All Discussions Tagged 'QRQcw' - QRQcw2024-03-29T13:01:17Zhttps://qrqcwnet.ning.com/forum/topic/listForTag?tag=QRQcw&feed=yes&xn_auth=noTAKE THE QRQ CW TEST - Which is better to copy - LINEAR or EXPONENTIAL raised cosine edgestag:qrqcwnet.ning.com,2017-12-08:1993813:Topic:334222017-12-08T14:32:52.504ZChuck aa0hwhttps://qrqcwnet.ning.com/profile/chase
<p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/GdvUPT_VU80?wmode=opaque" width="560"></iframe>
</p>
<p>an A / B test between Linear and Exponential QRQ CW audio tone waveforms</p>
<p>Which waveform do you think sounds best ?</p>
<p>SETUP for this test:<br></br> FLdigi is sending a text file at 71 wpm from TOM's famous article about qrq cw copy:…</p>
<p><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/GdvUPT_VU80?wmode=opaque" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</p>
<p>an A / B test between Linear and Exponential QRQ CW audio tone waveforms</p>
<p>Which waveform do you think sounds best ?</p>
<p>SETUP for this test:<br/> FLdigi is sending a text file at 71 wpm from TOM's famous article about qrq cw copy: <a href="https://sites.google.com/site/tomw4bqf/copyingcwover70wpm">https://sites.google.com/site/tomw4bqf/copyingcwover70wpm</a></p>
<p>LINEAR and EXPONENTIAL waveforms were created by the sineCW VST CW KEYER plugin: <a href="http://qrqcwnet.ning.com/forum/topics/home-brewed-software-code-practice-oscillator-vst-plugin">http://qrqcwnet.ning.com/forum/topics/home-brewed-software-code-practice-oscillator-vst-plugin</a></p>
<p></p>
<p>HERE is a picture of each waveform:</p>
<p> LINEAR</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3036813664?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3036813664?profile=original" width="631" class="align-full"/></a></p>
<p> </p>
<p> EXPONENTIAL</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3036816209?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3036816209?profile=original" width="645" class="align-full"/></a></p> CONGRATULATIONS TO JOE, W3GW FOR GETTING HIS ARTICLE about QRQcw PUBLISHED IN CQ MAGAZINE !tag:qrqcwnet.ning.com,2010-09-21:1993813:Topic:54322010-09-21T12:37:01.000ZChuck aa0hwhttps://qrqcwnet.ning.com/profile/chase
<b>CONGRATUALATIONS</b> to Joe, w3gw, for the success of your newly published article about <b>QRQcw</b> in <b>CQ MAGAZINE</b> for <i>SEPTEMBER of 2010</i> !…<div><p style="text-align: left;"><img alt="" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3036812703?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="640"></img></p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><br></br></p>
<p style="text-align: left;"></p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><img alt="" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3036814244?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="721"></img></p>
<p></p>
<div><br></br></div>
<div><p style="text-align: left;"><br></br></p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><img alt="" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3036815574?profile=original"></img></p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><br></br></p>
</div>
</div>
<b>CONGRATUALATIONS</b> to Joe, w3gw, for the success of your newly published article about <b>QRQcw</b> in <b>CQ MAGAZINE</b> for <i>SEPTEMBER of 2010</i> !<div><p style="text-align: left;"><img width="640" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3036812703?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" alt=""/></p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><br/></p>
<p style="text-align: left;"></p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><img width="721" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3036814244?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" alt=""/></p>
<p></p>
<div><br/></div>
<div><p style="text-align: left;"><br/></p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/3036815574?profile=original" alt=""/></p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><br/></p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><b><i>the above is just the first 2 paragraphs from the 3 page article</i></b></p>
</div>
</div> QRQcw SPECIALIST: w3njz, FRED RYAN, HOW TO SEND CW OVER 100 wpm.tag:qrqcwnet.ning.com,2010-05-24:1993813:Topic:48332010-05-24T10:15:32.000ZChuck aa0hwhttps://qrqcwnet.ning.com/profile/chase
<p><span style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: underline;">FROM AN EMAIL TO W3GW...RE: HOW TO PRACTICE TO SEND CW OVER 100 wpm.</span><br></br></p>
<p><br></br></p>
<p>Hi Joe,</p>
<p>As I recall, yesterday you asked me how I practice sending high speed code. First off, the sending is by far the hardest thing to master in having a high speed QSO. The copy by ear is only a mental exercise and
hours of listening at higher and higher speeds will usually bring that<br />
in. The reason that there are so few…</p>
<p><span style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: underline;">FROM AN EMAIL TO W3GW...RE: HOW TO PRACTICE TO SEND CW OVER 100 wpm.</span><br/></p>
<p><br/></p>
<p>Hi Joe,</p>
<p>As I recall, yesterday you asked me how I practice sending high speed code. First off, the sending is by far the hardest thing to master in
having a high speed QSO. The copy by ear is only a mental exercise and<br />
hours of listening at higher and higher speeds will usually bring that<br />
in. The reason that there are so few high speed operators is the<br />
inability to send high speed. Achieving that requires lots of hard work,<br />
both mental and physical. You must of course be able to type fast by<br />
touch only, no looking at the keyboard. You must be able to get the<br />
spelling correct quickly and get your thoughts in order quickly enough<br />
that you don't run out the buffer and create choppy sending. There is<br />
only one radio operator who sought my advice on getting to QRQ speeds<br />
that was limited by not copying high speeds well, yet being able to send<br />
it well. All of the others were capable of copying the QRQ but not<br />
sending it.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>When younger I found it rather easy to increase the sending speed as I was already a 100 wpm transcription typist at work. I would type my own
scientific papers as the Department secretary was so unpleasant to have<br />
to deal with. As a side note, both Chuck, Thom, and I were piano<br />
players when young and that sure helped.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>That was then and now is now. I am almost 80 now and the fingers and hands are no longer capable of playing the piano and without lots of
daily practice I would never be able to type over 100 wpm. To achieve<br />
that here is my session: First, I form a large list of words that are<br />
difficult to type using QWERTY. I then incorporate them into an<br />
imaginary conversation. I form the conversation around things that I<br />
would typically say on the air. A discussion of the current weather,<br />
work I am engaged in, important world happenings, etc. The point here is<br />
that you are pushing your brain to move fast on providing real<br />
information and converting it into perfect code, or as perfect as I can<br />
achieve at speed. The speed that I practice at should be faster than I<br />
will use on the air. Let's say you can send very well at 70 wpm. You<br />
should be practicing at 80 wpm, making errors and being choppy at , but<br />
always pushing yourself to improve. When you drop back down to 70 wpm<br />
you will find that it is becoming much easier to send good code. When<br />
you achieve good code at 80, move the practice up to 90 and start using<br />
80 wpm on the air. In my case I practice at 110 wpm and drop down to 100<br />
on the air. I am starting off each QSO on Chuck's Saturday schedule at<br />
100 and sending it at present for the first 10 or 15 minutes. Doing that<br />
is hard work and the fingers tire after that time and the errors start<br />
creeping in so I drop down to 90 and so on. I practice about 20 minutes a<br />
day, mostly at 110, dropping down to 100 at the end. It is ALWAYS hard<br />
work. If it isn't hard work, you are loafing below your capabilities! If<br />
I find it possible to send good code at 110 my practice will shift to<br />
120 wpm.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>In order to send good quality code you must always be fully alert an concentrated, whether at 60 wpm or 100 wpm. Even though 60 wpm is very
easy for me to send, if I am not paying full attention to my sending I<br />
am going to make sending errors. The tendency is to relax too much at<br />
low speeds like 60 wpm and the concentration is gone and the errors fill<br />
the vacuum.</p>
<p> </p>
Well, that's how I practice, Joe. I suspect that the same approach<br />
will work for you.