Recording a phone call

I am trying to record a telphone conversation for freelance journalism
interviews.

I have broadband and filters on the telephone points with phones
attached - I also have phone points with no filters or phone equipment
attached.

I have purchased a telephone recording adapter from Maplins:

http://www.maplin.co.uk/Products/Mod...eNo=30352&MR=N

it says it plugs into the phone handset bit it doesn't - it has a
socket that plugs into the ADSL filter which both the phone and the
recorder plug into.

It gives a constant very loud hum when connected and recording.

Is this because of the broadband or some other interference?

Is there a way to stop this hum and just record the phone
conversation?

Thanks for you help

Paul

<freelancer> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> I am trying to record a telphone conversation for freelance journalism
> interviews.
>
> I have broadband and filters on the telephone points with phones
> attached - I also have phone points with no filters or phone equipment
> attached.
>
> I have purchased a telephone recording adapter from Maplins:
>
>
http://www.maplin.co.uk/Products/Mod...eNo=30352&MR=N
>
> it says it plugs into the phone handset bit it doesn't - it has a
> socket that plugs into the ADSL filter which both the phone and the
> recorder plug into.
>
> It gives a constant very loud hum when connected and recording.
>
> Is this because of the broadband or some other interference?
>
> Is there a way to stop this hum and just record the phone
> conversation?
>
> Thanks for you help
>
> Paul

Well i am sure that is against the law and you are obliged to inform the
party you are making a recording. Equally, if you recording was required as
evidence, it would not stand up in court unless you informed the other party
of the recording taking place.

If you have a pda you could use the recording equipment on that, then
transfer it to your pc has a .wav. I have personally used this method
against a so-called freelance journo (see www.gomechewatch.com)

--
Krystian Whellans || AngelHosts.com
e-mail:sales [at] angelhosts.com
http://www.angelhosts.com/plans.html Hosting from $2 per month
http://www.angelhosts.com E-mail Hosting, Domain Names, PHP Forum Hosting

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, said......

> I am trying to record a telphone conversation for freelance journalism
> interviews.
>
> I have broadband and filters on the telephone points with phones
> attached - I also have phone points with no filters or phone equipment
> attached.
>
> I have purchased a telephone recording adapter from Maplins:
>
> http://www.maplin.co.uk/Products/Mod...eNo=30352&MR=N
>
> it says it plugs into the phone handset bit it doesn't - it has a
> socket that plugs into the ADSL filter which both the phone and the
> recorder plug into.
>
> It gives a constant very loud hum when connected and recording.
>
> Is this because of the broadband or some other interference?
>
> Is there a way to stop this hum and just record the phone
> conversation?
>
> Thanks for you help
>
> Paul
>
Disconnect the handset cable from the base (this is the rj11 connector)
and plug it in there. If you don't have a telephone with the handset
connected to the base unit by a bit of curly wire you need to get one to
use this.

It does not plug into the telephone socket on the wall or the ADSL
filter.
--
Mugwump

Reply to 'usenetmail{at}discworld{dot}org{dot}uk

On Sat, 1 May 2004 12:53:43 +0100, "AngelHosts.com"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Well i am sure that is against the law and you are obliged to inform the
>party you are making a recording.

He didn't say he wasn't going to inform the other party.

>Equally, if you recording was required as
>evidence, it would not stand up in court unless you informed the other party
>of the recording taking place.

In practice this is unlikely to be the case. It will depend upon the
nature of the case and how important that recorded call is. The Court
can allow a recording as evidence if it is material.

--
Hiram Hackenbacker

In article <SrMkc.36474$(E-Mail Removed)>,
"AngelHosts.com" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Well i am sure that is against the law and you are obliged to inform the
> party you are making a recording.

Well you can be as sure as you like but you are completely wrong.

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
(E-Mail Removed) (Hiram Hackenbacker) wrote:

> On Sat, 1 May 2004 12:53:43 +0100, "AngelHosts.com"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >Well i am sure that is against the law and you are obliged to inform the
> >party you are making a recording.
>
> He didn't say he wasn't going to inform the other party.

He certainly is under no legal obligation to do so. None at all. You are
perfectly at liberty to record your own phone conversations - irrespective
of whether you tell the other party to said conversation that they are
being recorded.

In response to what Hiram Hackenbacker <(E-Mail Removed)> posted in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

>>Equally, if you recording was required as
>>evidence, it would not stand up in court unless you informed the other
>>party of the recording taking place.
>
> In practice this is unlikely to be the case. It will depend upon the
> nature of the case and how important that recorded call is. The Court
> can allow a recording as evidence if it is material.

And from personal experience, merely informing the other party of a
recording that demolishes their assertions results in a speedy settlement.
Would you take a chance that a court would rule that your recorded self-
contradictions are inadmissible?

--
Joe Soap.
JUNK is stuff that you keep for 20 years,
then throw away a week before you need it.

In article <BCB968B9966810EDAB@192.168.0.3>, 666_@hack.powernet[dot]co
[dot]uk says...
> In article <SrMkc.36474$(E-Mail Removed)>,
> "AngelHosts.com" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > Well i am sure that is against the law and you are obliged to inform the
> > party you are making a recording.
>
> Well you can be as sure as you like but you are completely wrong.
>
>
>
Not saying who is right or wrong but why do some larger companies inform
us that "this call maybe recorded for training purposes", if they didnt
have to tell us that they "maybe" recording why would they bother?

Adam Davies wrote:
> Not saying who is right or wrong but why do some larger companies inform
> us that "this call maybe recorded for training purposes", if they didnt
> have to tell us that they "maybe" recording why would they bother?

Psychological I would say. If your calling for a new quote on car
insurance, and your warned as per above - your more likely to tell the
truth when asked questions. If your not made aware, you might feel like
taking a chance.

--
Regards
Andy M Jenkins
UK Broadband Usergroup http://www.uk-bug.net

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Adam Davies <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> In article <BCB968B9966810EDAB@192.168.0.3>, 666_@hack.powernet[dot]co
> [dot]uk says...
> > In article <SrMkc.36474$(E-Mail Removed)>,
> > "AngelHosts.com" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> > > Well i am sure that is against the law and you are obliged to inform the
> > > party you are making a recording.
> >
> > Well you can be as sure as you like but you are completely wrong.
> >
> >
> >
> Not saying who is right or wrong but why do some larger companies inform
> us that "this call maybe recorded for training purposes", if they didnt
> have to tell us that they "maybe" recording why would they bother?

Because they think it's good PR.