Trials & Errors #68: The Value of YouTube vs. In-Person Elmers

Dave, you picked an excellent topic. There is no right or wrong answer to this. And I think it goes quite deep into the character of amateur radio.

The first thing I'd like to tackle is that if you research ANY topic on the Internet, you have to be able to sort out the accurate from the plain wrong and the deliberately misleading. That is a life skill and if you don't have it, you'll be in trouble no matter if you are researching drywall techniques, short radius turns in downhill skiing or end fed wire antennas. To name a few of the topics I've looked at in the past couple of days. You need to be able to sort out the good from the bad and if you don't know how to do that, go the library and do some research in good old fashioned books. They are a much better place to start.

Second, people can be just as biased as Youtube when you talk to them face to face. I can think of members of our local ham radio club who are excellent advisors and freely share their time to help others & other mentors who will always advise the most complex and expensive solution to any problem and so on. Again you have to use your own judgement, and look for opinions from multiple people until you have sorted out who knows what they are talking about.

What disturbs me in ham radio is the tendency to attack those who don't exactly behave as we ourselves like to do. On the one end we have folks who like to use terms like "elmer" (which no newcomer to ham radio will understand) or think that any mode involving a computer is not "real radio". At the other end we have folks who are already bored with DMR or FT8/FT4 and are wondering what to do next. The beauty of ham radio is that it is a very big tent indeed covering an incredibly wide range of activities. This topic is reflective of that and my advice to anyone seeking information would be "here are the pros and cons of the Internet and the pros and cons of using a mentor. Use what works best for you."

No single right answer to your column. Like it!

 

I probably miss some good info by avoiding internet videos. This gap in my education causes me no stress at all.

In-person with the questions, digressions, and subject changes it brings is much more interesting IMO. People IRL are not noticeably invested in keeping my attention to earn likes, subscribes, and more views.

I've gotten spam emails to my QRZ-listed email address from a YT ham who shows up on the QRZ news page. Looks like they really stretch to find topics for the number of videos they need. People in person don't do that.

I'm sure some videos have good info that I could use. I doubt that info is a secret held only by the YT presenter. I'll learn some other way, thanks.

 

There's one more factor: a person who knows what they are talking about, and knows when they don't.

There are folks who have time and willingness to explain and demonstrate, but really don't know what they're talking about. They are often very personable and confident, and SOUND knowledgeable.

Dunning-Kruger Effect is real.

Here's an example:

There's a persistent myth about why we use LSB on 160, 75 and 40 meters, and USB everywhere else. This myth says that in the early days of SSB there were transmitters that generated SSB at 9 MHz and then converted it to 75 or 20 meters by mixing with a VFO at about 5 MHz, resulting in USB on 20 and LSB on 75.

It's a nice story, and there were transmitters like that, but it's just not true, because frequency conversion of SSB doesn't work that way. With a 9 MHz SSB generator and 5 MHz VFO you will get the same sideband on both 75 and 20. This is easily proved by basic math.

Yet the myth is often repeated and believed. I've encountered folks who INSISTED it was true, and got all insulted and offended when the reality was explained. One that I encountered INSISTED that I was wrong because his Elmer told him that was the origin, and his Elmer knew more than I ever would.

There are even folks who say that even though the myth is wrong we shouldn't hurt people's feelings by pointing it out.

Another example are the myths about the origin of terms such as "73" and "ham".

And if you REALLY want to go down the rabbit hole, there's SWR, the G5RV, grounding, and the National Electrical Code.

So many myths....

73 de Jim N2EY

 

Jim, nice post. I agree that ham radio is filled with legends and misinformation. I tried to write an article one time about a legend (the topic of "where did the term Elmer come from"?) and there were so many opinions and angst about it that I dropped it. Personally, I care little about various legends and misinformation there, but when I hear a YT or in-person ham say something that I know is wrong technically, it drives me nuts. Dave, W7DGJ

 

Hi Dave, thanks for the post. I wonder . . . how big an issue is the "spam via QRZ email address" issue? I will use that QRZ email on occasion when someone is a featured operator and I like their station, etc, and I hope those are not seen as spam by the recipient. QRZ has a very strict no-spam policy. The founder, Fred, knew how annoying that spam emails can be and they've never sent one mass email out in 30+ years. And, if someone (a YouTuber or anyone else) is abusing the listed emails, we should know about it. Write me by private email (or QRZ messaging) and let me know (if you want to) who it was? Let's hope nothing happens to the listed emails on QRZ! I think it's an important element of the info we have on our fellow operators. Dave, W7DGJ

 

Thanks for your comments Ritchie! There's so much going on in the field of Amateur Radio that it is almost like 8 hobbies in one. That's a good point here. Specialists from each area of expertise can be mentors in their niche. I know nothing about Sats and one of these days I'll want to be Elmered by a knowledgeable pro in that field, for example . . . I'll review the YT's on that topic, but trust 80% of my knowledge to my fellow ham. Dave, W7DGJ

 

Someone sent me an email when I was the QRZ featured member. That was a nice surprise.

Sending a link to one's own recent video is another thing.

I doubt that you send unsolicited links to your articles to random people.

Not a big issue. Spam filters work. I don't see many. My email is still listed on QRZ because it helps.

I'll end my bit of thread drift now.

 

When putting together a station after an 18-year absence in 2024, I watched lots of YouTube videos, many having the general theme of "the best radio/antenna/etc.". No matter how much research you do, it's easy to get led down a number of rabbit holes, coming out no better - or worse - than before on performance and decidedly worse in the eyes of the household budget.

Aside from this, too many videos are what are called "talking heads" in TV. In part, I come from a background of software tutorial writing where a "picture is worth a thousand words" is the guiding rule. So are specifics, e.g., a step-by-step guide to do a task, and not broad generalities.

However, a bad picture is worse than no picture at all. While looking for ideas on tilt-over towers and how to mount thrust bearings and rotators, there were numerous videos, but few did more than zip by the matter of interest, leaving me to freeze a frame or two and figure out what was done. The audio itself gave no support at all. On the other hand, videos such as those by WA2IVD on the IC-7300 helped immeasurably in getting the most out of that transceiver.

To sum, there are some very good YouTube educational videos and there are some influencers who offer good advice within their latest and greatest videos. As some have said, eventually, you learn who those folks are and gravitate to them. I agree, there's probably no substitute for an Elmer. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find one - yet. Maybe I need to do a better job of looking around. I tried the Discord forum of one local club. While friendly people, there was little response and I eventually had to pound the pavement (Google the Internet) to get the help I needed.

73 and Clear Skies
Brian
WB0NWZ

 

Thanks for the detail, Brian. Good summary of what seems to be the general thinking, that supplementing an in-person Elmer with the YT videos that merit attention is the best plan. Perhaps a future column on how to identify and work best with a mentor of this sort (Elmer)? Dave, W7DGJ

 

I've watched quite a few YouTube videos on some of the new rigs and antennas, and I've made a few YouTube videos myself. While YouTube videos are nice, instantaneous, and convenient, actual conversations with an elmer are beyond valuable. I can say this from experience as an elmer, a learner, and a YouTuber. When I make my YouTube videos, I try keeping them as brief as possible. This means that only the highlights of the POTA activation or product I am reviewing actually make it on the video. A lot of the nitty gritty stuff is left out. If a genuine newcomer to the hobby were to watch the average YouTube video on some of these vertical antennas or portable rigs, they would assume that the use of these products is somehow "easy" and may become frustrated when they themselves try a POTA activation with the same equipment. YouTube is great at showing working setups making numerous contacts. YouTube is also great at showing the highlights of some of these antennas and rigs. What YouTube isn't so great at is showing how long it really takes to set up the equipment properly, the steps of tuning it properly, giving it adequate grounding, etc. Basically YouTube presents the viewer with only the content that the creator has the time to show them. The average attention span of the average YouTube viewer is only a few minutes, so these videos are tailored to those parameters. Real instructions can take longer than a few minutes. If it is your fist time doing anything HAM related, you probably want to discuss it at length with your elmer.

 

Thanks Sebastian! Great comments, and adds to the discussion as you are the only YT producer we've had comment here. I'll check 'em out! Dave

 

A *good* elmer / mentor can tailor his or her answers according to the recipient's skill / knowledge level. Sometimes using technical terms causes the recipient's eyes to glaze over, while a simple response sticks in their mind forever.

Example:

Frequency and antenna length. Blah blah math divide 465... Or get a wooden ruler and hold it with some length sticking out from the edge of the table. Twang it. Change the length -- twang it again. The frequency changes. Tada.

I agree that some articles are way too technical -- sometimes its needed, but sometimes the author is just showing off. Same with the YouTube videos -- some ramble on and on, taking 20 minutes to half-fast explain something that should take a minute or two at most.

 

I agree that YouTube offers 24/7 information on a wide variety of topics - accuracy to be determined on a case by case basis.

But the YT host won't be coming over to our QTH to assist with installation of antennas (I have had the pleasure multiple times) or set up / diagnose / fix or run equipment in our shack. Even if our local Elmer(s) don't have all the answers there is something special about learning together.

 

Actually, there is a Reddit link https://www.reddit.com/r/amateurradio/comments/g2qdf9/hf_usb_vs_lsb/ to your post from 2015 on here!
https://forums.qrz.com/index.php?threads/an-urban-legend-disproved.462916/

 

Having researched YouTube POTA videos for months to decide what to get, I find that many do cover the nitty-gritty details, including some that compare different antennas, etc. What I usually skip is maybe the 30 minutes of activation video since that is not what I am interested in, but the detailed discussion of especially different antenna setups, grounding, including the "magic carpet", etc.