3 ms·

Oh my! Strictly speaking, it may be true that most folks will spend a bit more time on receiving practice to become minimally proficient. But I would caution ag

Oh my! Strictly speaking, it may be true that most folks will spend a bit more time on receiving practice to become minimally proficient. But I would caution against de-emphasizing sending practice for two reasons. First, there's a wide gap between sending /something/ and sending intelligible communications. At low speeds, an iambic keyer with strict timing can cover up poor technique, but at higher speeds or when sending with a straight key, it's surprisingly easy to send gibberish. If I can't make our your call, I can't respond to you ;) Second, effort spent on sending practice helps reinforce receiving practice. It also helps break things up, provide variety, and generally make practice more fun. As you point out, the code is no longer compulsory. It's a hobby and should be fun! :)

lutusp 10y ago
I agree with your points. My comment was based on my personal experience as a radio amateur. When I was young, when Morse was still central to radio communications, I spent too much time learning how to send and far too little learning how to receive, such that my receiving speed is now still far below my ability to send. > Second, effort spent on sending practice helps reinforce receiving practice. Perhaps to some extent, but I find that I can send with much more adeptness that the reverse. This (or its reverse) may be a common experience. I think time should be devoted to both, so I think we're in essential agreement. > It's a hobby and should be fun! Complete agreement, and how times change. After the Titanic went down, nautical authorities promptly required that radiotelegraph sets be installed on all large ocean-going vessels. Now Morse is a diversion, an interesting historical artifact.
lb1lf 10y ago
I never got the hang of iambic paddles, being too much of a klutz to get the good enough timing on the squeezing motion. Now, single-lever paddles, on the other hand... I've found them to be much more forgiving (at least with regards to my particular kind of klutziness) - I top out at some 17-18 wpm using iambics; single-lever, I can comfortably increase the speed by 10wpm (and still produce legible code! :)) Still no beating an old straight key for having fun, though. IMHO, of course.

lutusp 10y ago

I agree with your points. My comment was based on my personal experience as a radio amateur. When I was young, when Morse was still central to radio communications, I spent too much time learning how to send and far too little learning how to receive, such that my receiving speed is now still far below my ability to send. > Second, effort spent on sending practice helps reinforce receiving practice. Perhaps to some extent, but I find that I can send with much more adeptness that the reverse. This (or its reverse) may be a common experience. I think time should be devoted to both, so I think we're in essential agreement. > It's a hobby and should be fun! Complete agreement, and how times change. After the Titanic went down, nautical authorities promptly required that radiotelegraph sets be installed on all large ocean-going vessels. Now Morse is a diversion, an interesting historical artifact.

lb1lf 10y ago

I never got the hang of iambic paddles, being too much of a klutz to get the good enough timing on the squeezing motion. Now, single-lever paddles, on the other hand... I've found them to be much more forgiving (at least with regards to my particular kind of klutziness) - I top out at some 17-18 wpm using iambics; single-lever, I can comfortably increase the speed by 10wpm (and still produce legible code! :)) Still no beating an old straight key for having fun, though. IMHO, of course.