"Arnie Macy" wrote in message
...
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote ...

The technical fact of the matter is that SSB is just about as efficient
as
it gets for voice communications. The baseband (audio frequencies) are
translated to RF and back, with the result that the RF signal is no wider
than required to convey the baseband bandwidth. (unless, of course you're
running things into clipping and causing all sorts of intermod products)
While digital voice has some advantages in some applications (particularly
if one wants to use mixed media, such as VOIP links), even the best
low-rate
codecs require a bandwidth at least as wide as SSB and at those coding
rates
don't provide the same fidelity (speaker recognition, tonal quality, etc.)
due to the coding involved. Yes, SSB is at least 60 years old ... but
Morse
is what? About 3X as old? Its not simply a matter of age ...
__________________________________________________ ________________________

So tell me, Carl -- if SSB is not obsolete (as you have so adequately
explained) then why do you think JJ thinks CW is? I mean it has all the
same attributes as your SSB explanation -- and with less bandwidth use and
lower power requirements. Seems pretty efficient to me.

Arnie -
KT4ST

I'm not saying that CW is totally obsolete ... and I won't presume to speak
for JJ ... I just know that there are much better digital modes available
and
that CW's main purpose these days is as a recreational activity for those
who like it.

I like kyaking, but I don't believe that everyone should be a proficent
kyaker to go into the water.

Carl - wk3c