Hi John,
Actually I have and it was easy as could be. I simply use the IAMBIC
paddle, but
use it as if it were just a single lever. In fact, my first ever paddle was
an IAMBIC
paddle, but I just learned to use it as if it were a single lever. I
strongly believe "each to his own", but I'm just hardheaded and see NO
advantages to iambic. I've had a few iambic users in my shack and the
simply cannot master the old single lever.
Guess that is my 2 cents worth.
Tony
John - G3JAG wrote:
> Have you ever actually tried it, Tony ?? Its far from easy to go from
> fully non-iambic squeeze keying to iambic. It simply does not work. I
> have been stuck with it whilst guest operating overseas, and it was
> awful and extremely tiring. I can easily switch my own external keyer
> into iambic mode; in fact any time someone wants to hear garbage (more
> than my usual garbage that is) I'll do it.
>
> But going the opposite way is trivial, as long as the non-iambic keyer
> has dot/dash memories, because at the end of the day, all iambic keying
> has is a dot/dash memory to stop you losing the odd dot/dash off the end
> of a character through slamming the lever(s) over too fast. All the
> iambic buff needs do is exactly what he/she did before and it works
> fine. You cannot single squeeze anything more elaborate than an "a" or
> an "n" with an iambic keyer and thats exactly what a non-iambic keyer
> with dot/dash memories will do for you. You do not have to learn any new
> tricks at all.
>
> If you go from a keyer with dot/dash memories to one without ANY such
> memories at all (and they are now mainly useful as museum pieces) then
> you do have a serious timing problem, but so would anyone unfamiliar
> with vintage keyers. The guys who can use those old fashioned keyers
> well have had years of practice to sharpen up their timing, because the
> leeway for error is zilch.
>
> Now why do they build keyers into rigs at all if they cannot be set up
> to suit different operators ?? One answer: the availability of the
> Curtis dedicated CW chip. Very neat, but inflexible. I think Mr Curtis
> missed a trick and everyone since then has simply copied the same logic.
> Maybe its as simple as him not having room on his original chip for any
> more code ?? So iambic is the flavour of the month, even at TT, (and I'm
> about as relevant as the dinosaur). At least my Omni-V has no built-in
> keyer for me to curse/ignore, and it still keys beautifully.
>
> Now that is what we really want. The actual keying gizmo is a
> distraction as long as the signal is clean and the op takes care to
> send readable code. TT got their part right; its up to those whose
> ambitions exceed 5 wpm to deliver the "readable" bit, through practice.
> No-one can tell what key you use - they only hear the output.
>
> 73 to all John G3JAG
>
> Hutbers Law of Re-structuring: "Improvement" means deterioration.
> (Someone always loses .....)
>
> On 01-Jan-00 B. J. \"Tony\" Martin wrote:
> >
> > I couldn't agree more. A non-iambic operator can use an iambic
> > operator's
> > key configuration with ease. BUT, it is a very different story if
> > you are
> > an iambic operator faced with a non-iambic configuration (like field
> > day,
> > or a real emergency).
>
> ----------------------------------
> E-Mail: John - G3JAG <patents@dx0man.prestel.co.uk>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
> Date: 02-Jan-00
> Time: 00:29:03
>
> This message was sent by XFMail
> ----------------------------------
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm
Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|