Mark Conrad wrote:

Hmm, I suspect I did not get across my exact meaning,
my fault, sorry about that.

I _meant_ a device that will change the _incoming_
morse code dots and dashes to an artificial voice.


No, I got that. My AEA MM3 could do that, and so could my Pk-232. I still
have the MM3, I traded the PK-232 to someone who had better use for it
when I moved here in 1996.

In other words, change this code at 60 wpm:

_ _ . . . . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _


...into this artificial voice from an audio speaker:

"Best Wishes, Old Man"


...such that a ham newbie who did not even know the
morse code would be able to listen to a CW signal
rattling along at 60 wpm and have that signal
converted to speech that he could understand.

In theory it is possible, given a loud clean
CW signal.

I would hate to be the guy to design such a device,
it would not be a trivial project.

Actually it is quite trivial. There is lots of digital decoding software
for the PC out there and morse code is one of the simplest forms of
digital encoding. Since probably 99% of all high speed code is machine
generated, either by computer or keyer, it's uniform enough to be
easily decoded.

There is basicly 3 levels of code out there, the slow hand code which ranges
from really well done to almost impossible to copy sloppy, the mid range
keyer code and bug code where the individual characters are perfectly spaced,
but the spacing between them varies as the operater has to think between
them and the computer sent buffered code, where all of the thinking is
done before the send button is pushed, so it all comes out perfectly timed
and spaced.

The last two really are trivial to decode compared to any digital mode,
and the first ranges from easy to almost impossible.

A few years ago, it was theorized that one of the highest scoring stations
in a CW contest was exactly what you asked about. A ham who could barely
copy code using a decoding and sending program. It extracted the
callsign from the received code and replied with a signal report of 599
in perfectly sent perfectly spaced machine generated code.

A web search on "morse code decoding programs" found plenty, and
this is probably the cheapest device on the market:

http://www.mfjenterprises.com/Produc...ductid=MFJ-461

73,

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM
New word I coined 12/13/09, "Sub-Wikipedia" adj, describing knowledge or
understanding, as in he has a sub-wikipedia understanding of the situation.
i.e possessing less facts or information than can be found in the Wikipedia.

In article , Geoffrey S.
Mendelson wrote:

I would hate to be the guy to design such a device,
it would not be a trivial project.

Actually it is quite trivial. There is lots of digital decoding software
for the PC out there and morse code is one of the simplest forms of
digital encoding. Since probably 99% of all high speed code is machine
generated, either by computer or keyer, it's uniform enough to be
easily decoded.
A web search on "morse code decoding programs" found plenty, and
this is probably the cheapest device on the market:

http://www.mfjenterprises.com/Produc...ductid=MFJ-461


Great, I will also search the web for others, as you suggested.

I can see I have quite a lot to catch up on. With any luck,
my books should arrive today at my rural post office.

Really looking forward to getting back, only hope my
ancient brain is up to the task.

Most of my neurons have mutated into morons,
my synapses have not snapped in ages. My brain has
shrunk so much that I am afraid to shake my head,
for fear of hearing a rattling noise.

Mark

Mark Conrad wrote:

Really looking forward to getting back, only hope my
ancient brain is up to the task.

Most of my neurons have mutated into morons,
my synapses have not snapped in ages. My brain has
shrunk so much that I am afraid to shake my head,
for fear of hearing a rattling noise.

Search the web for CodeQuick. It's a Morse code course that teaches you
to copy code in the language part of your brain instead of the "beep" part.
This has two advantages, one it is independent of speed, so you don't have to
learn 5,13,20,35,etc, you just learn it once and work up your speed.

The second is that since it works in your language center, it works in
a part of your brain that is still in use and still active.

The disadvantage is it uses "sound alike" phrases to help you learn code
and you need to put enough effort into the practice that you stop using them
automaticly.

I like to say that I have a photographic memory, but I ran out of film
about 10 years ago.

Geoff.


--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM
New word I coined 12/13/09, "Sub-Wikipedia" adj, describing knowledge or
understanding, as in he has a sub-wikipedia understanding of the situation.
i.e possessing less facts or information than can be found in the Wikipedia.

In article , Geoffrey S.
Mendelson wrote:


Search the web for CodeQuick. It's a Morse code course that teaches you
to copy code in the language part of your brain instead of the "beep" part.
This has two advantages, one it is independent of speed, so you don't have to
learn 5,13,20,35,etc, you just learn it once and work up your speed.

One of my heros was a MARS station operator in the army.

He sat leaning back in his spring-back chair listening to what I would
call random static. Somewhere in that static was a 60 wpm CW
station that he was listening to as if it was a language, not just CW.

Best I could muster was 40 wpm, on a fairly strong CW signal.


BTW, my books finally arrived, I jumped right in studying for my
extra class exam'.

I have a plan, I am going to start at the top, then work my way
down to novice level. Great Minds are like that.

It should take me at least a 2 months to reclaim my extra class
license, so I will have plenty of time to decide on what kind
of rig to buy.

Mark