[CW] Flavours of Morse

[w4foa at comcast.net]

Interesting and just goes to prove the point that we all have opinions, hi. 
I enjoy hearing the "personal" touch of the straight keys, bugs and most of all, the cooties. I see a lot of talk about "perfect CW" yadda yadda yadda. Well, speaking as a CW guy for more than 60 years, I find perfect CW quite boring. In fact, I do my very best to avoid the keyboard CW stations because they are generally boring, spelling out each and every word, and most of all "dumping" their memories while they go eat breakfast, hi. 
My mentor was one of the very best CW ops in his time (Hack, W4DIJ, later K4KP). During my "side saddle" time with Hack, he never said "send perfect CW" but he did stress, DO NOT run everything together. I think we can all agree on that, right? 
And finally, I've never tried sending "cootie" CW with a double lever although I realize it could be done. 
73 
Tony W4FOA 
PS: It might be interesting to see what other Cootie ops consider their favorite cootie key. Mine for now is the GHD GF601MP 


----- Original Message -----

From: "D.J.J. Ring, Jr." <n1ea at arrl.net> 
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 8:52:23 AM 
Subject: [CW] Flavours of Morse 

Originally sent to the sideswiper net group. 
73 
DR N1EA 

From: "VK5EEE" < vk5eee at vkcw.net > 
Date: Feb 14, 2017 10:58 PM 
Subject: [SSN] Flavours of Morse 







Dear Side Sweepers whether single or double liver... 

A subject that has often riled me in the past, and still raises it's head, is the anti-bug anti-cootie, or rather, I should say anti-non-standard-CW arguments made by operators that I myself often find inferior in their abilities in CW -- but not always! There are those who are very skilled operators of CW but who dislike certain styles, or any wide deviation from standard CW. 


I posted in a forum today on this subject, and thought it may be of interest to other side swipers, so I think it worth sharing here. I am not preaching to the already converted, but I think this subject should be written about, and even some videos produced on it, that could do a lot to furthering the cause of bug and swing CW... Rhythm & Blues, Reggae, Soul and even Jazz... 

I also include a link at the end to a post I made on the Flavours of CW. I also have to confess, and I hope I'm not disliked for it, that I love "french CW" -- I find French cootie operators have a very lovely CW, partly assisted by the extra characters perhaps, and that when I was in England I noted some did not like that French CW :-) 

But I also like Russian QRQ CW in Russian Language, I even liked Arabic CW which was last used in Sudan and its overseas embassies right up until the 80s and sent on straight keys. In fact, I like all types of CW -- well -- almost all: *personally* I draw the line at joining letters on an electronic keyer like C = TR or KE, but when sent on other keys some letters can be quasi-joined! 

An example is my callsign: on an electronic keyer I would send my callsign in perfect Gerke Code with 1:1:3 ratio: VK5EEE. But on a bug/cootie I could make the dah in the V shorter, and the dah in the K (one or the other or both) longer, and I could join the K to the 5 which could be sent at double the dit-speed, followed by EEE, and that would not detract from it's intelligibility. 

What lead me today to write on this subject (again) was a criticism levelled against AA4OO saying that his bug ration on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-DGvvrCLIE was 20WPM dah and 25 WPM dits. WOW, seriously...!? It's lovely bug sending, nothing wrong with it, but because it varied from Official Gerke Code (International Morse Code actually), it attracted a criticism!? 

So I thought I'd not let the machine-CW-only have the final say, just as I would not let the Oxford-English-only have a final say over the Jamaican "Jomehkun", Thai English "Tinglish", Trinidadian "Trinni" and other variations, let alone other superior languages (French, Hungarian, Thai etc ;-) -- hehe I hope my fellow British friends can take a jab in the ribs now and then haha 


Please have a listen to my video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjqT8PSqG_w 



There as we all know we can demonstrate that it is possible, at certain speeds, to send on a straight key, on a electronic keyer and on a bug, "perfect" CW that would be indistinguishable from "PC sent CW" and make all keys sound the exact same. 



After showing that with a CQ call on each of the keys, I then try to show off hot-swapping keys, with mixed success :-) 



Now I come, once again, on this particular issue, to counter KE6EE with both tripple E's having differing views. It is a horse that has been beaten before, but in the case of those who have not heard the argument before, I as one of those who has long "mastered CW" have a view that is held my many CW operators, but far from ALL CW operators: 



Official "perfect" CW has a ratio of 1:1:3:7 dit-inter-dah-space. Yet, American CW has a very different ratio, again officially, and I don't know them all, but the dit:dah is 1:2 not 1:3. This results in a very different sounding Morse, but it is still Morse, in fact, it IS MORSE. The one we all use today is not Morse Code but Gerke Code: See http://www.vkcw.net/cwtoday click on the 3rd issue of CW Today for the story. 



I'm only out to state some facts and my own opinion and that of many bug users and cootie users regarding dit:dah ratios. First, look at the font of this email: it's a font and it works, right? But it is not the only font, there are many fonts with different ratios, and they all work, though for some people a particular font is favoured and easier to read while others find that same font obnoxious at worst, or less than ideal at best. 



And so it is with music, and so it is with CW. I am one of those who believe that Morse is music and rhythm and what matters is -- between the operators on a particular circuit -- intelligibility and easy of sending and reception. Radio amateurs are generally not qualified to pass judgement on such matters as those that operate for 8 hours non stop these days in contest only push buttons, they are button pushers. 



Those who ARE qualified to talk on this topic are those of us who have in various services had to receive and/or send CW non-stop for 8 hours. And there are many different services: military, police, maritime, etc etc and each of these services had their own versions of "Morse" or rather "Gerke" code. The military, of which there are several ex members probably among us here too, by necessity generally had to use the OFFICIAL EXACT ratio in order for their to be zero sigint or little sigint to enemy that could be used. 



That does not mean that it is only military types who favour official Gerke code in its perfect form, no matter which key it is sent on, and advocate for the type of sending I have demonstrated in the above video- which, by the way, I ALSO ENJOY. I like the sound of keyboard CW but I also like the sound of various extreme fists, and even this Ludwig Van Beethoven -- great practice to try to emulate it in sync on your cootie: http://www.zerobeat.net/morse505.html 



But I can tell you that if you have to listen to endless CW for 8 hours non-stop and take it all down accurately, official Gerke code actually sends you to sleep!!! Unless you drink endless cups of coffee or chew a cola nut. On the other hand, a different type of Morse that evolves within a particular closed network of operators using cooties and/or bugs, at 25-30WPM even, but which has a variation of ratios depending upon the letter, is less stressful over long durations. 



This is why police networks, to take one example of a closed network of operators, developed their own styles. In fact, I'd say some of those styles notably that by INTERPOL LYON on cootie keys was the best CW ever, to MY ears. 



So yes, I could add the cootie to that video and also do a perfect CW Gerke Code transmission same as the other keys... but when I use cootie I used a different style, shorter inter-character gaps, some rhythm and swing, and when I use a bug the same, I vary that style, and I dare say some of my dit:dah ratios will be 1:7 not 1:3 -- and would NOT be understandable by many of the CW operators who were raised on Perfect Gerke Code and/or electronic keyers. 



Yet those of us who find that handwriting very easy, and pleasurable, find it VERY easy to copy such, and often much more relaxing and therapeutic (as with styles of music) than official Gerke Code. I should produce a video of this to PROVE that we send such code DELIBERATELY and I can easily do this: as I showed in the above video that I can send perfect Gerke Code, I can also send perfectly-repeatable bug-EEE-code: I can send each word twice in EXACTLY the same manner with a completely different and variable inter-character spacing and dah-durations. 



I think I should produce such a video at some point as I believe that a great many who hear bug CW (even cootie CW) simply assume we don't know how to send code, and we are SLOPPY and that our sending the way we do is because we can not do it perfectly, whereas for most OPs the very opposite is true: EVER dit, space, and dah, is deliberately CRAFTED. Don't some of you also get the feeling or impression or feedback or criticism from some who hear our sending and think we can improve it, even though we are sending (not necessarily always, but most of the time!) EXACTLY as intended? And crafting very detail deliberately? 



Yes, it means very often that our audience who can copy our (often non-standard CW) is severely reduced as only those who have truly mastered CW in all its forms can follow us when we use more severe variations, and even those that can often find our styles to their disliking. To be honest I am quite sure if there was a competition to decode a huge variety of CW styles including foreign CW, many of us here would be one of the winners, it's not something most CW operators have had to do, copy non-standard CW: those who operated in closed networks (military vs police) often find difficulty with other types of CW. However I do believe that ship sparks (R/O) are generally more skillful (unless they only worked on British ships and ONLY worked GKA:) at decoding a variety of fists, and also QSD from rolling ships, drunk sailors, etc. 



So in conclusion I am of the firm opinion, nay knowledge, that there IS NO ONE CW -- yes there is the Gerke Code that most of us use and it has an official version, and even that official version changed in most of our lifetimes from a 4 dit-duration interword spacing to a 7 dit-duration interword spacing, and most amateurs don't use that official "International Morse (Gerke) Code" as their interword spacing is often too short and their inter character spacing is often too long -- yet it MATTERS NOT. There are many legitimate CWs, languages, even different codes (American vs International), and styles, and they are valid. 



What matters is: can you read this? 



And: are you having fun? 



All best wishes, Lou VK5EEE 

Here are some more posts on Flavours of Morse and also a video of a cat sending Meourse (CatW): http://www.vkcw.net/forum/t-1366733/flavours-of-morse 

-- 
-- Appeal: maintaining the VKCW.NET site and furthering the interests of CW in Australia 
has been an expensive exercise for me in terms of time and loss of earnings, but worth it. 
There is now an Appeals Tab at VKCW.net. Donations however small will help me to help you 
enjoy your hobby more. Please visit http://www.vkcw.net/donate and consider a donation. 

73 es 77 de VK5EEE 
Lou. 



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SSN-ML" group. 
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ssn-ml+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com . 
To post to this group, send email to ssn-ml at googlegroups.com . 
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/ssn-ml . 
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout . 





______________________________________________________________ 
CW mailing list 
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw 
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm 
Post: mailto:CW at mailman.qth.net 
CW List ARCHIVES: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/ 
Unsubcribe send email to 
cw-unsubscribe at mailman.qth.net 
Subscribe send email to cw-subscribe at mailman.qth.net 
Support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 

=30= 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/attachments/20170216/551819e3/attachment-0001.html>