NTE5 wiring

I decided to remove the "ring wire" from my NTE5 yesterday to see if it made any difference to my broadband speed. I've done this in a couple of previous houses, with some beneficial effect, following guides both here and at kitz. I've also previously replaced an NTE5 with a -5a without any problems, so have some experience of wiring in these sockets.

However, when I took the front off this socket, I found that the wiring was completely different to normal:

orange wire connected to 2
green wire -------"------ 3
white/orange -------"------ 5

The white green wire was wrapped around the outer insulation of the incoming cable and the blue and white/blue wires are connected to the back of the rear part of the socket (the A and B terminals I think?).

The phone has always worked fine and the broadband speed is not bad (~4Mbps at a distance of 2.5km). I disconnected the green 'ring' wire from 3, since I was there but have a question.

Does this make sense to anyone or have I got myself very confused. I was expecting the blue and blue/white to be attached to 2 and 5...

Since everything works, does this mean that the cable at the other end is attached incorrectly? The socket is in an extension so presumably has been added later by wiring in from the original master. Or is it possible that I'm getting speech and data through the other, usually unused, wires somehow? I'm obviously not going to mess around with the wiring now, since it is working and don't BT (although I'm with Sky so not sure if BT have any 'jurisdiction' any more...?).

Faceplate

Back of faceplate

Back of whole box

Thanks for any light that can be shed!!

blue/white and white/blue look OK connected to the AB terminals assuming they are coming from the original master NTE5? The other wires are presumably going to a voice extension socket elsewhere in the property (?) and the colours don't matter if they are connected the same at both sockets - orange/white and white/orange will be fine. If that is the case then the green/white wire connected at terminal 3 would be the ring wire and white/green redundant.

It would be interesting to know exactly what's happening at the other end of that cable though?

Hi, for the modern digital telephone you now only need connections 2 and 5, the connection number 3 is the bell wire required for the old electro-mechanical telephone bell, it is better to not connect this wire as it can cause interference to your broadband connection.

http://www.telephonesuk.co.uk/wiring_info.htm

Wire (B) 48v DC Live.

Wire (A) 0v DC Neutral.

http://www.wppltd.demon.co.uk/WPP/Wiring/UK_telephon...

Fair enough, I think this is the master socket for the house but I can't get to the other end of the wire as it's suspended at the top of the gable end of the roof and I don't have a tall enough ladder.

Since it's all working OK, reckon I'd better leave well alone and not fiddle!

As mentioned, I did disconnect that green wire to hopefully reduce interference. I think it takes a few days for the rate adaption to happen so I'll keep my fingers crossed!!

Thank you both for taking the time to reply.

Edited by deleted (Thu 08-Mar-12 10:32:39)

You have a filtered faceplate so removal of the ring wire is completely unnecessary.

Well if it is the master then you had best screw it back on the wall and not mess with the AB connections on the back of the NTE5 - messing with the connections on the faceplate will be legit though

Have to disagree with the other poster and say that the ring (bell) wire is best disconnected if not required for your phone equipment even though you have a filtered faceplate.

Edit: do you have any improvement to sync speeds and throughput speeds if you connect the router to the test socket, via a dongle filter/splitter, with the faceplate removed along with those orange/white and white/orange wires?

Edited by 4M2 (Thu 08-Mar-12 10:58:44)

There is so much misinformation on-line it is just crazy.

The reason that disconnecting the bell wire makes such a big difference in normal installations is the ring signal is generated in the master socket by a simple capacitor. This capacitor quite happily lets the AC DSL signal pass and creates an imbalance. When a filtered faceplate is installed the original ring signal is NOT used it is disconnected. The filter removes the ADSL signal and then a new ring signal is produced POST filter so there is no DSL signal to pass on to the ring wire to imbalance the signal.

What you are saying is absolutely true but why have a bell wire connected that COULD cause potential RF problems if it is not required for the phone(s) currently in use?

So, you are saying the incoming cable goes back to the gable box ... which means the incoming signal on Bl & Wh/Bl is being fed straight back down the same cable using Or & Wh/Or. As there cannot be a phone there, those connections are not needed and as they will most likely be un-terminated there is potential for moisture ingress and issues that may cause so all three should all be removed.

I would also guess that the cable was NOT installed by a BT technician for three reasons:

1. The wires connecting to A & B have some rather long uninsulated tails projecting - how easily they could be shorted

2. The punchdowns on 2, 3, 5 are not trimmed

3. Backwiring is frowned upon and should only happen in exceptional circumstances.


And who has written on the back?

Back wiring is known to be done, particularly where people have requested a master re-location.

I know the XTE-2005 filters out the ring wire, (though I find your latest explanation a bit confusing as it talks about different kinds of signal in the same sentence), as do OR-logo'ed faceplates, but is this true of the old BT v1.0 that the OP has? I thought not.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Back wiring is known to be done, particularly where people have requested a master re-location.

I know,, but it should only be done in exceptional circumstances. It is one of the principles taught to trainee technicians or apprentices within BT and backwiring out to an eaves box? A definite NO.

Must be the same engineer who did mine - eaves box and wired back to it.

Line performs no worse than the second direct line, even though there is a star config. Even working with a 3dB target maring.

But what confused me is that the OP did not show a phone connected to the faceplate in the photo - either the phone lead was temporarily removed from the socket, he doesn't have a landline phone or the orange/white and white/orange wires are going from the back of the faceplate, along the same cable as the blue/white and white/blue AB wires, to somehow (?) connect to a phone extension socket...

The way it works is as follows....

Incoming 2 wire system goes to A&B on the back of the NTE-5.
The NTE-5 has a capacitor connected to the B leg that is presented in the test socket on connection 3.
Normally the line has DC power on it but DC will not pass through the capacitor.
When the ring signal is sent it is AC and this will pass through the capacitor to the ringer.
This was all worked fine before DSL.

Now with DSL added to the line there is a continual RF AC signal on the line, but the problem is that DSL is a balanced signal that depends on the cancellation effects of a matched pair. Once it hits the NTE-5 however half of the DSL signal is sent down the ring wire causing an imbalance.

All filters that meet the SIN specification generate their own ring signal post filter on the voice side of the filter. Therefore assuming the filter is doing it's job the only signal present is the DC voltage. The new ring signal therefore is completely clean as it is in no way connected to the DSL signal.

The problem being that plug-in filters on the end of extensions do not account for the fact that already from the master to the extension there is a rouge half DSL signal being broadcast down a single wire all over the house. When a faceplate is fitted it only uses the connections 2 & 5 the ring signal is left disconnected. The filter then filters out the DSL signal and then creates a new ring signal with it's own capacitor that is then delivered to the extensions without any DSL signal on it.

As a result fitting an iplate or disconnecting the ring wire will not achieve anything.

What is this ring signal that emanates from the filtered faceplate, presumably along the bell wire? I have an old phone that will not ring on the end of an extension with the bell wire disconnected at the back the faceplate. A modern phone will ring however without the bell wire. Are you suggesting that the bell wire could remain connected to any filtered faceplate even though it's not needed for modern phones?

Edited by 4M2 (Thu 08-Mar-12 13:44:47)

Yes the bell wire should remain connected as it will not adversely effect your connection due to having a filtered faceplate installed.

The bell wire will NOT cause problems when fed from a filtered faceplate.

Should remain connected to ANY filtered faceplate?

A second simple YES

Yes even the old BT ADSL 1.0 faceplate

----------------
There is so much misinformation on-line it is just crazy.
----------------

Agree 100%.

Too many people comment, who haven't got a clue, or at best, only half a clue.

Sorry I can not see the point of having the bell wire connected if it's currently not needed, especially if one is unsure of the filtered faceplate's spec.

A filtered faceplate will filter the bell wire, which maybe needed at a later date.

Are you going to rip the wire out of your telephone cord, just because it goes to terminal 3 in the faceplate. (yes, most 2 wire phones still have a terminal 3 wire, even if not used).

Might put a bit of tape over the cord's terminal 3 connector connecting at the front of the plate LOL!

Just to add my five penn'eth.

The OP's pictures clearly show a 6 wire feed which has been backended from where ever, to provide an NTE and SSFP in that location.

I agree with MHC that back ending is frowned upon.

I also agree with Mr.S, I have never seen back ending cause any issues.

Leave the bell wire in situ, it has been filtered by the SSFP.

Wow - lots and lots of posts now, while I've been away!

Thanks for all the input. I did disconnect the bell wire, but (probably no surprise) sync speed hasn't changed at all. I may reconnect if I have a spare moment.

I don't reckon this was fitted by a 'proper' BT tech either - there's so much dodgy stuff in this house that I don't see why the phone would be any different.

The wire comes into the property from the pole, up to the gable end of the extension roof. There is a wire which then comes down into the wall where that socket is, but from the gable another wire goes into the eaves of the main house, up into the loft. I can't see from the ground whether the branch to the socket in the photos is a spur off the main cable or what. There is some sort of black cylindrical object (about 6 inches by 1 inch) up there too - maybe some sort of junction box?

There is never a phone connected to the pictured socket; the cordless base unit is plugged in in the kitchen. The only other occupied socket is in the lounge (Sky box).

There's no other faceplate with an ADSL socket in the house.

Sky box has a filter?

Star wiring and not uncommon for eaves boxes. Can be a problem for ADSL2+ sometimes.

The black lozenge is a cable repair housing.

Actually it doesn't have a filter - thought it didn't need one with the NTE5 faceplate.

Confused now!?!

NTE5 refers to standard master socket.

If you have the ADSL faceplate and the sky box is connected via the extension connections on the back of this faceplate, then correct no filter needed.

Not if it is connected to the secondary A/B ones that the XTE-2005 has. It would need a filter then.

Edited by RobertoS (Tue 13-Mar-12 21:15:59)

Ok so it seems that I've got a 'star' arrangement and the adsl is on a spur then?

Sorry for the confusion about the NTE5 - I thought that was the name of the adsl faceplate - oops!

I took a dodgy phonecamera pic of the outside of the gable end:

http://i1083.photobucket.com/albums/j391/JackoLad/IM...

If the system is indeed a star, and the adsl is on a spur, does this mean that my current sync speed is about as high as I'll get? 4 Mbps doesn't seem too bad 2.5km from the exchange I suppose.

Waiting for Sky Fibre...

Edited by deleted (Wed 14-Mar-12 17:20:56)

4 Mbps doesn't seem too bad 2.5km from the exchange I suppose.

8M sync is possible on 2.5km of line length, but star wiring could knock it down a long way especially if the ring wire is in circuit

So you have a filtered faceplate on the nte5 which the router is connected to (no phone in use there) and two extension sockets: one for the cordless phone in the kitchen and another for the sky box in the lounge? If that is the case then it's possible that the filtered voice wires are somehow going to the kitchen from the back of the faceplate which would be fine and Sky (or somebody) have perhaps fitted an extension for the Sky box to another section of the house telephony wiring which may not be properly filtered...