"Tom" wrote in
m:

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.

SC

Slow Code wrote:
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.

All your ear needs to decode RF is a pencil and paper?????
I certainly would like to see a demonstration. I could
sell my IC-756PRO and just use pencil and paper.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Slow Code wrote:
"Tom" wrote in
m:

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.

SC

The Army was full of cooks and mp's who washed out of ditty-bopper
school.

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

"Tom" wrote in
om:

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.
--

(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.

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.

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

wrote in news
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 08:40:15 -0400, Al Klein
wrote:

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.
back to lie some more AL no one (except pro coders) is suggesting we
need totest for digital modes
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/



Mark,
If ever there was proof of the dangers of dumbing down ham radio, you're
it.

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.

On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 08:40:15 -0400, Al Klein
spake thusly:

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.

Nice strawman. The pixels form a full complete picture. Beeps are just
beeps. One dimensional. That they form a recognizable pattern does not
make them more. Humans are highly visual creatures. I have listened to
code for years. Being able to make out a few letters does nothing for
me.

It's just plain dull.
--

(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.

"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.