At 08:51 AM 11/7/2011 -0500, you wrote: >With good CW ops you can just save all the dah's till the end and send >them all at once; if the other guy is any good he knows how to put >them all back in the right place. [See QST March 1964 "Love them >Dits..." > >73, >Drew >AF2Z
A lot of truth to the above statement. I worked professional CW communications on point to point land nets and all the ops used bugs (no electronic keyers in those days) and all had recognizable fists. The fists that were the most comfortable emphasized the dashes and speeded up the dots. How they did this really created the distinctiveness of the individual's 'fist'. All were recognizably different from one another but certainly not variable on a scale of sloppinesss'. Pride came from ability to communicate not from the similarity to perfectly formed characters. Normal text was sent as in normal speech. However if sending special non-normal information ... such as a serial number ... the op would slow down and send well formed letters .... just as in normal voice one slows down and gives attention to clear enunciation. If all the text was sent this way (computer like characters) i can assure you it would be found boring. Something like listening to slowly enunciated speech in language lessons on Voice of America. That is okay for someone learning the language but really boring for someone who knows it. The CW equivalent would be the code practise sessions on W1AW .... a CW op would have to really 'pay attention' to copy it. So calling someone's fist sloppy would be like saying someone with a different accent speaks with sloppy language. Someone just learning the language CW or otherwise is considered a 'novice' and they speak as a novice. Likewise not really 'sloppy'. There are 'purists' who have fixed ideas of what the language should sound like and consider their idea of the ideal should be a developmental goal. I assure you that in reality that goal is futile. Learn the language and develop your facility to communicate in whatever community you frequent .... that is the only goal. If you change the community/environment then you no doubt will have to adjust your language facility. If you leave the 'novice' CW community and move in to a higher speed community I assure you will have to adjust ... and almost certainly perfectly formed speech/characters will fall by the wayside. As usual a lot of listening comes before venturing some input of your own!!! CU Jim, VE3CI >On Sat, 29 Oct 2011 13:20:49 -0400, Ken VE3HLS wrote: > > >It sounds like everyone is saying sending sloppy code is desirable. How > >odd; I always thought hams took pride in their sending. Well formed, > >well spaced characters are much easier to copy. I find nothing quaint > >or charming about sending dits at 30wpm and dahs at 10 wpm, which is > >typical of what I hear. Either slow down the dits or speed up the > >manually sent dahs. I know there are limits on how slow you can send > >dits with a bug, but if you can't slow it down enough then consider > >using another instrument for sending code or resign yourself to the fact > >that VE3HLS will never answer your CQ (that should be pretty easy to > >live with)! :-) > > > >daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah dididit dididit > >daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah! :-) > > > >Ken, > >VE3HLS > > > > > >______________________________________________________________ >Elecraft mailing list >Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >Post: mailto:[email protected] > >This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[email protected] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
