Master Face Plate Splitter - Filtered ?

I recently installed a master face plate splitter (see http://www.solwise.co.uk/adsl_splitters.htm) and found that unless I put a 'dongle' filter between the face plate and the phone, the phone is unusable since it sounds like static when I try and talk to someone (at my end, theirs is fine). The ADSL connection is not affected by the phone use.

I thought these face plates were filtered, are they just splitters? I would like to know if either.

1. That is how they work, they are just splitters and you need to connect the phone via a filter.
2. They should filter, mine could be dodgy
3. I might have installed it wrong - difficult to see how, it just screws on.

Thanks for any insight

Adam

How is your signal from the exchange arriving at the faceplate?

Not sure what you mean? The face plate splitter is attached to the master socket.

They're certainly supposed to be filtered, but the Solwise one is a bit cheap and nasty. You would have done better to get the ADSLNation one http://www.adslnation.co.uk/products/xte2005.php

Eric

Have to agree.

BT Engineer attending to a fault wasn't impressed with my new Solwise Faceplate.
He replaced it [FOC] with a BT unit.

Thanks for the info guys, I think will order an ADSLNation one.

So how is the exchange line wired into the master socket?

In reply to:

---

They're certainly supposed to be filtered, but the Solwise one is a bit cheap and nasty.

---

Oh. I obviously made a mistake, and should have bought the ADSLNation one three or four years ago. Aren't I lucky that I have had no problems whatsoever in that time with this obviously completely inadequate piece of kit. I obviously should have spent the extra 5p rather than buy this cheap and nasty thing. (Of course there was a problem in that the the ADSLNation equivalent wasn't available then, so I suppose I should have done without until it arrived since it obviously shouldn't have worked as well as it did).

And if you haven't noticed, some of this is a joke. Some is also a criticism. Please try and work out which is which before you complain. I do happen to have used both items and neither I nor the other three installations I have made using it have had a problem with the Solwise faceplate. The only reason I prefer to use the ADSLNation offering is because it allows the unfiltered extension which would have been extremely useful on one of my installations, but they were unable to supply it. (Or if they were they couldn't be bothered to tell me which would not have been difficult since I was looking precisely for a faceplate with an unfiltered output).

I placed an order with ADSLNation today for a client's installation. The faceplate was the only thing they could provide from my list, the rest came from Solwise and would have included their faceplate except that this installation needs an unfiltered extension.

I'm not really sure what that rant was about, but I stand by my statement. Even cheap and nasty filters will be adequate in many situations, but better ones will work better, and in more situations. The Solwise faceplate uses a simpler and less precise filter circuit than the active filter used in the ADSLNation faceplate. I'm sorry if you have difficulty accepting this fact.

Eric

In reply to:

---

I'm sorry if you have difficulty accepting this fact.

---

Fact? I only see conjecture with no evidence. I suggest that there may be some situations where the ADSLNation faceplate works but the Solwise doesn't. I suggest that this is an inadequacy of the circuits on which it is being used and the solution would better be to solve the problems rather than use something which may be better at concealing the faults.

If you are being factual then you are saying that the Solwise filter does not mee the standards and specifications for its purpose. If that is the case, I suggest you have a duty to present the evidence to the appropriate Trading Standards Officer. Solwise claim that their filters have been tested by BT to the requirements of SIN346. Is this claim false? If it is true then how can they be described as inadequate?

I can accept it as a fact that Solwise are lying and engaged in commercial malpractice, but I need quite a lot of evidence to do so. You conjecture is neither fact nor evidence so I do not accept it as either.