ad: expert-3

MRP40 CW Decode and IC-7300

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio Software' started by W4LAC, Oct 8, 2019.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-2
ad: L-Geochron
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: HRDLLC-2
ad: abrind-2
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-3
  1. K0RGR

    K0RGR Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Essential equipment for some. I will confess that I can't copy the DX stations who send at 50+ WPM, and a good CW decoder works great on the machine-sent code, which is what most contest stations send.

    FLDIGI is free and does a good job on CW. I use it to demo various digital modes, and run some digital nets, but I've demo'd it to my Tech students several times during contests. I know several 'no code' or 'very slow code' guys who work DX using it.

    I've always wished I could get Techs and other nocoders interested in using computers to do Morse on the air. Two Techs could be happily banging away at 50 WPM without knowing any code. Unfortunately, a CQ will almost always result in answers from people who don't send really standard code. If you're using a code reader, only answer the ones you are copying well. You MUST learn how to send with proper character and word spacing, and all the CW prosigns on the keyboard.
  2. K3EY

    K3EY Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    I am CW since 1982 exclusively. I don’t why some act like using a reader is sacrilege, it’s not. Be glad these people are even interested in CW, pretty soon there won’t be anybody to talk to —RAGCHEW—.
    Anyone can exchange numbers and call it a QSO.

    If readers are so Horrible how am I able to use my bug and have a reader copy it perfectly:rolleyes:
    K7OZI and K2NCC like this.
  3. WN1MB

    WN1MB Ham Member QRZ Page

    I can come up with two reasons:

    1) your skills sending on a bug are excellent, and

    2) your reader doesn't have to deal with the sometimes challenging vagaries of actual off-the-air signal readability, strength, QRM, QSB, QRN, etc.
    WA1GXC and W4NNF like this.
  4. WD0BCT

    WD0BCT Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    IMO CW decoders are training wheels. This is why I think that:
    1. I found the CW decoders to be very touchy. Obviously deficient as most here agree.
    2. While using them I eventually found myself correcting them with my own copy.
    3. I cant't imagine anyone seriously using decoders 100% of the time.
    4. Like training wheels the user will either learn to copy or give up. No one IMO stays on training wheels or electronic decoders for very long!

    So decoders as training wheels end up being a learning tool I suppose.
    If someone chooses to use the encoders for their CW experience totally it could be called a crutch....but I don't think very many would choose to do that.
  5. K3EY

    K3EY Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    My point IS if a guy even wants a reader he is INTERESTED in CW,
    so why discourage the
    VERY few
    that give a **** about CW anymore.
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 11, 2019
    WD0BCT likes this.
  6. N4GKS

    N4GKS Ham Member QRZ Page

    I can teach you to copy 10 WPM in two weeks.
    WN1MB likes this.
  7. N4GKS

    N4GKS Ham Member QRZ Page

    Learning code is like learning a second language. It’s hard, but it’s rewarding. Like a good stiff drink makes you feel good, except accomplishing something is better than any artificial high.
  8. N4GKS

    N4GKS Ham Member QRZ Page

    Calm down, captain happy.
  9. W2AI

    W2AI QRZ Lifetime Member #240 Platinum Subscriber Life Member QRZ Page

    I use the MRP40 program with the Yaesu FT1200dx to send keyboard CW. The received CW signal I can copy by ear and translate it onto paper. As previous posters have written; CW decoding programs are quite fallible and I am in agreement with that assessment.
  10. W2AI

    W2AI QRZ Lifetime Member #240 Platinum Subscriber Life Member QRZ Page

    Once you learned Morse code--you'll never forget it!:)
    K2NCC likes this.

Share This Page