[CW] Flavours of Morse

wealsowalk at aol.com wealsowalk at aol.com
Mon Feb 20 15:16:33 EST 2017


In the late 1980's an old guy friend told me that he sends the way he does because his intent was to defeat the computer code readers.  I thought he was sort of hard copy, but readable.
Bill
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: D.J.J. Ring, Jr. <n1ea at arrl.net>
Sent: Wed, Feb 15, 2017 7:17 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/20170220/f5ba1a3c/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the CW mailing list