Microfilters (for BT Broadband/Homehub)??

Just ordered BT Broadband/Homehub for my Mum, arriving next week.
I think it comes with 2 microfilters.
On the basis that there should be a filter on each phone in the house
(she has 3), I think I need to get a third one.
Can you get them reasonably easily (e.g. Homebase appear to doa Commtel
model), and are they acceptable, or do I need a BT supplied filter?
TIA
Allan

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 12:30:06 +0100, Allan <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Just ordered BT Broadband/Homehub for my Mum, arriving next week.
>I think it comes with 2 microfilters.
>On the basis that there should be a filter on each phone in the house
>(she has 3), I think I need to get a third one.
>Can you get them reasonably easily (e.g. Homebase appear to doa Commtel
>model), and are they acceptable, or do I need a BT supplied filter?
>TIA
>Allan

Why aren't phones made with the microfilters built in ?

(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 12:30:06 +0100, Allan <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Just ordered BT Broadband/Homehub for my Mum, arriving next week.
>> I think it comes with 2 microfilters.
>> On the basis that there should be a filter on each phone in the house
>> (she has 3), I think I need to get a third one.
>> Can you get them reasonably easily (e.g. Homebase appear to doa Commtel
>> model), and are they acceptable, or do I need a BT supplied filter?
>> TIA
>> Allan
>
> Why aren't phones made with the microfilters built in ?

because if you totally filter the socket before splitting to extensions,
you don't need more than one filter anyway.


Nevermind, in a few years it will ALL be VOIP anyway, and you will
simply plug a set of standard phones into your router.

On 16/08/10 12:30, Allan wrote:
> Just ordered BT Broadband/Homehub for my Mum, arriving next week.
> I think it comes with 2 microfilters.
> On the basis that there should be a filter on each phone in the house
> (she has 3), I think I need to get a third one.
> Can you get them reasonably easily (e.g. Homebase appear to doa Commtel
> model), and are they acceptable, or do I need a BT supplied filter?

You don't need BT to supply them.

I tend to use microfilters from
http://www.adslnation.com/products/index.php
as they work OK and get good reviews.

"The Natural Philosopher" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:i4birq$24t$(E-Mail Removed)...
> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>> On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 12:30:06 +0100, Allan <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> Just ordered BT Broadband/Homehub for my Mum, arriving next week.
>>> I think it comes with 2 microfilters.
>>> On the basis that there should be a filter on each phone in the house (she has 3), I think I need to get a third one.
>>> Can you get them reasonably easily (e.g. Homebase appear to doa Commtel model), and are they acceptable, or do I need a BT
>>> supplied filter?
>>> TIA
>>> Allan
>>
>> Why aren't phones made with the microfilters built in ?
>
> because if you totally filter the socket before splitting to extensions, you don't need more than one filter anyway.


Correct, and despite most ISPs not mentioning it, a single central filter is
always better than filtering multiple extension sockets.

If your incoming line goes to an NTE5 master socket, a replacement
filtered faceplate (not an i-plate) implements this neatly.

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

Sir Micheal Rake wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 10:00:11 +0100, Peter Crosland wrote:
>
>> Perhaps inferior would be a better word than poor. However the main
>> difference is the ADSL Nation ones are an active design using
>> transisters to filter the signals.
>>
>> Peter Crosland
>
> Did you mean: transistors?
> When attempting to speak authoritatively on a subject, please spell the
> key word correctly. Thank you.

He couldn't have meant transistors because ADSL nation filters are
passive like everyone else's.

Least ways mine is, and their specs mention only passive components.

http://www.adslnation.com/products/xf-1e.php

"The XF-1e contains four high quality ferrite cores to ensure that
accurate frequency separation is achieved.

Accurate separation ensures that overspill is minimised. Overspill is
where the ADSL signal leaks in to the voice frequency range or speech
interferes with the ADSL signal. The high quality, low tolerance
components used in the XF-1e ensure that your ADSL service will run at
maximum performance and that your telephone calls will be free of
interference.

Designed to exceed the the BT SIN 346 v2.2 guidelines for UK
microfilters the XF-1e offers complete compatibility with BT services
such as CLI (Caller ID).
The XF-1e is designed for maximum compatibility with even the most
complex telephone equipment. Fully compatible with DECT cordless phones
and PABX systems."

You would have thought they would say if they were active.

I would say, its *probably* not legal to use active filters, anyway. And
there are good reason why that is so. They would likely be worse performers.

http://www.btwebworld.com/sinet/346v2p8.pdf

is the spec, and it doesn't specifically prohibit them, but the specs
would be hard to achieve with a powered active device, and I am not sure
where the power would come from. BT don't like other things than phones
drawing power.



But hey, It's Peter fucking killfiled Crosland. So all bets are off.

On 17/08/10 12:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> He couldn't have meant transistors because ADSL nation filters are
> passive like everyone else's.

http://www.adslnation.com/support/filters.php

"The XF-1e uses transistors to actively remove the ADSL signal
from the telephone equipment."

Andrew Benham wrote:
> On 17/08/10 12:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> He couldn't have meant transistors because ADSL nation filters are
>> passive like everyone else's.
>
> http://www.adslnation.com/support/filters.php
>
> "The XF-1e uses transistors to actively remove the ADSL signal
> from the telephone equipment."
Muy bad. Dunno why they bother though. I wonder if its like those 9
transistor radios' we used to get where three of them were soldered into
the board, but did nothing. :-)

Last place I would attempt active filtering is at the end of a BT line...

Sir Micheal Rake wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 15:18:24 +0100, Andrew Benham wrote:
>
>> On 17/08/10 12:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> He couldn't have meant transistors because ADSL nation filters are
>>> passive like everyone else's.
>> http://www.adslnation.com/support/filters.php
>>
>> "The XF-1e uses transistors to actively remove the ADSL signal from the
>> telephone equipment."
>
> As do several others - but don't point that out to the doofus. Peter may
> have fucked up his spelling, but at the back of the class once more is
> the group idiot: 'The Natural Phillosopher'. Nobody likes a know-all, but
> everyone laughs at a know-fuckall.

Oh dear. Cant spell philosopher and wants to be a knight.

Kill file for you.

>>>
>>>They are first class and in fact I would go so far as to say that they are
>>>the canine gonads!. I recently had the opportunity to dissect one of the
>>>filters supplied by BT with their Business Hub AKA 2Wire 2700HGV. Although
>>>the components were of reasonable quality the design was poor compared with
>>>the ADSL Nation ones.
>>
>> In what specific way
>
> Perhaps inferior would be a better word than poor. However the main difference is the ADSL Nation ones are an active design using
> transisters to filter the signals.
Somewhere I have a pair of filters with active components.
When I get a moment I will sketch out a schematic, but a brief inspection
of the PCB suggested to me that the transistors sniffed the RF and held two relays
closed which each switched in part of the filter.
Or to put it another way the filter was partially switched out when ADSL was
not present.
The only advantage I could see was perhaps more "top" in the POTS
response when your modem was switched off.
1) not that I have ever noticed any lack of HF response using a filter
2) not a lot of use in an "always on" situation.

I am willing to be corrected on how these things work.
Does anyone know?


--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%