, you must know the code in order to send, but sending requires trained hand/arm muscles too. It's really too bad that we no longer require passing a sending test. I suspect the requirement was dropped because it is not practical for VEC's to do that, not because it is an unessential requirement. When I took my Commercial Radiotelegraph license test in front of an FCC examiner, probably 1/3 of those who failed the code test failed the sending part, not the receiving. You are right to focus on passing the test. But understand that you will need to learn to send at some point unless you plan to limit yourself to using a keyboard. And check your sending by recording it, then listening to yourself the next day and see if still like your "fist". Secondly is the motto of the FISTS organization: "Accuracy before Speed". It's amazing how many ops will talk on reflectors about sending above 30 wpm all the time, but as both a commercial and Ham licensee, I've probably not had more than two dozen contacts at over 30 wpm in 50 years, and most of those on commercial circuits. I'm sure that if you develop a love for speed and only look for high speed ops to chat with, you can spend most of your time at those rates. But all you need to enjoy the Ham bands is a good smooth 10 to 15 wpm. If you hang out with faster ops, your speed will naturally increase. Third, as you learn to copy, be sure you learn using pencil and paper for the test! I have a buddy who was preparing for his CW tests and, shortly before the big day, he realized that he had learned to copy CW using his computer! He absolutely could NOT copy using a pencil on paper. He made it -- with a lot of practice and sweating. To pass the test, be sure you learn to copy in the sort of manner you will be required to do so at the test. Finally, and here I'm about to spear a "Sacred Cow" among modern Hams, I'm not all that enamored of the "Farnsworth" system in which characters are sent at one speed but the spaces between the characters are sent at a slower speed. That's like playing music but opening up the interval every three or four notes. Can you imagine listening to the "William Tell Overture" going "Tiddy-bum.......................Tiddy bum.....................Tiddy bum..........Bum.................Bum"? To this OT, it's like fingernails on a blackboard. And few, if any, ops on the air will do that. Indeed, many of those ops who learned to receive using the Farnsworth system have little or no ability to insert the proper spaces in their sending. So they often soundlikethisontheairanyway. In all fairness, they never learned to send (see point 1 above). But it makes it hard on you trying to enjoy a QSO. Unless you get used to copying code at the CORRECT spacing from at least 8 to 10 WPM up to 15 to 20 WPM, you will find yourself struggling with many signals on the air. If your local VEC is using Farnsworth, by all means learn it and pass the test. Just be aware that you will have a period of adjustment learning to hear "real" CW out there. I have actually spent considerable time practicing Farnsworth spacing to help new ops copy my fist. It's tough, like learning to play music at the "wrong" tempo. And with that I'll admit to a lie and offer a fifth and final observation: Practice. After 50 years I still practice! I still make a tape and play it back later from time to time. I still like to take out a page of the phone book, sit down and send the whole page to see if I can do it all without a single mistake while watching my timing and spacing to see where I can improve. I happen to enjoy using a manual semi-automatic key (a.k.a. "Bug"). After 20 years on keyers and paddles I pulled out my old Bugs again and had to re-learn them. So they are a bit demanding if I want to send really clean CW. But it doesn't matter what you are using unless it's a keyboard: practice from time to time no matter whether you've been on the air a week or half a century. Good luck. I'll be waiting to work you on CW one day! Ron AC7AC K2 # 1289 ++++++++++++++++++ Reply-To: "bob baxter" From: "bob baxter" To: Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Learning CW Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 09:50:29 -0700 Is there a good/better/best/preferred/proven way to learn CW accurately and quickly? Tapes? CD? Online Study Practice Sessions? A lot of folks swear by the Koch method. G4FON has a freeware trainer on his website, however I don't have the url anymore. You can email him at g4fon at qsl.net to get his web url. If you want to get more info go to http://www.sdc.org/~finley/finley.morse.html The Koch method philosophy is to start with a few letters at the speed you want to end up with and progress a few letters at a time. Bob Baxter AA7EQ Bisbee, Az. +++++++++++++++++ Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 12:01:45 -0500 (EST) From: baltimoremd at baltimoremd.com To: "Ron D' Eau Claire" Cc: Elecraft at mailman.qth.net Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Learning CW On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Ron D' Eau Claire wrote: > Finally, and here I'm about to spear a "Sacred Cow" among modern Hams, I'm > not all that enamored of the "Farnsworth" system in which characters are > > To this OT, it's like fingernails on a blackboard. And few, if any, ops on > the air will do that. It seems a 1000 years ago(actually 40) when I learned the code...I had no tapes, no elmers, just a battered old Boy Scout Merit badge book. But, I did have a receiver...and I did my darnest to copy those weird sounds. As I listened, I realized that some of them sounded nice....there was a certain rythmn that made it EASY to copy. Mind you, I knew nothing of the proper spacing, character speed and all the good technical stuff, but as someone who played percussion instruments, I had a sense of what sounded good and what sounds appeared to "work" with others. So, as I started sending using the same spacing that I heard from the "good" signals...and, while it's no longer true, people complimented me on my fist. Sorry for the long memory...but if I were to learn the code again...I'd try to find pleasent sounding signals... Thom baltimoremd at baltimoremd.com Thom LaCosta K3HRN Webmaster http://www.baltimoremd.com/ Baltimore's Home Page http://www.baltimorehon.com/ Home of the Baltimore Lexicon http://www.zerobeat.net Home of The QRP Web Ring and Drake Mail List Pages +++++++++++++++++++ Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 11:58:30 -0600 From: "George, W5YR" To: baltimoremd at baltimoremd.com Cc: Ron D' Eau Claire , Elecraft at mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Learning CW Thom, we share a similar background in getting started on CW. The first thing I did was to build a code practice oscillator like my Elmer (W5QN SK) had and buy a good straight key: a Johnson Speed-X. I then taught myself the code, to a large measure, by sending the characters over and over until they sounded "right." Of course, I was influenced by what I heard when Bill was working his rig on 10 CW (this was 1945!). When I was able, I bought a little Hallicrafter's S-20R receiver and began to copy W1AW and to send along with them with the QST article before me that they were using for text. Bottom line: my code education was based as much on sending as on receiving. It took me about a year to prepare for the 13 wpm Class B exam, but I passed it and immediately got on 20 CW with "the big boys." After a few weeks with the Speed-X, I acquired an old Vibroplex bug and taught myself how to use it - Bill had a brand neww Original Deluxe and could make it sound like a tape machine! In a matter of a few months, I was in there on 20 working at 25-30 wpm and thinking nothing about it. In all this, while there was no overt effort to use extra spacing between characters, I did unconsciously emulate the Farnsworth approach without realizing it. But I had no problem copying "regular" code from W1AW and on the FCC code tape for the test. Like you, once I had a fist like a tape machine - used to give Novice code tests and taught code for the Air Force for a couple of years, most of it using a straight key for teaching and then tapes for student practice. But, those days are gone forever . . . I can still do pretty good with the paddles and keyer, but I am sure that the computer keyboard will claim my efforts eventually as the arthritis progresses! <:} 72/73/oo, George W5YR - the Yellow Rose of Texas Fairview, TX 30 mi NE of Dallas in Collin county EM13qe Amateur Radio W5YR, in the 56th year and it just keeps getting better! QRP-L 1373 NETXQRP 6 SOC 262 COG 8 FPQRP 404 TEN-X 11771 Icom IC-756PRO #02121 Kachina #91900556 IC-765 #02437 ++++++++++++++++ Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 13:45:54 -0500 (EST) From: kc4kgu at ENTERZONE.NET To: Jeff Stout Cc: Elecraft at mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Learning CW On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Jeff Stout wrote: > Knowing the reponse from the list, I'll probably get about 25 > different avenues to pursue, but I can narrow down which is best for > me...so here goes: -- snip -- Jeff, I am not sure of this was in QST or not but, I recall receiving an email from ARRL with regards to different "learning styles" and the association of those styles with the success of individuals learning the code. I am one of the "visual" learners meaning, I tend to make a mental image of things to learn them. As result, my learning code involved using a straight key and oscillator. When I copy code now, I can see my own hand on the key sending the code. It may sound strange but, that's how it works for me at least and after seeing the ARRL article, at least I know I'm not alone. There is one benefit to this. I got to learn how to send while I was learning how to copy. As for which is the most important to learn, from a licensing standpoint, copying the code is the most important. There is no sending requirement. Once you get your new ticket, actually HAVING the ticket and wanting to engage in CW QSOs will probably drive you to get your sending skills on par with your copy skills. > I should also add that I'd not be opposed to learning at a higher > speed than 5 WPM, as I'm sure there are many more QSO's available to > someone with better skills. Is it better to learn at 5, then enhance > your speed.....or just learn it at say 13 WPM? I personally find it hard to work at 5 WPM. I'm not trying to be stuck up here. I just tend to get ahead of the sender while I'm copying. If you find it easier to work at 13 WPM, go for it. You won't be alone. The CW exam is not that long and you'll have no problems "slowing down" to copy 5 WPM if you work and learn at 13 WPM. Good Luck! 73 de John KC4KGU +++++++++++++++++++ Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 13:47:29 -0500 To: "WA5PB" , "Jeff Stout" , From: Hank Kohl K8DD Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Learning CW At 2/20/02 10:34 AM -0600, WA5PB wrote: >Now go to this one. FREE BOOK! >The following is a must have for everyone who loves CW. >http://www.qsl.net/n9bor/n0hff.htm Just spent the past two hours reading excerpts of this book. I believe it truly "is a must have for everyone who loves CW" .... or wants to really learn CW. It is motivating me to start working on my "code hump" .... thought I had maxed out as xx wpm! 73 Hank K8DD */ Hank Kohl K8DD k8dd at arrl.net */ ARRL TS http://www.qsl.net/k8dd */ MI-QRP - Vice Pres. QRP-ARCI - Director */ If God intended you to be on single sideband, he would have given you only one nostril. - Steve, K2PTS +++++++++++++++++ Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Learning CW - oscillator Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 15:19:08 -0500 From: "Michael Groeschner" To: Hi Jeff, I have seen many posts addressing your question about learning CW. I did not see anyone answer your question about purchasing an oscillator. I think that you should have a code practice oscillator but that you should build your own. It will save you lots of $$$$ and it is really easy. Here is a link with a diagram of my oscillator. It does also have an attenuator so it can be hooked into a mic jack of a 2 meter rig for sending modulated cw. We are getting a group of hams in our club that want to learn the code and we are setting up a net on 2 meter fm. This is something that a tech can do for live practice without breaking any rules(as far as I know). The second link is to our club web site. You may find other interesting things on this site. If you don't want to hook into a 2 meter rig, just leave off the attenuator circuit(everything hooked into the white line except the speaker). Best of luck learning the code and I am sure you will have no trouble with the upgrade. 73 Mike KB1DXC http://www.qsl.net/wb1grb/osc.html Oscillator page http://ctsara.homestead.com/ Stamford Amateur Radio Association page +++++++++++++++++++ Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Learning CW Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 16:15:51 -0500 To: "Jeff Stout" , From: Bill Coleman On 2/20/02 10:48 AM, Jeff Stout at w5jfs at yahoo.com wrote: >I finally have the time and inclination to upgrade from TECH to GENERAL and >maybe even EXTRA! These days, so long as you are good at taking tests, such an upgrade is easily accomplished with a bit of study. >Is there a good/better/best/preferred/proven way to learn CW >accurately and quickly? Tapes? CD? Online Study Practice Sessions? Depends. What's your goal for the CW? Are you just trying to learn 5 wpm so you can pass the test, and then hereafter forget CW altogether, or are you intending to use CW as a mode of communication? Frankly, 5 wpm is next to worthless as a mode of communication. It's darned slow. If you tune the bands, you'll find that most CW is somewhere around 15-20 wpm. If you want to use CW as a mode of communications, then you should target a speed of at least 15 wpm. That said -- there are many ways of learning CW. Tapes and CDs are pretty rare these days. Your best bet is probably to find a computer code practice program. There are many of these available. >And should I practice sending and >receiving to pass the test...does sending help receiving? Unfortunately, no, sending doesn't really help receiving, although it make help you to learn the letters by doing a little sending at first. Many CW beginners can send CW a lot faster than they can receive. I suggest you hold the sending practice off until after you've passed the test -- but before you actually get on the air with any CW! >Based on my current schedule and obligations, I could safely dedicate >about 1 hour a day to practice, maybe split between 1/2 hour in the >morning and 1/2 hour at night... Practice is the key. Daily practice of 30 minutes or so -- take it in groups of 5 minutes each -- should be sufficient to catapult you to 5 wpm in a couple of weeks, at most. >Is it better to learn at 5, then enhance your >speed.....or just learn it at say 13 WPM? No, start right out at 13-20 wpm. That way, you'll learn the code by the sound, not the patterns. Seems to me there's a program around now that teachs via the Koch method (which is a 60-year old German technique). Might be worth looking into. Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: aa4lr at arrl.net Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!" -- Wilbur Wright, 1901 +++++++++++++++ From: "Rod N0RC" To: "Elecraft-list" Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 14:45:39 -0700 Subject: [Elecraft] Learning Code Folks, I followed the thread, and want to stress there are 3 aspects of learning code: 1) Reception Most of the information presented so far is about reception. All of it is good advice. Take some time to try the different methods and find what works best for you, we all learn differently. But let me stress this: include in your "lesson plan" on-air reception. Code over a shortwave radio circuit sounds much different than "clean-machine" code. 2) Transmission Some have mentioned it, practice sending. Don't under-estimate the need for this! Code sent with proper element timing, character and word spacing, is a pure joy to listen to. AND AMAZINGLY EASY to copy!!! The most difficult code to copy is what I call run on elements: A string of Morse elements [dot and dashes] with almost no space between them. It'sliketryingtoreadasentencelikethisonewithoutwhitespacesbetweenthewo rds! 3) USAGE! I don't think this was mentioned, it almost never is. Learn the abbreviations, prosigns, message format conventions...etc. Some of the best information concerning this aspect of Morse can be found at: http://www.alltel.net/~johnshan/cw_ss_proc.html You see Morse is just like any other language, you have to learn how to read, write and USE it correctly. To do that is in the underlying advice given by all: practice, practice, practice. GL 73, Rod N0RC Ft Collins, CO ++++++++++++++++ To: Cc: Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Learning CW Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 22:42:07 -0000 >Is there a good/better/best/preferred/proven way to learn CW >accurately and quickly? Tapes? CD? Online Study Practice Sessions? While it's more than 30 years since I had the doubtful pleasure of sitting at a bench for at least an hour per day having to learn Morse, I suspect the methods haven't changed all that much. The main problem is one of motivation, folks get stuck at two or three stages and find progress very difficult. So probably attending a class will help with needing to keep up with the others. Those personal Morse tutor machines, that can be used almost anywhere, are probably worth a try too. 73's Dave, G4AON K2 #189 +++++++++++++++++ Reply-To: From: "Ron D' Eau Claire" To: Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Learning CW Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 20:22:16 -0800 Jerry, K7YVZ, asked: > I am looking for tips to learn how to copy in ones head. I am to the point > that my hand will not keep up, not to say I get tired of having piles of > paper laying around.(I already know answer: practice practice) Yes... and it doesn't seem to me that it need to take any major change in what you are doing... just a sort of "weaning" process from the paper. When I learned CW it was all about perfect copy on paper, either using a pencil or a Mill (special typewriter with all cap keys). That's the way we learned for Ham licenses and that's what was required in commercial work. The ability to "copy in one's head" was not even "on the map". If it wasn't on paper, it didn't exist. Still, the ability developed as, like you, I got tired of writing everything down. First, one had to learn to "copy behind". It was not possible to copy letter-by-letter reliably. One had to hear the words, then let the fingers make the word on paper. So there was an ability developed of storing the English translation of the CW briefly in the mind before it went to paper. Next with the "standard" QSO format I'd quit writing "NAME HR IS DON DON DON" and started just waiting for the name and writing that down. That made it easier at higher speeds. The whole sentence only required that I write "DON". Pretty soon I discovered that I didn't need to write the name down - I could remember it! Wild concept . My notes now contain a time, call, name, QTH and a few other tidbits jotted down during a QSO (I do not use a computer logging program, which would obviate even those sparse notes) along with one or two words about things I want to comment on. Yeah, I write names down again after referring to "Fred" as "George" a few times. But I'm taking notes, not "copying on paper". My point is that it seemed a very natural process, starting with not writing down every single word and pretty soon not needing to write down almost anything. It was not a process of re-learning to copy code... just a natural progression beginning with not writing down EVERY letter or word. Ron AC7AC K2 # 1289 ++++++++++++++++ From: bejones at hursley.ibm.com To: elecraft at mailman.qth.net Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 17:32:51 -0000 Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Learning Code There is a new PC based tutor using the Koch method at www.g4fon.co.uk. Also I have built a handheld LCD Koch tutor (pretty much like the MFJ CW tutor only using the Koch approach) at www.ivarc.org.uk and follow the projects link. The ivarc site is new and works well with IE6, not too bad with Netscape and Opera 6 and breaks a bit with older browsers but you should be able to get to the download page. Also some of the graphics (ie special event page) are slow but you shouldn't have a problem following the Projects link. You will need to blow a PIC 16F84 but that's pretty simple and I'll add some details of how shortly (but searching 'PIC microcontrollers beginner' should throw up some links - I recommend looking at the Ludipipo programmer). Finally take a look at www.k1el.com and the k10+ keyer. This is a keyer (yes I know the K2 and K1 have one!) but it also has a learn code option - as well as sending it will also send and expect a response from a paddle. It sends one char - if you paddle it right it then sends 2 chars and so on. Sounds ideal to learn paddles and for code copying in the head. Mine arrived in the mail yesterday so I haven't tried it yet but for less than $10 it's worth a try. Brian G0UKB Brian E Jones Pervasive Computing Specialist IBM HURSLEY ++++++++++++++++++++ Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 12:47:25 -0600 To: "Jerry Summerall" , elecraft at mailman.qth.net From: Tom Hammond =?iso-8859-1?Q?N=D8SS?= Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Learning CW Jerry: >I am looking for tips to learn how to copy in ones head. I am to the point >that my hand will not keep up, not to say I get tired of having piles of >paper laying around.(I already know answer: practice practice) Well... unfortunately, you DO know the answer... darn it... For most ops, 'head copy' comes as a natural result of not being able to copy fast enough on paper... usually somewhere about 18-23 WPM... When you copy to paper, do you copy letter-for-letter, as it's sent? If so, try copying 1-2 letters BEHIND what's being sent. As you become more comfortable with this technique, stretch it out to copying 3-5 letters behind. Once you get to copying 3-5 letters behind, you have then trained your head to retain what you're hearing, to the point that you will begin to hear WORDS, even short phrases, rather than merely letters. Once you get to this oint, you'll find that it's a lot easier to copy 'in your head'. Now, start writing down only the important points of the QSO... and work the guys who FORCE you to copy a bit faster than you can copy 100%... this will require that you copy in your head and retain what you copy. But untimately, the answer is PRACTICE... PRACTICE... PRACTICE... as you already know. Once you do get 'into' head-copy, you may find that your copying speed increases much more quickly than you ever thought it could... at least up to 30-35 WPM, at which point, you may have to work a bit more to cause it to increase. 73, Tom N0SS ++++++++++++++++++++ Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 06:53:34 -0700 From: "Rod N0RC" To: "Low Power Amateur Radio Discussion" , "cqc-l" Subject: [122220] Good CW Procedure Article on ARRLWeb Message-ID: <000501c1ccf1$f7d28c40$6401a8c0 at greyrock> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Something good to read, print out, and re-read now and again. http://www.arrl.org/news/features/2002/03/17/1/?nc=1 73, Rod N0RC Ft Collins, CO ++++++++++++++++++++ Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 21:28:37 -0700 From: zeekzilch at juno.com To: CQCLIST at yahoogroups.com, qrp-l at Lehigh.EDU Subject: [122394] Good CW Procedure Article on ARRLWeb Rod, Thanks for the heads-up, it was a great CW article and I wrote the author to tell him so. I also appreciated that he mentioned the growing habit of never giving the other station's call sign. Even though it's not required by the FCC, it would be nice, especially in difficult conditions, if the other station would simply answer my CQ with something like; "WB0JNR DE VQ9GB K" 72s Roger http://www.rogerwendell.com/morsecode.html On Sat, 16 Mar 2002 06:53:34 -0700 "Rod N0RC" writes: > Something good to read, print out, and re-read now and again. > > http://www.arrl.org/news/features/2002/03/17/1/?nc=1 > > > 73, Rod N0RC > Ft Collins, CO ++++++++++++++++++ Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 10:52:59 -0500 From: Greg Weinfurtner To: qrp-l at Lehigh.EDU Subject: [123902] neat morse page Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Hi all, Check out the page: http://www.soton.ac.uk/~scp93ch/morse/index.html It has a java morse code thingy that will allow you to play morse code characters of what ever you type in to a box. I found it from the PBS page on the special "Vanished" that was on last night. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/vanished/stendec.html Interesting story.. 72 de NS8O ++++++++++++++++++ Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 23:52:04 +0100 From: Chuck Adams To: qrp-l at lehigh.edu Subject: [123956] Some Notes of Thumps Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020404232849.009e5910 at mail.earthlink.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Gang, Dave Fifield's note on thumps brings up the topic. First of all let me say again, dit time = 1200mS / WPM speed I got the usual nasty-gram from the usual suspect that I needed to proof read my own posting as there was no account for weighting in the timing spec. Else where in the posting I covered the issue and person was illiterate and did not read it was my guess. :-) As I said in the posting that the definition of the timing does not allow for weighting and the only reason for weighting is for giving transmitters a chance to output the correct 1:1:3 ratios ( dit:space:dah ). Some people I know use a weight change to help the human mind decode a little bit easier as the higher speeds, but all attempts a record speeds must be done with the 1:1:3 ratio with no exceptions to the rule. Been there - done that. In generation of Morse by means of a computer and other electronic means you can not generate a square shaped tone on the leading and trailing edge or you will hear the dreaded 'thump'. So you have to shape the wave form. This does several things such as narrow the bandwidth just a little and reduces the thump. The ARRL recommends that you have a rise time of 5mS and a fall time of 5mS also. This is what they use in their tapes and CDs and they use a famous filter done by Ed Hare, W1RFI, of the ARRL HQ staff. I use the same timing for my CDs and it seems to be a fair value. But one thing that I have noticed is that all headphones are not created equal. Some thump with the standard wave form and some do not. Now I do not want to go and make up a table of all the headphones in the world and show which ones I hear a thump in and which ones do not and heck, the same brand and model of a headphone from the same manufacturer may vary in response. I don't know. All that I can tell you is that you must experiment in this area. Even the band pass of the audio circuits in the player may effect the results. So the phrase "your mileage may vary" certainly applies to this area. Sony no longer makes it, but they had a tiny cassette player called the WM-10 that is just slightly larger than the cassette. I still have mine but rarely use it anymore as we all have migrated to the CD-player and now the MP3 format I'm sure to get the 10 or more hours of play on a single CD that we now pay less than $0.25 for in large quantities. The WM-10 headphones that came with te player are my favorite. They have a single stainless steel band about 4mm wide with the two small headphones that slide up and down for head size. They are lightweight and they have the response that does not produce the thump. So, you might be able to reduce the famous 38Special thump with a change in headphones, if you use them. Speakers, which I don't use, may also be subject to the same response problem. Another area in which I have wasted some time doing research to find the right combination that works for me. FYI, Chuck Adams, K7QO CP-60 k7qo at earthlink.net http://www.qsl.net/k7qo ++++++++++++++++++