On Thursday 31 December 2009 11:11:45 Andy obrien wrote:
> Am I wrong in thinking that if one uses something like MixW to "direct"
> key a rig that has no internal keyer, that you also get some "odd results"
> ? In the early days of Mixw I used direct keying with my TS440, not audio
> CW. It work
; I Do not use, but as a courtesy do upload to eQSL for those who do.
> > Moderator
> > DXandTALK
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk
> > Digital_modes
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digital_modes/?yguid=341090159
> >
> > ----- Original Message -
> &
Am I wrong in thinking that if one uses something like MixW to "direct" key
a rig that has no internal keyer, that you also get some "odd results" ? In
the early days of Mixw I used direct keying with my TS440, not audio CW. It
worked but I would get comments from some that suggested my CW had an
modes
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digital_modes/?yguid=341090159
- Original Message -
From: f6...@free.fr
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, December 31, 2009 10:45 AM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] AFCW and keyed cw programs
Hello,
Keying dire
m
> Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2009 4:43 PM
> Subject: [digitalradio] AFCW and keyed cw programs
>
>
>
> I have used a couple of programs for generating cw and have found that I
> prefer a 'direct' keyed method (MixW) compared to the AFCW that some
> progr
: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2009 4:43 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] AFCW and keyed cw programs
I have used a couple of programs for generating cw and have found that I
prefer a 'direct' keyed method (MixW) compared to the AFCW that some programs
u
I have used a couple of programs for generating cw and have found that I
prefer a 'direct' keyed method (MixW) compared to the AFCW that some programs
use (FlDigi). Running Linux BTW here.
Was wondering why some programs used direct keying of the radio and others
have gone the AFCW method? Is the
