Well I've been at it for about 8 months now and have worked only CW (about 1100 QSOs to date) since I got my ticket . I'm just beginning to be able to put down the pen and copy in my head. Sure I miss a couple of words here and there, but for the most part I'm getting much better. I think I'm at a transition point and finding that even though I don't have to write down copy I find it somewhat reassuring and often do it anyway so I don't miss anything. Of course if the WPM goes much faster than about 22 WPM, I can't write fast enough anyway so I have to really focus and let the old brain have at it. I think once I hit the one year mark, I should be in pretty good shape and expect to be able to send and copy at about 30 wpm...not that I have a need for speed, but it's just an observation on my progress during my first year as a ham. It's certainly more relaxing to just sit there and close my eyes and listen rather than frantically trying to write down everything!
73 Steve W1SFR On Nov 8, 2012, at 1:52 PM, Andrew Moore wrote: > Hope anyone who's interested in getting into CW isn't put off by the > thought of spending hundreds of hours to train or being bored by just > another digital mode. Larry is 50% right here. I mean that in a positive > way (i.e. not "50% wrong"!) > > To say that CW is just another digital mode, or that it takes hundreds of > hours to train, isn't necessarily correct. > > Some of the most exciting moments I had doing CW were when I was studying > code before I got my ticket, (barely) copying 5 WPM in Mass. from a station > in Florida which seemed like pulling magic out of the air. At that point I > had only about 24 hours of CW training. When I got the ticket, my first QSO > was on a straight key from Tenn. to Washington state (still have the QSL > card, N7CEY!) was equally thrilling, largely because it was hands-on > (Internet wasn't even mainstream yet). > > It's a very different *experience* than having a computer do it for you. > > I agree with Larry's recommendation to just jump in and immerse yourself in > the mode, in whatever form. One way isn't better than the other. For > upcoming CW enthusiasts, only by trying the different methods available to > you - digital or analog makes no difference - will you find what you like > and what you can do without. Find your niche and enjoy it; it's YOUR niche > and there's a lot of fun out there when you find it. Decode-by-brain comes > quick for some, especially when they enjoy it. And then, training is > ongoing - so yes, it can certainly require hundreds of hours, but for some > those hours seem like a thrill not a chore. > > --Andrew, NV1B > maineware.net > .. > > > > On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Larry Libsch <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Your brain IS best at CW decoding - but only after you've spent >> many hundreds of hours training it. You can work CW DX NOW by getting a >> Keyer and learning one thing in CW - the sound of your callsign. Let CW >> Skimmer decode for you. It's not as good as your brain, but this setup >> will have you working CW at any speed without dedicating hundreds of >> hours you might wish to spend otherwise. CW is just another digital >> mode. Decoders will improve. Get in the CW game now. >> >> K4KGG, Larry >> >> > ______________________________________________________________ > 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
