I think some are getting hung up on the 100 wpm thing. And the speed is not
the point...the point is just the FUN of doing something like that. Since my
two strokes, I'm lucky to be doing much between 70 and 80 wpm. 100 wpm may
be a thing of the past for me, but there is now no one around to try it
with.
Believe it or not, there is more 'full duplex' going on at 100 wpm than
there is at 40 wpm. It's basically not much difference from using a
different language and talking to someone on a telephone.
The discussion about DSP is moot. It's here and it has to be in every radio
so manufacturers can claim to be with the state of the art. I have to
accept that, and I do. But that is not going to hinder me in enjoying part
of this hobby that I enjoy, it just means I have to hold on to the older
rig's that will function in the CW mode the way I want mine to function.
Heck, I enjoy rag chewing at 30 wpm just as much as I enjoy rag chewing at
70 wpm. What I DO NOT enjoy is paying $3700 for a radio that will not even
function well at the 30 wpm level.
Tom - W4BQF
----- Original Message -----
From: "n4lq" <n4lq@iglou.com>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, August 13, 2004 3:47 PM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] DSP in CW transmit?
> There is some truth here but it still doesn't discourage us QSKers from
> pursuing our goal. Learning to live with no QSK is not an option for us.
> Certainly, the breaker must send more than a few characters in order for
> the breakee to hear him since some of the breakers characters will
> coincide with the timing of the breakee's characters and not be heard.
> Now for these guys going 100 wpm....By the time they are broken, the
> breakee will have sent an entire paragraph and the breaker may have
> forgotten why he broke in the first place. I don't think there is a whole
> lot of duplex cw going on at 100 wpm but there are quiet a few at 30 wpm.
> Noting is quite as satisfying as a full duplex cw qso. I find the silence
> between the characters of semi-BKin eerie and frustrating, thinking all
> along that something may be going on that I need to hear!
> n4lq
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lee Crocker <w9oy@yahoo.com>
> To: tentec@contesting.com
> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:02:20 -0700 (PDT)
> Subject: [TenTec] DSP in CW transmit?
>
> > But it's not just the generation of the waveform that
> > is occurring in the DSP, it's also the time it takes
> > when you go from transmit to receive for the received
> > signal to get through the DSP filter and into your
> > ears. This takes time, and is occuring during the
> > time you would normally be listening for the
> > "break-in" in the QSK cycle. Just about the time a
> > breakin from the station you are working would occur,
> > the audio is switched, you're back in transmit, and
> > the side tone is now being routed to your ear.
> >
> > So the time that used to be devoted to listening for a
> > break is now being used to process the received
> > breakin signal and just as it is about to get to your
> > ears, it then gets lost as the rig goes to transmit,
> > and the next character is generated and transmitted.
> > During this period of transmission the recieve
> > processing is halted and its not until the received
> > breakin signal starts into the DSP again that
> > processing begins anew.
> >
> > Hence my original question, how much QSK is really
> > necessary? Is it enough that you can be broken during
> > during the 7 dit-length word space? Do you need to
> > have keyers that extend the word-space period? I
> > think it is unlikely a rig that is busy doing all this
> > signal processing is going to ever be as good a QSK
> > radio as my old 580 delta in therms of "breakin".
> > Maybe if there were separate receive and transmit DSP,
> > maybe if you had parallel co-processed transmitter and
> > receiver so thing were not being done serially, you
> > could approximate the behavior of the 580 delta.
> >
> > You may call these "bells and whistles" but it is
> > merely an engineering design trade-off between
> > mutually exclusive criteria. You can't receive
> > processed audio until processing is completed, and if
> > the rate of data transmission is faster this
> > processing can occur in a given system, you won't be
> > hearing any breaks. Like I said I used to judge a
> > radio by its QSK behavior. But then I found QSK to
> > not be as totally useful as I once thought. Really
> > fast well executed semi-breakin does just as well in
> > my opinion.
> >
> > 73 W9OY
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
> > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> > _______________________________________________
> > TenTec mailing list
> > TenTec@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|