----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 1:04
Subject: Re: LF: CW and other modes
Why do you need to go to all this trouble when a
competent CW operator can DO BETTER. For those that do not or cannot master
CW, start learning. This is the most sensible and most cost efficient way to
approach the business. No expensive computers or other devices needed.
All that is needed is dedication and some work
and not depend on the LAZY MAN'S approach.
As a start John, we might have to define our terms as to what is
acceptable as "speech transmission"!
Dependant upon the defined term we can commence with a series of logical
steps toward such a goal.
At the "starter" end there is perhaps the simple "Voice-to-code,
Code-to-voice" protocol of speech recognition to keyer (morse or other) and
the various demod possibilities with the attendant condition that one might
call "CQ" into one's mic. today, and be attendant upon one's receiving
apparatus for a speech reply sometime during the following week! The
thing starts to take on interesting possibilities if it is acceptable to
involve networking infrastructure with only some of the task being
allocated to the RF path at LF.
However, I believe that chucking these questions and ideas up in the air
for all to catch and play with is what will prompt experimentation and
"Is there somebody out there ?" is a whole sentence and, as we are all
aware, requires very few data bits to be identified as such in
innumerable languages without complicated translation.
Lateral thinking might, therefore, suggest that "speech" should be
redefined when "transmission" at narrow bandwidths is invoked. This is more or
less what we are doing today - conveying sense and meaning. Your question may
in fact be posing as a whole range of problems to whet our appetites!