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?