Cool, back to showing folks that it's their extension wiring thats crippling their speed.

How will it work. I was led to believe the faceplate needed changing...and most people won't be capable of doing that.

In reply to a post by orly:

How will it work. I was led to believe the faceplate needed changing...and most people won't be capable of doing that.

It doesn't .

Plain and simple!

Any filter or filtered faceplate will do.

There are at least two posters on here where the engineer has happily left a proprietory filtered faceplate in situ, and in one of those he even put the modem at a filtered extension running off an unfiltered feed from the filtered master faceplate.

What the quoted bit, (and yes/no Bill, same document but a different OP site I think, as the boxes are wider on mine, the link in this post by Fragsey), doesn't tell us is whether or not the OP modem is still a requirement.

(Edit - Bill's link is later than the one I used)

Edited by RobertoS (Fri 22-Apr-11 20:33:48)

We all sit here, quite smug, and in most cases fairly well informed, so to install the kit in the premises wouldn't be much of an issue, just wait till 18:00 on the day in question, and then on you go, the engineer has done the cab work, etc, etc. The problem is that many get it wholly Pete Tong, Perhaps there is no true NTE in the premises, or is star wired from the BT66, or the NTE is in the loft .........

Back in the previous engineer installed days, 45db or less for a 576Kbps USB modem service, the engineers, as now made sure that it was fed directly from the NTE. There weren't any of the faults we see these days of self install.

You should just look at the design of the 'fibre' NTE faceplate to see it's been created for self-install.

and there I was worried that we wont be getting any faults since we're removing all the alarm wire / diy doorbell extensions etc.... looks like plenty of faults in future ahoy then

Fair enough. It's just we had a proper filtered faceplate on our master, but the engineer we had still replaced it which led me to believe the one for FTTC was different in some fashion. Guess he was just being thorough.

It's just we had a proper filtered faceplate on our master, but the engineer we had still replaced it which led me to believe the one for FTTC was different in some fashion. Guess he was just being thorough.

Same for me.


.

Same here, new faceplate and redid the wiring "just to be safe". I figure after 11 years we were ready for a new one anyway

There are at least two posters on here where the engineer has happily left a proprietory filtered faceplate in situ, and in one of those he even put the modem at a filtered extension running off an unfiltered feed from the filtered master faceplate.

I persuaded the engineer to hook up without a filter at all.

Admittedly he was a little reluctant at first but when I pointed out that the FTTC faceplate's job is to filter the extensions and as the line is BB only there weren't any, there wasn't an NTE5 for him to fit it to and all he had to do was unplug my ADSL2+ modem and drop the FTTC modem in its place he fairly quickly changed his tack to "Well, let's plug it in and see if it syncs".

In reply to a post by mr_bean:

There are at least two posters on here where the engineer has happily left a proprietory filtered faceplate in situ, and in one of those he even put the modem at a filtered extension running off an unfiltered feed from the filtered master faceplate.

I persuaded the engineer to hook up without a filter at all.

Admittedly he was a little reluctant at first but when I pointed out that the FTTC faceplate's job is to filter the extensions and as the line is BB only there weren't any, there wasn't an NTE5 for him to fit it to and all he had to do was unplug my ADSL2+ modem and drop the FTTC modem in its place he fairly quickly changed his tack to "Well, let's plug it in and see if it syncs".


Did he leave you a faceplate filter anyway?