Is the benefit of this faceplate only that it eliminates the need for microfilters, so that it will solve the problem if and only if the microfilters were the problem? If so, I guess it's unlikely to make a difference, since all my microfilters can't be so badly and identically faulty. I will still try this of course.

I wonder if someone could also explain why there is a difference between the test socket and master faceplate socket at all? All the advice is that routers should be plugged in at the master socket, so that extension wiring doesn't interfere with the signal. But then why is there any difference between the test socket and the normal master socket...? Particularly if there are no other devices plugged in anywhere in the house. That advice makes it sound like interference from extension wiring is cut out by plugging in at the master.

You may have read some incorrect advice - there's plenty of it around . Or got confused by more complex scenarios where the writer has not been clear.

The faceplate has the extension wiring attached, as you know. By removing it, and plugging into the test socket behind, you eliminate (in most cases) the extension wiring.

I say "in most cases" because there is a setup, usually historic, where there are extensions connected to junction boxes between the master socket and the point the incoming wire reaches the property. In this case removing the faceplate doesn't eliminate extensions.

That's why I asked you about all the extensions earlier, to see if that was a possibility. It's called star wiring. It is bad for ADSLx and often disastrous for FTTC. One of the main reasons for the years when only engineer installs were allowed was so they could detect and eliminate it.

It doesn't even matter if the extensions have nothing connected - their mere existence can cause trouble.

This interstitial faceplate has an inbuilt filter which protects the broadband side from any problems caused by extension sockets. Though even then there can occasionally be problems, making the test socket the only clean one.

Re-reading your post, I think what may have confused you is that connection at the master is always best even if there are no "problems" as such. Simply because on most FTTC installations every extra metre of phone-type wiring matters unless you are very close to the cabinet. Particularly if the extension wiring itself is poor quality.

So connecting at the master is a question of overall length and quality, not interference. Interference is what all the filtering is dealing with.

You have probably read about CAT 5 and Cat 6 wiring. Lots of people have that installed, replacing normal phone wire, if they really need to use an extension for broadband. It is also the wiring used for ethernet cabling.

When used to reach a normal extension for broadband the extra distance still counts. When used to carry an ethernet signal from a modem or router then (generally) it doesn't.

I hope that helps.

Edited by RobertoS (Thu 29-Sep-16 19:43:08)

In reply to a post by canary107:

Is the benefit of this faceplate only that it eliminates the need for microfilters, so that it will solve the problem if and only if the microfilters were the problem? If so, I guess it's unlikely to make a difference, since all my microfilters can't be so badly and identically faulty. I will still try this of course.

It only takes one to be faulty...

Faceplate eliminates need from filters and stops interference picked up by the extension wiring from affecting the VDSL2, so its a two fold benefit

Wires that are connected even with nothing plugged in are great at picking up radio interference (hence why many FM radios come with a length of simple wire to pick up the radio signal)

Maybe I've misunderstood you, but my point was that I've tried different microfilters all over, so for it to be a microfilter problem, they would all have to be identically faulty.

It may be a misunderstanding.

IanBB was saying that if you had a number of extensions and each had a filter then only one of them needs to be faulty to screw up the line.

I think your saying you have tried replacing your filter with a number of other filters and therefore ruled out it being "the" filter that is the problem.

RobertoS, thanks again for such a comprehensive response.

I don't think we have such an historic setup with junction boxes, as a) I can't see any evidence of it, and b) the WAN speed when plugged into the test socket appears to be exactly as it should be.

I do understand that this faceplate has the potential to solve the problem. MrSaffron's comparison of all that wiring to an aerial makes sense to me, and particularly given the illogical order in which extensions have been added in this house, we really do have a lot of wiring all over the place. Some of it will also be old and probably poor quality.

Anyway, I have ordered the faceplate, and I noticed a lot of reviews talking about exactly the kind of speed uplift that I am looking for, so I'm optimistic.

Thanks again.

I see. Actually that's helpful, because I probably hadn't grasped that one faulty filter elsewhere could have that impact, but it is still unlikely to be the problem here, because I removed all other appliances and filters and tried different filters.

A very common cause of this kind of slowdown is a house alarm. They often have no filter. Just a thought.

Even if it's on a different line??

I even checked it the other day and I was able to call our normal home phone by plugging a phone into the other master socket by the alarm and checking the number calling. It's definitely a different line.

Plus, the fact that the WAN speed when plugged into the test socket is above 25 Mbps according to the router (which is a good fibre speed).

Surely this pretty much rules that out as the cause.