[rec.ham-radio] Understanding scrambled speech without a descrambler

parnass@ihuxz.ATT.COM (Bob Parnass, AJ9S) (04/17/88)

x
   The discussion of copying RTTY by ear is interesting, and
   I've	often thought about such things.

   One of my favorite daydreaming topics is how	humans might
   develop  the	 ability  to  understand  scrambled  speech,
   without using a  descrambler.   I'm	talking	 here  about
   speech  inversion  type  scrambling,	 not  digital  voice
   encryption, or time domain rolling code scrambling.

   Could this ability be developed in a	child  raised  (from
   infancy)  by	 parents  and  teachers	who communicate	only
   through use of a speech inversion scrambler?

   I've	been able to understand	SSB  transmission  fragments
   without  a  product	detector.  However, this is probably
   due to the cadence and context (e.g., recognizing someone
   calling  CQ is much easier than understanding an operator
   describing the weather).

-- 
===-===-===-===-===-===-===-===-===-===-===-===-===-===-===-===-===-===-===-===
Bob Parnass AJ9S - AT&T Bell Laboratories - ihnp4!ihuxz!parnass - (312)979-5414

henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (04/20/88)

>    One of my favorite daydreaming topics is how humans might
>    develop  the  ability  to  understand  scrambled  speech,
>    without using a  descrambler...

There are instances of this on the record.  In mid-WW2, Bell Labs
demonstrated that about half of a conversation using the then-current
A-3 scrambler -- used by Roosevelt and Churchill, among others --
could be understood by the unaided ear, with some practice.  It is
really quite hard to scramble speech well with pre-digital techniques.
There is too much redundancy in it.

(For more detail, see Kahn's 'The Codebreakers'.)
-- 
"Noalias must go.  This is           |  Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
non-negotiable."  --DMR              | {ihnp4,decvax,uunet!mnetor}!utzoo!henry

leonard@bucket.UUCP (Leonard Erickson) (04/23/88)

I remember seeing a reference somewhere regarding this. It was in some work
dealing with either espoinage or cryptography during WWII. It stated that
speech inversion was quickly dropped as it was possible to understand
without a descrambler "with practice".

Possible it was in The Codebreakers by Kahn?

-- 
Leonard Erickson		...!tektronix!reed!percival!bucket!leonard
CIS: [70465,203]
"I used to be a hacker. Now I'm a 'microcomputer specialist'.
You know... I'd rather be a hacker."