Software to decode wefax,cw, ect.

Software to decode wefax,cw, ect.

Post by Susan Misene » Thu, 19 Apr 2001 04:50:50

Does anyone know of a program that works well with a Sound Blaster card to
decode digital such as Wefax, slowscan, CW, ect??  I've tried a few with no
luck yet.  Thanks Marc.
 
 
 

Software to decode wefax,cw, ect.

Post by John » Thu, 19 Apr 2001 10:37:31


Have a look at the following sites,
http://www.qsl.net/ec1ame/soft.html
http://members.brabant.chello.nl/~j.verhees/Downloads.htm
http://www.strongsignals.net/htm/software.htm
http://iz8bly.sysonline.it/
http://www.muenster.de/~welp/sb.htm
these should keep you busy for the next week or so ?


Quote:> Does anyone know of a program that works well with a Sound Blaster card to
> decode digital such as Wefax, slowscan, CW, ect??  I've tried a few with
no
> luck yet.  Thanks Marc.

 
 
 

Software to decode wefax,cw, ect.

Post by Queequ » Thu, 19 Apr 2001 21:41:28

CWGET works acceptably well on CW, but it is much better to just learn morse
code.  Get to 5 wpm and you can pass the code section of a ham license.
Then you can participate rather than just SWL.  I did it (in spite of
increasing occurences of 'senior moments') at 54 years and now can send and
receive at about 15 wpm.

Paul KB1GEJ


>Have a look at the following sites,
>http://www.qsl.net/ec1ame/soft.html
>http://members.brabant.chello.nl/~j.verhees/Downloads.htm
>http://www.strongsignals.net/htm/software.htm
>http://iz8bly.sysonline.it/
>http://www.muenster.de/~welp/sb.htm
>these should keep you busy for the next week or so ?



>> Does anyone know of a program that works well with a Sound Blaster card to
>> decode digital such as Wefax, slowscan, CW, ect??  I've tried a few with
>no
>> luck yet.  Thanks Marc.

--
"Dead Whale or a Stove Boat"
<---------[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[
 
 
 

Software to decode wefax,cw, ect.

Post by Richard McCollu » Fri, 20 Apr 2001 01:27:46


Quote:> CWGET works acceptably well on CW, but it is much better to just learn
morse
> code.  Get to 5 wpm and you can pass the code section of a ham license.
> Then you can participate rather than just SWL.  I did it (in spite of
> increasing occurences of 'senior moments') at 54 years and now can send
and
> receive at about 15 wpm.

> Paul KB1GEJ

You can get Morse Academy from http://ah0a.org.  Read the instructions,
follow the plan and you will have it in no time.

Dick N?BK

 
 
 

Software to decode wefax,cw, ect.

Post by [Me] » Fri, 20 Apr 2001 09:35:59

They think "Well, if we learned it then you can learn it too".
I've learned allot of things they don't know about the human body but I don't
suggest learning biology just because they have a pesky nose hair problem and
want the optimum removal technique. That in a sense is what they do when they encourage
us to learn morse code.

> It ALWAYS amazes me how EVERY TIME someone asks for CW *decoding*
> software, all the BIG HEADED HAMS come in and recommend some type of
> morse code learning.  Hams are some of the MOST OBNOCTUOUS people I've
> ever seen!!!  Did it ever occur to you hard heads that some people
> DON'T WANT to learn morse code.  That's why they asked for the
> software in the first place!!!!  If they wanted help learning morse
> code, at least they are smart enough to ask, but you all can't even
> answer a simple question!!!!!!!

 
 
 

Software to decode wefax,cw, ect.

Post by Richard McCollu » Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:07:17


Quote:> It ALWAYS amazes me how EVERY TIME someone asks for CW *decoding*
> software, all the BIG HEADED HAMS come in and recommend some type of
> morse code learning.  Hams are some of the MOST OBNOCTUOUS people I've
> ever seen!!!  Did it ever occur to you hard heads that some people
> DON'T WANT to learn morse code.  That's why they asked for the
> software in the first place!!!!  If they wanted help learning morse
> code, at least they are smart enough to ask, but you all can't even
> answer a simple question!!!!!!!

The unvarnished fact of the matter is that there is no software that will
handle hand-sent CW worth squat.  The same code that grayware can handle
without a lot of trouble will drive a computer buggy.  Can't recommend
what don't work.

I tend to partially agree about the first answer but given that it was
made, and I happened to know where a good package could be found in a sea
of bad ones, I tossed in my zwei pfennigs and a brass farthing.  Last I
heard, ***s made their own decisions.

Sounds to me like you have an emotional problem with Morse.  Take it up
with the chaplain, not me.  He can be found down the hall in the room with
three letters on the door.

Dick N?BK

 
 
 

Software to decode wefax,cw, ect.

Post by Queequ » Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:19:12

WTF is your problem?  The reason WHY it is recommended to learn code is that
software is piss-poor at decoding anything less than S9+ machine generated
codewith no QRM.  Forget real-world code with guys using hand keys or bugs.
some oldtimers using bugs are rumored to purposely send code that breaks
software.

And to set the record straight:  before I became a 'BIG HEADED HAM', I was a
SWL for 36 years and didn't give a ***about CW.  When I tried to use
software to do it, I was so frustrated with the shitty job it did, that I
took a few hours a week to listen to W1AW and practice code.  At 54.  With a
brain that was subjected to pot for years.

Software is fine for PSK31 and RTTY (I use both), but sucks BIGTIME for CW.
Better to use the 'wetware' between the ears.  Or forget CW, its only 'BIG
HEADED HAMS' anyway...


>It ALWAYS amazes me how EVERY TIME someone asks for CW *decoding*
>software, all the BIG HEADED HAMS come in and recommend some type of

[snippum]

Q.
--
"Dead Whale or a Stove Boat"
<---------[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[

 
 
 

Software to decode wefax,cw, ect.

Post by [Me] » Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:24:07

I disagree with you entirely.
I use a program called MixW and it decodes and encodes morse code perfectly under poor conditions
unless the keyer is just a downright retard with horrible timing. It also does RTTY, FSK, PACTOR, HELL
and so on decoding.



> > It ALWAYS amazes me how EVERY TIME someone asks for CW *decoding*
> > software, all the BIG HEADED HAMS come in and recommend some type of
> > morse code learning.  Hams are some of the MOST OBNOCTUOUS people I've
> > ever seen!!!  Did it ever occur to you hard heads that some people
> > DON'T WANT to learn morse code.  That's why they asked for the
> > software in the first place!!!!  If they wanted help learning morse
> > code, at least they are smart enough to ask, but you all can't even
> > answer a simple question!!!!!!!

> The unvarnished fact of the matter is that there is no software that will
> handle hand-sent CW worth squat.  The same code that grayware can handle
> without a lot of trouble will drive a computer buggy.  Can't recommend
> what don't work.

> I tend to partially agree about the first answer but given that it was
> made, and I happened to know where a good package could be found in a sea
> of bad ones, I tossed in my zwei pfennigs and a brass farthing.  Last I
> heard, ***s made their own decisions.

> Sounds to me like you have an emotional problem with Morse.  Take it up
> with the chaplain, not me.  He can be found down the hall in the room with
> three letters on the door.

>*** N?BK

 
 
 

Software to decode wefax,cw, ect.

Post by Queequ » Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:25:44

Learning code was suggested because the poster seemed to be expressing an
interest in the content of CW QSO's.  It makes sense.  I program database
applications sometimes when the rent is overdue and I need money.  One
client asked if I could set up a database system for his wife's hobby.
Couple of days later I handed him a plastic box filled with 3X5 cards.
Sometimes the elegant solution evades us because we are looking too high.


>They think "Well, if we learned it then you can learn it too".
>I've learned allot of things they don't know about the human body but I don't
>suggest learning biology just because they have a pesky nose hair problem and
>want the optimum removal technique. That in a sense is what they do when they encourage
>us to learn morse code.

Q.
--
"Dead Whale or a Stove Boat"
<---------[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[
 
 
 

Software to decode wefax,cw, ect.

Post by [Me] » Fri, 20 Apr 2001 12:32:48

But no one "wants" to learn code anymore.
It's obsolete.
If I have a problem in my car, I call help on my cell phone.
If a ship has a problem it sends over satellite.
If a ham has a problem he gets on a microphone unless he's of a lower
class to where he can't use voice, then it's the stupid code that keeps him
from using his microphone to begin with, which puts him in possible danger
of not getting help except from people in the VHF/UHF range which isn't very
good unless you happen to have problems in the middle of a city where there are
tons of people and tons of repeaters.
"Dead Whale or a Stove Boat"
No, just obsolete morse code. :)

> Learning code was suggested because the poster seemed to be expressing an
> interest in the content of CW QSO's.  It makes sense.  I program database
> applications sometimes when the rent is overdue and I need money.  One
> client asked if I could set up a database system for his wife's hobby.
> Couple of days later I handed him a plastic box filled with 3X5 cards.
> Sometimes the elegant solution evades us because we are looking too high.


> >They think "Well, if we learned it then you can learn it too".
> >I've learned allot of things they don't know about the human body but I don't
> >suggest learning biology just because they have a pesky nose hair problem and
> >want the optimum removal technique. That in a sense is what they do when they encourage
> >us to learn morse code.

> Q.
> --
> "Dead Whale or a Stove Boat"
> <---------[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[

 
 
 

Software to decode wefax,cw, ect.

Post by Dwight Stewar » Fri, 20 Apr 2001 22:42:01


> The unvarnished fact of the matter is
> that there is no software that will
> handle hand-sent CW worth squat.  The
> same code that grayware can handle
> without a lot of trouble will drive
> a computer buggy.  Can't recommend
> what don't work.

  Of course there is, Richard.  I've been using computer software to
decode Morse for years (started way back in my Apple II days while
listening to military transmissions in Europe).  Good software, a good
computer, and a good receiver, can do just fine at Morse.

Dwight Stewart   (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net

 
 
 

Software to decode wefax,cw, ect.

Post by Queequ » Fri, 20 Apr 2001 23:12:05


>But no one "wants" to learn code anymore.
>It's obsolete.

You are quite right.  CW IS obsolete.  So are:
   57 Chevies
   Bowhunting
   Black powder firearms
   Homebrew beer
   Garter belts
   Log cabins in the woods
   Getting married
   Chess (or any other board game)
   Black & white photography
   Fishing & hunting
   Vegetable gardening
   Newspapers
   Picnics
   Football on natural turf
   Over-the-air TV
   Shortwave listening

Q.  

--
"Dead Whale or a Stove Boat"
<---------[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[

 
 
 

Software to decode wefax,cw, ect.

Post by Mark Holde » Sat, 21 Apr 2001 00:55:36

<snip>

Quote:> You are quite right.  CW IS obsolete.  So are:

<snip>

Quote:>    Homebrew beer

<snip>

Homebrew is obsolete?

Did those Clydesdales finally figure out how to make something that
tastes like beer?

 
 
 

Software to decode wefax,cw, ect.

Post by Queequ » Sat, 21 Apr 2001 02:20:08



><snip>

>> You are quite right.  CW IS obsolete.  So are:

><snip>

>>    Homebrew beer

><snip>

>Homebrew is obsolete?

>Did those Clydesdales finally figure out how to make something that
>tastes like beer?

Hell no, but Long Trail Brewing in Vermont makes a brew called "Two Bagger
Strong Ale" that very much resembles real beer.  Look for it at your local
stupor market...

Q.

--
"Dead Whale or a Stove Boat"
<---------[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[

 
 
 

Software to decode wefax,cw, ect.

Post by Dwight Stewar » Sat, 21 Apr 2001 11:44:06


> You are quite right.  CW IS obsolete.  So are:
>    57 Chevies
>    Bowhunting
>    Black powder firearms
>    Homebrew beer
>    Garter belts
>    Log cabins in the woods
>    Getting married
>    Chess (or any other board game)
>    Black & white photography
>    Fishing & hunting
>    Vegetable gardening
>    Newspapers
>    Picnics
>    Football on natural turf
>    Over-the-air TV
>    Shortwave listening

  Whoa, lets not throw out the important things - like garter belts
(my wife looks good in those).  Hey, wait a minute, with the exception
of the 57 Chevies (I hate Chevies) and CW, you've just about described
my life.  I guess that pretty much makes me obsolete also, and I'm not
that damn old. :-)

Dwight Stewart   (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net