Isn’t that the truth! A lot of weak ones under the din. I hear many of the shore stations asking callers to QSW (call me on — frequency) or (I’m going to — frequency to receive calls or pass traffic). Sort of what some of the VHFers in this area do in a contest, they CQ on 144.200 then move, for instance, to 144.210 to receive and make more CQs. (Around here, 144.200 is the “calling frequency”, so they don’t want to hog it).
73
John
A lot less if you search the used ham ads.
Hi Erik,
Overnight I find the topic has been stretched in all directions!
The CW filter option in modern radios (everything since the 817, around Y2000) is automatically only applicable to the CW mode. In the 817 this is done by defining what kind of filter is installed, which the software in the radio then uses to work out which modes to enable it, when the NAR option is selected in the operation menu. So it doesn’t affect SSB at all. Conversely if you installed the narrow SSB filter, which does make quite a difference to SSB reception and transmission, it has no effect on CW mode and sadly isn’t even available as it would narrow the bandwidth slightly.
Regarding whether a narrow filter is essential, it isn’t essential for general operation. But when there is QRM from adjacent contacts that start up after you do, a 500 hz filter effectively nulls out a contact that is happening at 1000 hz above your frequency, and everything above that too. So its major benefit is that it prevents signals outside your contact from interfering with reception of the signal you want to hear. When the qrm is s9 and your wanted signal is s3, while you can concentrate on the frequency of the desired signal, an s9 interfering signal inside the receiver passband will dominate the action of the AGC in the receiver, as the AGC is dependent on the sum of all signals arriving at the AGC detector. So your desired S3 signal is being pumped up and down in level, as the stronger signal keys down and up. This effect is actually more difficult to copy through, than the strong signal in your ear at say 1600 hz. That’s the main reason for engaging the narrow filter, in my experience. However of course, 500 hz, or even 270hz, is still finite, so there is still space for an interfering signal to be close enough to make copy very difficult when your desired signal is weak.
Questions about Cw filters, speed, style and how to learn morse are frequently asked on this reflector/forum. The search facility works well, you can find lots of discussion on these topics.
Personal preferences dictate operating modes and equipment types. As already stated above, this is why there is no single correct answer. Thank goodness, I couldn’t bear it if I had to use the same radio as everyone else!
73 Andrew VK1DA/VK2UH
1 Like
All of mine were bought used apart from one that came in the radio.
I was unable to copy most of them 1st time I listened as I was sat mouth agape.
A lot of people still switch off the AGC, crank up the AF gain and ride the RF gain as a volume control. This stops pumping and reduces blocking.
2 Likes
Yes that was the method used on my old receiver in the 60s, bandwidth about 10 khz I think… however nowadays it seems the only receivers that allow you to turn the agc off are those that are SDRs and they have very nice bandwidth options anyway, so it is rarely something you’d need to do.
This is nothing Andy. Try mentioning activating with FT8 and watch the deluge of zero experience expertise you get then 
1 Like
That’s how you trick the TS570. It has two sets of menus, A & B. You can operate the radio using either menu set A or menu set B. Each set are independent and you can have completely different settings in each set. You select CW filter installed in menu A and SSB filter installed in B. Then you can flip between set A or B and use the filter in CW or SSB mode. In my case a 270Hz filter is too narrow for voice, but works fine for soundcard digital modes that are narrow. Using the narrow CW filter in SSB digi modes allows you to cut out huge amounts of energy and reduce AGC pumping etc. and allow the digimode magic to further do its stuff.
2 Likes
Well you can turn off the AGC on the fairly ubiquitous FT817/818, and on the FT857D. I don’t know about other rigs but not being able to turn off the AGC strikes me as pretty odd!
Erik,
I had the same dilema as you. I took approach to order QCX Mini for 20m band as I already have QCX 40m. I applied for forthcomming CW Academy course and hopefully will be able to do CW activations in the spring.
If capabilities of QCX proves insuficient, I can switch to mcHF which has adjustable filters. I wish I could afford/justify expence of KX2/KX3/IC705.
From my very limited experience unless there is contest at the time standard fixed 300Hz filter should be OK for 95% of QSOs. Handling potential pile up on high scoring summit scares me much more.
Good Luck, and maybe see you on the bands one day.
73 de Marek
1 Like
Great stuff! I appreciate everyone that took the time to answer my questions. I will keep practicing Morse daily with hopes of doing my first SOTA via CW in the Spring. One cool thing that happened yesterday! I was flying into an airport and the ATIS (automated terminal information system) was on a VOR frequency which is pretty rare these days. I was able to decipher the station ID in the background of the message instantly, so my code practice must be working! I thought how cool on long boring flights I can scan through the VORs and practice Morse station identification while being paid😀
One year ago I had no idea what SOTA was or even that such a thing existed. What a wonderful activity that has brought me to places I would have never visited and met people I otherwise wouldn’t have.
3 Likes
Good deal ! You’re coming along. It won’t take long before you can
carry on with lots of QSOs on CW.
About a year and a half ago, I didn’t know what SOTA was, either.
Had worked a couple of SOTA stations but really didn’t know there was so much activity. Then I got interested and started to investigate on the internet and found the SOTAWATCH site. Then I started paying attention and chasing the activators. Now I have had about 4000 SOTA QSOs and 22,000 points! Amazing.
I’ve worked some activators who were REAL slow a year ago, and now they are much improved in just a year or so. I do mostly CW.
73
John K6YK
2 Likes
That method of turning off the AGC and using the RF gain as a
volume control is the way I was taught back 50-60 years ago! And
it worked! Those old receivers just didn’t have the selectivity of
the new stuff. If you have a decent filter in the radio, those adjacent
signals won’t work the AGC. The last couple of years I’ve been using
150 Hz filtering for CW. Sounds awful narrow, doesn’t it? But
it doesn’t have any ringing and there is hardly ever any signal I can’t
dig out of the noise and other nearby signals. The IC-7600 and other
IC-756 type radios have a very slow tuning rate available so you can
tune around with a 150 Hz filter and not miss any stations. ( The tuning rate is about 2 turns of the big knob for 1 Khz change). This
setup works very well!
73
John
I’ll bet if a guy was to put an audio filter such as an Autek QF-1 or similar into the headphone jack of your computer, you could sort out all those signals to the point where you could hear each one individually.
I have one of those filters, I may give it a go.
John
I was at sea and a Radio/Electronics Officer in the 1970’s and 1980’s, both deep-sea, and on ferries to the continent. Those audio clips are good examples of what 500kHz CW was like then, when CW was a major part of on-board marine communications. It is now a lost era, and it felt rather nostalgic for someone who was involved with it.
73’s
David
G4ZAO
1 Like
As someone who has been operating Morse only for the last 11 years or so I have to admit my astonishment at how “squaggy” many of those signals were and that it was considered acceptable for them to sound so bad. I suppose I’ve been spoilt by only hearing mainly modern transmitters with their synthesised, rock solid oscillators.
2 Likes
40m cw end used to have a lot of signals sounding like that. Chirp, unstable etc. and few of them with amateur callsigns. Possibly spurious signals from a tx actually intended to be transmitting in a marine band.
Some awful tx designs, like free running 6v6 oscillators and an 807 amp, no voltage stabilisation for the oscillator.
When propagation improves there will probably be similar signals again.
That’d do the 50W nicely if you pushed the 807 a bit 
(as per Now with 50W thread q.v. )
Back in the 60’s there were indeed some terrible signals about, I was told that the chirp and drift was from certain popular war surplus rigs and the less than T9 notes were badly made PSUs! Add to this that many of the war surplus receivers were very drifty, even putting a voltage stabiliser on the oscillator valves had little effect. Mind you, some of the early ham transmitters weren’t exactly paragons - Swan radios in particular were said to be VERY drifty, but I never got my hands on one so I don’t know! Even the best valve radios had to be run for at least half an hour before operating, to warm up and get the drift minimised. We’ve come a long way!
Yes, warming up the rig was standard procedure. I used to just
leave the receiver on all the time back about 60 or so years ago.
I still have some old gear and use it occasionally to chase DX or
SOTAs if I can hear them. Pictures of the “boat anchor” desk are on my QRZ page. Even my 65 year old transmitter sounds
better than a lot of those signals on that recording! I have only one
WW2 surplus rig, and it also sounds very clean and clear.
Maybe a lot of the problem with ship systems was voltage instability
and poor filtering, I don’t know.
It’s fun to listen and try to sort it out. Like a DX pileup!
73
John K6YK
2 Likes