[CQ-Contest] Voice Automation Enhancements and the future
jimsmith at shaw.ca
Sat Jan 29 02:35:46 EST 2005
We currently have contests in which require no operator coding or
decoding skills and have had for decades. They are RTTY contests.
People seem to like them. The good ops with the good stations and
locations are the ones who win them.
Automated CW decoding is here now and few contests specifically disallow
There would still be differences in occupied bandwidth, the quality of
the decoding devices and the skill of the operator in using them.
Development of speech recognition systems which would work well under
contest conditions would be a fertile ground for ham experimentation
which I suspect isn't being done by others. i.e. while I may well be
wrong, I doubt that any commercial or academic enterprise is doing
research on speech recognition with 1 kHz or worse channel spacing.
So, while the mechanisms may change, I suspect that the fundamentals of
73 de Jim Smith VE7FO
Mike Clarson wrote:
>Please--don't misunderstand. I am not trying to start a phone vs. CW thing.
>Just trying to envision what is coming and where we are going. I am not
>anti-progress. I don't miss recopying logs and using those paper dup sheets!
>So Eric is developing full voice automation. Fascinating. It seems to be
>patterned after automated CW. I could see one having the same buttons for CW
>and phone. What then would be the difference between operating a phone
>contest vs. a CW contest? Only the ability to copy CW. The same difference
>it would be if one participated in a Spanish Language contest. Same
>buttons--another language (and I only use Spanish as an example because I am
>a native English speaker). Next step is voice recognition/CW recognition. If
>the computer does the copying, then there would really be no difference
>between a phone or CW (or for that matter, digital mode or digitized
>voice)contest. Any thoughts?--Mike, WV2ZOW
>CQ-Contest mailing list
>CQ-Contest at contesting.com
More information about the CQ-Contest