Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by W4LAC, Oct 8, 2019.
Reading ones words does not equal psychic, and your piss poor one.
I don't believe anything I said, at least in this thread, should discourage those folks. If it did, it wasn't my intent.
That might be true! Hadn't thought of it that way before. Thumbs-up.
I figure it IS a perishable skill, but easier to get back on the bike if you've already had some experience.
I learned 20GPM (groups per minute, we didn't use many "words") in the Army (05D), 15 years before I got my Tech+ in 2005.
I hadn't touched CW since returning to civilian life, yet it only took a few hours of practice the day before the test to pass the minimum 5WPM.
But, of the 1000s of contacts I've logged, only about 500 are Morse code.
Why do the same-ol'-thing when there's 1000+ other modes and methods one can work?
(I'm proud to say I've worked or decoded over 100 of them.)
If you limit yourself to your favorite dish on the huge buffet of amateur radio, you'll miss out on so many things you might otherwise enjoy.
If you're one of those "I DON'T DO xxx" or "I ONLY DO xxx", then you're missing out. Expand your horizons and try something new this week, even if it's just once.
Don't be afraid to experiment. IMO, one of the driving forces of this hobby/service.
Old expression in corrections:
"Believe nothing you hear and only half of what you see."
That includes perusing these ZED forums.
The OP said, "Please don't tell me to go learn CW. LOL."
I replied, "Learn Morse, then operate CW."
I mentioned to another poster later in the thread, "Morse is the code; CW is the mode. Know the difference. "
Nuance, my friend. Nuance.
Doesn't seem like "very few" to me. Day by day there's about as much activity on CW as on phone, and during contests the CW segments are wall to wall signals.
Why discourage someone from using a CW reader? They don't work very well. The time spent fooling with one could much better be spent doing a little code practice.
Some folks don't want to take the time to learn Morse code. But are still at least a little fascinated by it. Playing with software to decode (which in itself is a learning experience) might lead them to take the mode on with more vigor. IMO, some exploration is better than none.
Good points. However, a caveat explaining the inherent shortcomings of CW readers presented up front, such as W4NNF and others have provided, is equally important.
Well said, and I totally agree. At least it's some interest and that's a good thing. You are right.
And I now consider my "tone softened" regarding software decoding efforts.