A Broadband and ADSL forum. BroadbanterBanter

Welcome to BroadbanterBanter.

You are currently viewing as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today.

Go Back   Home » BroadbanterBanter forum » Newsgroup Discussions » uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) (uk.telecom.broadband) Discussion of broadband services, technology and equipment as provided in the UK. Discussions of specific services based on ADSL, cable modems or other broadband technology are also on-topic. Advertising is not allowed.

BT iPlate



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 3rd 14, 07:11 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Woody
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 752
Default BT iPlate

I have been helping an elderly neighbour who has just got a
laptop, and broadband supplied by the Post Office. They
posted him a Zyxel wireless router complete with two plug-in
phone line filters and expected him - at 89 - to set it up
himself, so I did it for him. He has two extension wired
phones both of which had plug-in filters as well.

Speedtest using the Warwick University servers showed a ping
of 36mS and peaking at 7.47Mb/s on a wireless connection.

I suggested a BT iPlate (actually intended for vDSL but
backward compatible) having read much about it on line.

To cut a long story short I ran Speedtest again yesterday,
same speed 7.47Mb/s but this time with a wired connection. I
then fitted the iPlate and removed the additional filters as
well. Left the router to settle for about 15 mins then ran
Speedtest again on the same server: this time 31mS ping and
10.69Mb/s download.

Now I would have believed possibly a minor improvement, but
over 50%?? Amazing.

There again as a cable user it might amaze me!


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com


  #2  
Old August 3rd 14, 08:08 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
fred
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 175
Default BT iPlate

In article , Woody
writes

To cut a long story short I ran Speedtest again yesterday,
same speed 7.47Mb/s but this time with a wired connection. I
then fitted the iPlate and removed the additional filters as
well. Left the router to settle for about 15 mins then ran
Speedtest again on the same server: this time 31mS ping and
10.69Mb/s download.

Now I would have believed possibly a minor improvement, but
over 50%?? Amazing.

There again as a cable user it might amaze me!

Not using an iPlate but with a filtered faceplate I have recently
changed an installation with appalling extension wiring from a
downstream SNR margin of 6.0 to 13.1. Download speed remains 9.75M down
but I am hoping for 16M plus after a bit of re-training, otherwise I
will ask them to reset the profile. The 7dB lift came as a bit of a
surprise to me too.
--
fred
it's a ba-na-na . . . .
  #3  
Old August 3rd 14, 10:48 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Woody
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 752
Default BT iPlate

"fred" wrote in message
...
In article , Woody
writes

To cut a long story short I ran Speedtest again yesterday,
same speed 7.47Mb/s but this time with a wired connection.
I
then fitted the iPlate and removed the additional filters
as
well. Left the router to settle for about 15 mins then ran
Speedtest again on the same server: this time 31mS ping
and
10.69Mb/s download.

Now I would have believed possibly a minor improvement,
but
over 50%?? Amazing.

There again as a cable user it might amaze me!

Not using an iPlate but with a filtered faceplate I have
recently changed an installation with appalling extension
wiring from a downstream SNR margin of 6.0 to 13.1.
Download speed remains 9.75M down but I am hoping for 16M
plus after a bit of re-training, otherwise I will ask them
to reset the profile. The 7dB lift came as a bit of a
surprise to me too.
--



Actually my mistake, this was a fully filtered faceplate
marked as BT Openreach vDSL Interstitial Faceplate Mk2, not
just the iPlate.
The iPlate would not, I think, have made any difference as I
believe all it does is filter the ringing line which this
installation does not have.

I'll get my neighbour to run Speedtest again later this week
and see if has got any better - between the ADSL dropouts
that is........




--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com


  #4  
Old August 4th 14, 09:28 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Peter Able
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default BT iPlate

On 03/08/2014 22:48, Woody wrote:
"fred" wrote in message
...
In article , Woody
writes

To cut a long story short I ran Speedtest again yesterday,
same speed 7.47Mb/s but this time with a wired connection.
I
then fitted the iPlate and removed the additional filters
as
well. Left the router to settle for about 15 mins then ran
Speedtest again on the same server: this time 31mS ping
and
10.69Mb/s download.

Now I would have believed possibly a minor improvement,
but
over 50%?? Amazing.

There again as a cable user it might amaze me!

Not using an iPlate but with a filtered faceplate I have
recently changed an installation with appalling extension
wiring from a downstream SNR margin of 6.0 to 13.1.
Download speed remains 9.75M down but I am hoping for 16M
plus after a bit of re-training, otherwise I will ask them
to reset the profile. The 7dB lift came as a bit of a
surprise to me too.
--



Actually my mistake, this was a fully filtered faceplate
marked as BT Openreach vDSL Interstitial Faceplate Mk2, not
just the iPlate.
The iPlate would not, I think, have made any difference as I
believe all it does is filter the ringing line which this
installation does not have.


An iPlate does more than isolate the ongoing bell wire. It also
rebalances the line pair. This can make a slightly unbalanced line
quieter/more noise-immune from the adsl modem's point of view.

PA


  #5  
Old August 4th 14, 10:23 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Roderick Stewart
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 562
Default BT iPlate

On Mon, 04 Aug 2014 09:28:20 +0100, Peter Able [email protected] wrote:


Actually my mistake, this was a fully filtered faceplate
marked as BT Openreach vDSL Interstitial Faceplate Mk2, not
just the iPlate.
The iPlate would not, I think, have made any difference as I
believe all it does is filter the ringing line which this
installation does not have.


An iPlate does more than isolate the ongoing bell wire. It also
rebalances the line pair. This can make a slightly unbalanced line
quieter/more noise-immune from the adsl modem's point of view.


I too would have expected it only to make a difference where the modem
was on the end of an extension and therefore possibly affected by the
bell wire. However, if iPlates really do contain superior filters that
can make a difference, and as they're not very expensive, I think I
should count this as an experiment I can't afford not to try...

Rod.
  #6  
Old August 4th 14, 11:50 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Woody
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 752
Default BT iPlate

"Roderick Stewart" wrote in
message ...
On Mon, 04 Aug 2014 09:28:20 +0100, Peter Able
[email protected] wrote:


Actually my mistake, this was a fully filtered faceplate
marked as BT Openreach vDSL Interstitial Faceplate Mk2,
not
just the iPlate.
The iPlate would not, I think, have made any difference
as I
believe all it does is filter the ringing line which
this
installation does not have.


An iPlate does more than isolate the ongoing bell wire.
It also
rebalances the line pair. This can make a slightly
unbalanced line
quieter/more noise-immune from the adsl modem's point of
view.


I too would have expected it only to make a difference
where the modem
was on the end of an extension and therefore possibly
affected by the
bell wire. However, if iPlates really do contain superior
filters that
can make a difference, and as they're not very expensive,
I think I
should count this as an experiment I can't afford not to
try...



I found it for 5.19 plus 50p p&p - and it arrived in two
days. Look in Amazon for JLCD Ltd.


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com


  #7  
Old August 4th 14, 02:03 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Peter Able
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default BT iPlate

On 04/08/2014 10:23, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Mon, 04 Aug 2014 09:28:20 +0100, Peter Able [email protected] wrote:


Actually my mistake, this was a fully filtered faceplate
marked as BT Openreach vDSL Interstitial Faceplate Mk2, not
just the iPlate.
The iPlate would not, I think, have made any difference as I
believe all it does is filter the ringing line which this
installation does not have.


An iPlate does more than isolate the ongoing bell wire. It also
rebalances the line pair. This can make a slightly unbalanced line
quieter/more noise-immune from the adsl modem's point of view.


I too would have expected it only to make a difference where the modem
was on the end of an extension and therefore possibly affected by the
bell wire. However, if iPlates really do contain superior filters that
can make a difference, and as they're not very expensive, I think I
should count this as an experiment I can't afford not to try...

Rod.

It is not a "superior" filter, but it is a DIFFERENT sort of filter
entirely from the one which is used to split broadband and POTS signals.

The latter filters by frequency and works because the broadband
frequencies are different from the POTS frequencies.

The former tries to remove what are called "common mode" signals from
the line and to re-balance "differential mode" signals - and works
because the wanted signals are the transmitted into the line in a
differential mode whilst the unwanted ones being picked up by the line
manifest as common-mode signals.

I could go into more depth - in fact I did, but have cut a lengthy
exposition that might be too much to take in. Suffice it to say that -
fortunately - there are several physical characteristics which
differentiate what is wanted and what isn't wanted. The two sorts of
filters I've mentioned go to work on different characteristics and so
can be regarded as complementary means of enhancing the
wanted-to-unwanted signal ratio.

PA

  #8  
Old August 4th 14, 03:17 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Roderick Stewart
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 562
Default BT iPlate

On Mon, 04 Aug 2014 14:03:22 +0100, Peter Able [email protected] wrote:

An iPlate does more than isolate the ongoing bell wire. It also
rebalances the line pair. This can make a slightly unbalanced line
quieter/more noise-immune from the adsl modem's point of view.


I too would have expected it only to make a difference where the modem
was on the end of an extension and therefore possibly affected by the
bell wire. However, if iPlates really do contain superior filters that
can make a difference, and as they're not very expensive, I think I
should count this as an experiment I can't afford not to try...

Rod.

It is not a "superior" filter, but it is a DIFFERENT sort of filter
entirely from the one which is used to split broadband and POTS signals.

The latter filters by frequency and works because the broadband
frequencies are different from the POTS frequencies.

The former tries to remove what are called "common mode" signals from
the line and to re-balance "differential mode" signals - and works
because the wanted signals are the transmitted into the line in a
differential mode whilst the unwanted ones being picked up by the line
manifest as common-mode signals.


So it balances the line as well as filtering. Doesn't that make it
superior?

On the available testimony (yet to be verified by me, but I'm
definitely going to give it a try) the use of an iPlate can give a
faster connection and/or a better SNR, even with ADSL. Doesn't that
make it superior too?

We may disagree on exactly what the word "superior" means, but I hope
we can agree that an iPlate contains a filter which differs in a way
that makes it work better, whatever word you want to use for that.

Rod.
  #9  
Old August 4th 14, 04:13 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Peter Able
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default BT iPlate

On 04/08/2014 15:17, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Mon, 04 Aug 2014 14:03:22 +0100, Peter Able [email protected] wrote:

An iPlate does more than isolate the ongoing bell wire. It also
rebalances the line pair. This can make a slightly unbalanced line
quieter/more noise-immune from the adsl modem's point of view.

I too would have expected it only to make a difference where the modem
was on the end of an extension and therefore possibly affected by the
bell wire. However, if iPlates really do contain superior filters that
can make a difference, and as they're not very expensive, I think I
should count this as an experiment I can't afford not to try...

Rod.

It is not a "superior" filter, but it is a DIFFERENT sort of filter
entirely from the one which is used to split broadband and POTS signals.

The latter filters by frequency and works because the broadband
frequencies are different from the POTS frequencies.

The former tries to remove what are called "common mode" signals from
the line and to re-balance "differential mode" signals - and works
because the wanted signals are the transmitted into the line in a
differential mode whilst the unwanted ones being picked up by the line
manifest as common-mode signals.


So it balances the line as well as filtering. Doesn't that make it
superior?


No, I made it quite clear that the filters discussed are DIFFERENT and
complementary. Their function(s) do not overlap one jot. Therefore the
concept of "superior", "better" ( your word - below) - or whatever
synonym you choose - has no meaning.

On the available testimony (yet to be verified by me, but I'm
definitely going to give it a try) the use of an iPlate can give a
faster connection and/or a better SNR, even with ADSL. Doesn't that
make it superior too?

We may disagree on exactly what the word "superior" means, but I hope
we can agree that an iPlate contains a filter which differs in a way
that makes it work better, whatever word you want to use for that.

Rod.

No, we can't agree because you don't seem to realise ("a filter which
differs in a way that makes it work better") that different filters
address different issues. As for the two filters I commented upon, if
the installation has no active bell wiring and the lines are reasonably
balanced and not subject to much EM induction then the iPlate will not
help significantly. If the installation has no POTS equipment then a
splitter filter would be a waste of money.

I bought an iPlate. As you say, it isn't that expensive. It didn't
help me, personally, one jot but it has been helpful when I've been
helping others. More to the point, I understand its engineering
functions and therefore its relationship to other elements in the
installation. If you flame my notes, then that attempt to share that
knowledge has gone down the pan.

PA

  #10  
Old August 4th 14, 05:58 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
The Natural Philosopher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,728
Default BT iPlate

On 04/08/14 14:03, Peter Able wrote:
On 04/08/2014 10:23, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Mon, 04 Aug 2014 09:28:20 +0100, Peter Able [email protected] wrote:


Actually my mistake, this was a fully filtered faceplate
marked as BT Openreach vDSL Interstitial Faceplate Mk2, not
just the iPlate.
The iPlate would not, I think, have made any difference as I
believe all it does is filter the ringing line which this
installation does not have.


An iPlate does more than isolate the ongoing bell wire. It also
rebalances the line pair. This can make a slightly unbalanced line
quieter/more noise-immune from the adsl modem's point of view.


I too would have expected it only to make a difference where the modem
was on the end of an extension and therefore possibly affected by the
bell wire. However, if iPlates really do contain superior filters that
can make a difference, and as they're not very expensive, I think I
should count this as an experiment I can't afford not to try...

Rod.

It is not a "superior" filter, but it is a DIFFERENT sort of filter
entirely from the one which is used to split broadband and POTS signals.

The latter filters by frequency and works because the broadband
frequencies are different from the POTS frequencies.

The former tries to remove what are called "common mode" signals from
the line and to re-balance "differential mode" signals - and works
because the wanted signals are the transmitted into the line in a
differential mode whilst the unwanted ones being picked up by the line
manifest as common-mode signals.

I could go into more depth - in fact I did, but have cut a lengthy
exposition that might be too much to take in. Suffice it to say that -
fortunately - there are several physical characteristics which
differentiate what is wanted and what isn't wanted. The two sorts of
filters I've mentioned go to work on different characteristics and so
can be regarded as complementary means of enhancing the
wanted-to-unwanted signal ratio.

PA

Since the input to just about every router ever has a common mode
balanced input doofus, getting rid of common mode hash is pretty
irrelevant at the filter plate


--
Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the
rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. - Erwin Knoll
 




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
IPlate question Steve uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 21 September 4th 08 10:38 AM
Iplate Steve uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 4 August 12th 08 08:35 PM
New BT Iplate questions. Peter Crosland uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 23 July 29th 08 12:50 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2019 BroadbanterBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.