"Al Klein" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 01:46:40 GMT, Opus- wrote:

You also have to believe that a bunch of beeps on the speaker is real
exciting.

Or that a bunch of lit pixels on the screen is.

What a shame that we all have to agree on how to be a ham. Oh, wait -- we
don't.

Effective right now, everything legal that anybody wants to do for their
personal enter-ham-tainment (don't try to look it up) is OK with me.

On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 20:53:59 -0700, "Sal M. Onella"
spake thusly:


"Al Klein" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 01:46:40 GMT, Opus- wrote:

You also have to believe that a bunch of beeps on the speaker is real
exciting.

Or that a bunch of lit pixels on the screen is.

What a shame that we all have to agree on how to be a ham. Oh, wait -- we
don't.

Effective right now, everything legal that anybody wants to do for their
personal enter-ham-tainment (don't try to look it up) is OK with me.

Works for me.
--

(Jim, single dad to Lesleigh [Autistic] 04/20/94)

"What, Me Worry?" A. E. Newman

Please note: All unsolicited e-mail sent to me may, at
my discretion, be posted in this newsgroup verbatim.

Opus- wrote in
:

On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 23:44:47 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly:

"Tom" wrote in
news:gtidne6NO5opTIfYnZ2dnUVZ_qGdnZ2d@insightbb. com:

I am interested in the MFJ 464 and was wondering what you all thought
of
it. I've been wanting to get back into CW this winter and thought
this might help. Is there any other brand reader out there that is
any good? Thanks for your help.


The Human ear.

It doesn't need batteries, can provide reliable copy when band
conditions are bad, or the sender can't send well. All you need is a
pencil and paper for hard copy.

It takes a little work to get good at the Ear method, but no one has
ever has any problems learning it unless they're sick, lame, or Lazy.

You also have to believe that a bunch of beeps on the speaker is real
exciting.


That's why I said if you're sick, lame, and Lazy, then you can't or don't
want to learn it. Heard any DX on your CB lately?


SC

On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 23:22:23 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly:

Opus- wrote in
:

On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 23:44:47 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly:

"Tom" wrote in
news:gtidne6NO5opTIfYnZ2dnUVZ_qGdnZ2d@insightbb .com:

I am interested in the MFJ 464 and was wondering what you all thought
of
it. I've been wanting to get back into CW this winter and thought
this might help. Is there any other brand reader out there that is
any good? Thanks for your help.


The Human ear.

It doesn't need batteries, can provide reliable copy when band
conditions are bad, or the sender can't send well. All you need is a
pencil and paper for hard copy.

It takes a little work to get good at the Ear method, but no one has
ever has any problems learning it unless they're sick, lame, or Lazy.

You also have to believe that a bunch of beeps on the speaker is real
exciting.


That's why I said if you're sick, lame, and Lazy, then you can't or don't
want to learn it. Heard any DX on your CB lately?

Hear lots on my Grundig.
--

(Jim, single dad to Lesleigh [Autistic] 04/20/94)

"What, Me Worry?" A. E. Newman

Please note: All unsolicited e-mail sent to me may, at
my discretion, be posted in this newsgroup verbatim.

Tom wrote:
I am interested in the MFJ 464 and was wondering what you all thought of
it. I've been wanting to get back into CW this winter and thought this
might help. Is there any other brand reader out there that is any good?
Thanks for your help.

There are loads of free softwares that will do that plus all the other
usual modes. No need to waste money on that, unless you have no
computer and sound card. Like the others say, most code readers
are not that great, and there is little difference from a standalone
box,
or just soundcard software. The brain is a much better reader.
I'd use it if you actually want to learn or improve CW skills.
If I were to use the puter, I'd rather work PSK or whatever.. It's
much more robust that using a puter for CW work.
MK