On Dec 13, 5:47 am, "Henry Kolesnik"
wrote:
-
- W1AW sends codes practice lessons on week days..
- Several times a day and many bands..
- also code bulletins..
- check www.arrl.org
- for the frequencies and times ..
- or check QST
-
- --
- Thanks & 73
- Hank WD5JFR
-

HK,

"W1AW" is a very good Tip and Link for those who
want to Listen To and Learn Morse Code.

On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 20:18:55 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
W is quite
different.

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here. Are you arguing
with something which was said in this thread, or is it something you've
picked up from somewhere else?

"Morse Code" is an anachonistic term, not used by any receiver
manufacturer. AM/FM/LSB/USB/CW are typical of the mode choices.

On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 20:18:55 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:


I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here. Are you arguing
with something which was said in this thread, or is it something you've
picked up from somewhere else?

The point is none of my radios say "Morse Code". They say "CW".

On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 12:56:01 -0800, RHF wrote:



- - I don't think there's a radio made that doesn't call it "CW".

- - The VBR binary system invented by S. F. B. Morse

Dave - ? VRB ? = Variable Bit Rate

Yer absolutely right. I meant some characters have more bits than others.

In message , Dave
writes
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 20:18:55 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:


I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here. Are you arguing
with something which was said in this thread, or is it something you've
picked up from somewhere else?

The point is none of my radios say "Morse Code". They say "CW".

I've just realised I I've got another receiver which says 'BFO'. So,
I've got radios which say 'SSB', 'CW', 'USB', 'LSB', and 'BFO'. The
funny thing is, when switched to these positions, they all can receive
what I mistakenly call 'Morse Code', which is what the OP was asking
about.

On my PC, I have several programs concerned with reception and
transmission of that funny beepy stuff. With one exception, they are all
about something anachronistically called 'Morse Code'. You really would
think that their authors would know better, wouldn't you?
--
Ian

Ian Jackson wrote:
On my PC, I have several programs concerned with reception and
transmission of that funny beepy stuff. With one exception, they are all
about something anachronistically called 'Morse Code'. You really would
think that their authors would know better, wouldn't you?

No, the programs can decode Morse code. They probably CAN NOT DECODE other
trinary encoding, whether it's sent using CW (carrier on/off), MCW (tone
modulated carrier on/off), or FSK (frequency shift keying).

You keep confusing the encoding of the data with the transmission medium.

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM

In message , Geoffrey S.
Mendelson writes
Ian Jackson wrote:
On my PC, I have several programs concerned with reception and
transmission of that funny beepy stuff. With one exception, they are all
about something anachronistically called 'Morse Code'. You really would
think that their authors would know better, wouldn't you?

No, the programs can decode Morse code.

Only those programs which are designed to decode Morse code will decode
morse code. Some of the other programs are designed to teach Morse, and
will not decode Morse code. Most of these will accept a text file and
translate it into audible Morse. 50 years ago, when I was trying to
learn Morse, such facilities had never even been dreamt of! For
beginners, these programs are far more user-friendly than trying to find
slow Morse transmissions on the SW bands.

They probably CAN NOT DECODE other
trinary encoding, whether it's sent using CW (carrier on/off), MCW (tone
modulated carrier on/off), or FSK (frequency shift keying).

As long as the PC sound card is fed with beeps and boops which
adequately resemble what I mistakenly call Morse code, the decoding
programs make a valiant attempt to decode it. For convenience, you can
simply record the beeps and boops as an audio file, and decode it later.

You keep confusing the encoding of the data with the transmission medium.

But I have said absolutely nothing about either the encoding or the
transmission medium. You are mistaking me for someone who knows more (or
better) than I do.
--
Ian