"John Smith" wrote in message
...
... actually, the only thing I have found that I can't allow for is
someone's sloppy key (you must decide what range of microseconds is a dit,
and what is the dah-- I have been kicking around the idea of a piece of
code to "sample" the senders "style" and automatically adjust--but that is
for tomorrow--and would be great if the code could automatically duplicate
his "sloppy style" and feed it back to him grin) but then--sloppy key
is no easier to copy with ear then by reader...

John


Depends on how you define easier. The ear can copy code so sloppy that no
computer/soundcard/software would ever decipher it.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
I don't think there is a ham alive which can beat my keyboard, hooked to
a "electronic key" and sending morse, nor my sound card doubling as a
"code reader" and producing text on screen from cw...
You mean to tell me people actually use "real keys" still--gawd, I
thought all those sk tongue-in-cheek

Warmest regards,
John

When conditions are poor, even some one as poor at morse code as I am can
beat a "code reader" sound card/computer.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

I am betting just the opposite, and I bet the code reader can copy at a
speed long after the human reader is all done...

one advantage, in microseconds the code reader can guess at the
likelihood of what character the dot/dash sequence is in logical
relation to forward and reverse characters (whenever there is a slight
doubt)... the human reader would just be sitting there losing
characters...

John

"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
... actually, the only thing I have found that I can't allow for is
someone's sloppy key (you must decide what range of microseconds is a
dit, and what is the dah-- I have been kicking around the idea of a
piece of code to "sample" the senders "style" and automatically
adjust--but that is for tomorrow--and would be great if the code
could automatically duplicate his "sloppy style" and feed it back to
him grin) but then--sloppy key is no easier to copy with ear then
by reader...

John


Depends on how you define easier. The ear can copy code so sloppy
that no computer/soundcard/software would ever decipher it.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
I don't think there is a ham alive which can beat my keyboard,
hooked to a "electronic key" and sending morse, nor my sound card
doubling as a "code reader" and producing text on screen from cw...
You mean to tell me people actually use "real keys" still--gawd, I
thought all those sk tongue-in-cheek

Warmest regards,
John

When conditions are poor, even some one as poor at morse code as I
am can beat a "code reader" sound card/computer.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
I am betting just the opposite, and I bet the code reader can copy at a
speed long after the human reader is all done...


Speed is a different issue than sloppy sending.

one advantage, in microseconds the code reader can guess at the likelihood
of what character the dot/dash sequence is in logical relation to forward
and reverse characters (whenever there is a slight doubt)... the human
reader would just be sitting there losing characters...

No the human brain does the same type of "fill" once they get past the point
of having to copy every single letter manually. Even if they do have to
copy manually as I do, it's easy to fill in the missing letters most of the
time. Of course you have to train yourself not to dwell on what was missed,
a common beginner problem.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

.... so, we can throw away the scientific calculators and go back to
slide rules--I think not... a code reader is that kind of difference...
of course, I am the type of guy would wouldn't go back to regen
receivers either...

John

"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
I am betting just the opposite, and I bet the code reader can copy at
a speed long after the human reader is all done...


Speed is a different issue than sloppy sending.

one advantage, in microseconds the code reader can guess at the
likelihood of what character the dot/dash sequence is in logical
relation to forward and reverse characters (whenever there is a
slight doubt)... the human reader would just be sitting there losing
characters...

No the human brain does the same type of "fill" once they get past the
point of having to copy every single letter manually. Even if they do
have to copy manually as I do, it's easy to fill in the missing
letters most of the time. Of course you have to train yourself not to
dwell on what was missed, a common beginner problem.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
... so, we can throw away the scientific calculators and go back to slide
rules--I think not... a code reader is that kind of difference... of
course, I am the type of guy would wouldn't go back to regen receivers
either...

John


Your comparison falls down. It is more like retaining the ability to do
mathematics with pencil and paper occasionally.

All the code readers I've seen fail except under ideal conditions (i.e.
strong signal, near perfect fist, little static, little fading).

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

no... the old hams have become as out dated as regen receivers... they
may think no ones notices... we do... it is ok to fool others, but when
you only end up being a fool from your efforts you have failed to stop
listening to others telling you about it... you now go on to tell
everyone else "how it is"--failing to comprehend that everyone has
already stopped listening...

John

"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
... so, we can throw away the scientific calculators and go back to
slide rules--I think not... a code reader is that kind of
difference... of course, I am the type of guy would wouldn't go back
to regen receivers either...

John


Your comparison falls down. It is more like retaining the ability to
do mathematics with pencil and paper occasionally.

All the code readers I've seen fail except under ideal conditions
(i.e. strong signal, near perfect fist, little static, little fading).

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Dee Flint wrote:
"John Smith" wrote in message
...
I am betting just the opposite, and I bet the code reader can copy at a
speed long after the human reader is all done...

Speed is a different issue than sloppy sending.

I recall an oldster on here bragging that he could send code so badly
that a No-Code Technician with a code reader couldn't copy it. All of
the other oldsters on here covered for him by claiming "banana-boat
swings" and other excuses for having a "unique" and incorrect fist.

That and the Farnsworth debacle led to the discovery that the FCC has
absolutely no working definition of Morse Code, yet the FCC denies
people access to hobby radio every day based upon an exam for something
which they no longer have a definition for.

.... people who play a musical instrument well, I can appreciate and have
a liking for... those with a code key in their hand I attempt to
avoid...

.... thank gawd they can't force us to suffer it... frankly, I don't
know of many places where they can practice it in public... other
citizens would get angry and ask 'em to leave... it would kinda be like
masturbating in public, everyone knows you do it, just don't do it in
front of them!!! tongue-in-cheek

John

"bb" wrote in message
oups.com...


Dee Flint wrote:
"John Smith" wrote in message
...
I am betting just the opposite, and I bet the code reader can copy
at a
speed long after the human reader is all done...

Speed is a different issue than sloppy sending.

I recall an oldster on here bragging that he could send code so badly
that a No-Code Technician with a code reader couldn't copy it. All of
the other oldsters on here covered for him by claiming "banana-boat
swings" and other excuses for having a "unique" and incorrect fist.

That and the Farnsworth debacle led to the discovery that the FCC has
absolutely no working definition of Morse Code, yet the FCC denies
people access to hobby radio every day based upon an exam for
something
which they no longer have a definition for.

John Smith wrote:
... people who play a musical instrument well, I can appreciate and have
a liking for... those with a code key in their hand I attempt to
avoid...

... thank gawd they can't force us to suffer it... frankly, I don't
know of many places where they can practice it in public... other
citizens would get angry and ask 'em to leave... it would kinda be like
masturbating in public, everyone knows you do it, just don't do it in
front of them!!! tongue-in-cheek

John

A public nuisance. Hi! ;^)