Archive for April, 2008

Review of Ring Voltage Booster II™ from Mike Sandman Enterprises

Once in a while you run into a situation where someone wants to put a whole bunch of phones on one physical phone pair. This can often happen in a home with many rooms, where every room has been prewired with a phone jack. You start out with a phone in the kitchen or living room, then you want one in the master bedroom, then each of the kids wants one, then you want one in the workshop down in the basement, and so on. Okay, so granted that the above example would probably have been more appropriate 20 years ago (before all the family members started wanting their own cell phones) but you can still run into such situations, both in homes and in small businesses that only have one or two phone lines and a bunch of phones hanging off each line.

In the old days the phone company let you have enough current to ring five standard telephone ringers – 5 REN in telco-speak – and that was five of the old mechanical style ringers with real bells. But nowadays people have started replacing their old wireline lines with newer stuff, like VoIP, and VoIP adapters can be notoriously stingy with ring current. Sometimes when people convert to VoIP, they find that they either have to disconnect some phones (or at least, shut off or disconnect the ringers in those phones) or figure out a way to boost the ring current.

Yet another problem with both certain makes of VoIP adapters, and even with some low-cost telephone switches sold to businesses, is that they don’t produce enough ringing voltage or current to begin with. That might be particularly true if the adapter or switch was designed to standards other than those typically used in the U.S.A. and Canada. In those two countries, phones and phone equipment have always been designed to expect ringing current at approximately 90 volts AC at 20 Hertz (cycles per second), but in some other countries both the ringing voltage and frequency can be quite different, causing equipment designed for the North American standard to not ring properly. Even with a VoIP adapter set to the correct voltage and frequency (not all are; it’s left to the provider to set those parameters on some devices), most VoIP adapters are only rated at 3 REN or less.

Ring Voltage Booster II™

Recently I discovered that Mike Sandman Enterprises has started offering their Ring Voltage Booster II™ – this is the successor to the original Ring Voltage Booster™ that Mike has been selling for several years now, and it looked to me as though it would be just the thing to cure those ringing problems. The Ring Voltage Booster II is used in series with a telephone wire pair entering the premises (or coming out of a VoiP adapter or similar device), and it senses ringing voltage on the line and increases it (actually regenerates it) to the North American standard 90VAC RMS at 20 cycles, and increases ringing current to 7.5 REN.

I wanted to obtain a unit and try it out. I did just that and I thought I’d share the results of my test with you folks, because I was very favorably impressed with the unit. If all you want to know is whether it works as advertised, I would say that based on my experience the answer is an unqualified yes (with one very minor caveat, which I will mention in a moment).

The way I tested it was this. I had a Sipura SPA-2000 VoIP adapter which was connected to the existing phone wiring in a home where the wireline service has recently been disconnected. There was already quite a collection of phone equipment on the line, and I hung a couple of extra items on to load it down. When we got through adding phones we had the following on the line: two modern phones with warble-type ringers, three old 2500-series touch-tone wall phones with real mechanical ringers, one old 2500-series desk set with a real mechanical ringer, and just for fun, one old Western Electric 302 desk set with original ringer and ringing capacitor.

I want everyone reading to pause for a moment and consider that, apart from the fact that this 1940’s-era phone has a rotary dial rather than a touch tone pad, it works great today with the original ringer and capacitor. I’ve had several computer power supplies fail on me in recent years, usually within a year or two of purchase, due to bad capacitors (in a couple cases, exploding capacitors!). For all the bad things about the old Bell System, they sure knew how to build a telephone that would survive just about anything, except the elimination of switching equipment that accepts rotary dial pulses.

Anyway, I had the aforementioned relatively huge load (well above 3 REN, no matter how you count it) hooked up to the Sipura SPA-2000, and I placed a call to it.

And darned if the phones didn’t ring!

I stood there open-mouthed for a moment. Granted the ringing was a bit weak, but all the phones were ringing. I really hadn’t expected that. I could tell I was putting a significant load on the SPA-2000, but not enough to make a very noticeable difference in the quality of ringing. Then it dawned on me – I remember reading somewhere that early Sipura adapters were conservatively rated, but such was not necessarily the case with their successor, the PAP-2 from Linksys. Well, I have one of those, too.

So I disconnected the SPA-2000 and hooked up the newer PAP-2, and placed a call to the PAP-2, and did that make a difference! With the same load as described above, the phones were still ringing, but they were really struggling. The W.E. 302 and one of the new warblers were having the most trouble, both giving only partial rings. The others were ringing very anemically.

I then inserted the Ring Voltage Booster II™ and placed several test calls. The ringing was clear and strong, in fact, each phone rang as if it were the only phone on the line, and the ringing seemed loud and crisp on all phones. Granted this is a bit of a subjective observation since I was, after all, listening to mechanical telephone bells ring, but I grew up with those and I know what they sound like when they are ringing as they should, and these were.

There were two other things I wanted to observe. One was whether the unit interfered in any way with Caller ID. Only one of the phones in this test had a Caller ID display, but it got the correct Caller ID information every time. The other thing was whether it would have any problem with a distinctive ringing signal, and again, I can report that it did not. I happen to have that adapter programmed so that when a particular friend calls it rings with a distinctive ring, since this particular friend seems to have a peculiar form of psychic ability – he always seems to call when I am indisposed (usually in the bathroom or some such thing). So if it rings with his ring, I know I can wait until I’m through with whatever I’m doing, then call him back and share a laugh over yet another occurrence of his weird form of E.S.P. So, in order to test distinctive ringing, I called him and asked him to call me back and let it ring, and once the ringing commenced I checked several phones and all were ringing with the correct distinctive ring cadence (two approximately one-half second rings followed by a one second ring, or at least that’s what it sounds like). Also, I could hear a relay inside the Ring Voltage Booster II™ clicking on and off in time with the distinctive ring patterns.

In fact, the unit worked perfectly, save for one very minor nit: Sometimes, if I picked up a phone during a ring, it would continue to apply ringing voltage for the duration of that ring – in other words, it didn’t seem to always sense that the phone had been picked up and stop the ringing until that ring had ended. In all fairness, I’ve seen this happen before with other types of equipment, including real phone switches (particularly on long loops in rural areas, etc.). What this means is that if you pick up the phone at the very start of a ring and press it to your ear immediately, you could get a pretty loud buzz in the ear for a second or so. I don’t think this will be a major issue for most users, particularly since the unit solves a much greater problem (phones not ringing at all, or ringing very weakly). But for a few people, it might be an annoyance (Edit: One way to reduce this would be to always use a ring pattern that has rings that are one second long or less.  Some VoIP providers will let you set a “distinctive ringing” pattern for each line or each incoming number – if you pick one that has a two or more short rings instead of a single long one, you greatly reduce your chance of hearing the loud buzz when you pick up the phone.  Now that I think of that, I’ll bet that explains why many independent telephone companies used one-second long rings, instead of the two-second rings common in the Bell System).  I don’t know if this was an issue with just the unit I was using, or with all of the units of this model, but it was the only thing I noticed about the unit that wasn’t “perfect” – in every other way, it delivered all you’d expect from such a device.

There are a couple of other pleasant surprises about this unit. Neither the unit itself nor its power supply seem to generate excessive heat in normal standby mode (I did not test an extended ringing cycle lasting several minutes or more, because that would have required shutting off voicemail) – in fact the small “wall wart” was very cool to the touch a couple hours after being plugged in. That’s more than I can say about many of the “wall wart” power supplies i normally use, and as you know, heat is wasted energy, so I’m very happy that Mike is including what appears to be a quality power supply. But what really shocked me was the small size of the unit. Perhaps it’s because I’m an “olde pharte” that equates a ringing generator with, at the very least, a large steel box hanging on the wall in a basement or phone closet, but this thing blew me away because it’s even smaller than any of my VoIP adapters! The longest dimension on it is only about three and a half inches. You’re almost certainly not going to have any problem finding a place to put it.

Hookup couldn’t be simpler, but you must observe that you get the connections right to avoid damaging the unit – in other words, don’t connect the side that’s supposed to be connected to the phones to the incoming phone line, or you will damage the unit. There are only three connections, one for power, one for the incoming line (labeled “line in” – this is the side you’d connect to a VoIP adapter), and one to go to the phones. If you are connecting it to a VoIP adapter you can probably do it in under a minute, once you have it out of the packaging.

In summary, if for any reason you don’t have enough ringing voltage or current on your phone line (or coming out of a VoIP adapter) and you need to boost it, this is the unit that will do it, at least up to 7.5 REN. And if you have a ridiculous number of phones on one line, remember that you can connect some of them before the Ring Voltage Booster II™ (using the original ringing voltage and current from the line or adapter) and the rest after (using the regenerated ringing current from the Ring Voltage Booster II™).

One caveat, this unit does not increase the gain (circuit loss), talk battery, or loop current of a line – if you need to boost loop current then Mike sells a separate Loop Current Booster™ that will do that. But the Ring Voltage Booster II™ basically gets out of the way when the phone isn’t ringing, and should not have any effect whatsoever on transmit or receive volume levels.

Mike Sandman has been selling quality phone equipment for many years now, so I expected this to be a quality unit. Even so, I was very favorably impressed with it. If you have problems related to low ringing voltage or current, get this device. If you have problems related to wrong-frequency ringing current (something that’s putting out ringing current at a frequency other than 20 Hertz), I’m pretty sure this will solve that problem as well, though I did not test that personally. Here is one more link to the page that describes this unit (and some others) and please note this is a plain-vanilla link – I’m not making any commission or anything if you buy one. I hope this review helps someone that’s having a problem getting their phones to ring!

Disclosure:  I have not been and will not be paid anything for writing this article, and I do not receive any commission or other compensation from sales of this item, and the links in this article are not affiliate links.  I did, however, request and receive a complementary Ring Voltage Booster II™ for review purposes (which I was allowed to keep after writing the review, and for that I am most grateful).

Comments (5)

Big phone companies are run by crazy people (redux)

Misleading Customer Service Kills Your Business
Creative Commons License photo credit: libraryman

Two items today that show that phone companies still think they can treat customers like crap and that you folks will just take it. The first is this item from The Consumerist:

Here’s an odd little letter. For once a customer was actually pleased with the salesperson that came to their door and convinced them to try FiOS. Yay! The trouble came when the nice salesperson called in and Verizon refused to activate the account unless the customer canceled their phone lines with Vonage and Cablevision and switched all three to Verizon.

Full article: Verizon: Cancel Vonage And Cablevision Phone Lines Or You Can’t Have FiOS

Of course, this is more than likely the actions of a couple of poorly-trained employees (including a supervisor who allegedly couldn’t care less whether Verizon acquired a new customer or not) but this sort of thing happens FAR too often.  Big phone companies need to train their employees that customers matter, that without customers there is no reason for the company to exist – and that sort of service-oriented training simply doesn’t seem to be happening.

Now, I learned a long time ago that if you don’t like what a phone company rep is telling you, all you have to do is hang up and play “customer service roulette” – in other words, keep calling back until you find a rep who is willing to see things your way (preferably BEFORE you give them your account information, so they can’t make a note on your account if they deny your request – and it helps if you’re not calling from the phone number that your inquiring about, in case they are capturing Caller ID or ANI). But most customers are either not willing to jump through such hoops, or don’t know that they can.

Yes, the salesperson probably should have never mentioned the Vonage and Cablevision VoIP lines (and I’ll bet that he knows better now!), but the real fault seems to be that Verizon’s poorly trained employees apparently have a “don’t give a damn” attitude toward customers.  Of course, my guess is that they get it from their management, which seems to have a “don’t give a damn” attitude toward entire states (we are still waiting to see FiOS deployed anywhere in Michigan). It turns out that Verizon management is now doing some backpedalling but I’d bet that this attempt to make amends would never have happened if the affected prospective customer had not reached out to The Consumerist.  So here’s a thought:  If you think we’re being discriminated against by Verizon here in Michigan, maybe you should try sending your gripe to The Consumerist – they seem to be about the only ones the phone companies pay attention to these days.

But, let us not give grief only to Verizon.  AT&T has their own brand of craziness.  Quoting from a news item in BroadbandReports.com:

From the “we’re terrified of becoming a dumb pipe” and “that ad revenue sure looks tasty” departments comes news that AT&T is developing their own web browser, dubbed Pogo. The new browser is Mozilla based and includes 3D visual technology developed by Vizible, which AT&T has a stake in. The private beta just launched last week and a video demo is available here.

The browser’s “3D” GUI is a bit of a system pig (for a browser), requiring a 1.6GHz processor, 2GB of RAM, and a video card with at least 256MB of VRAM. ….. Of course if you give users a piece of bloated crap painted blue and tied to the AT&T brand, that idea may backfire. Early impressions aren’t exactly stellar. While it’s only in early beta, major complaints include the high system specs, slow performance, bookmark import issues and a generally unintuitive interface.

Full article: AT&T Developing New Web Browser

So here is my question:  Did some dim bulb at AT&T actually think that if they installed a slow, bloated, AT&T branded browser on their customers’ computers, this would actually make people want to stay with AT&T?  You can pretty much be assured that if the release version of this browser causes major problems on people’s computers, cable company advertising will be amended to note that fact.

Now this is another case where if a customer has sufficient knowledge, they will not allow an ISP (any ISP) to install software on their computer.  Unless you are so technologically behind the curve that you need help finding the power switch on your computer, AND you don’t have a technically knowledgeable person in your immediate or extended family, then you shouldn’t even have your computer turned on during a broadband installation, unless YOU are sitting at the keyboard doing the navigation.  And you never, ever, ever under ANY circumstance let a phone company or cable company installer stick a CD or other media into your computer (unless perhaps it’s an older “sacrificial” computer that you keep around just for testing purposes, where you don’t mind reformatting the hard drive and/or reinstalling the operating system afterwards.  If the “sacrificial” computer has some version of Linux installed, so much the better – most installers won’t touch a Linux box with the proverbial ten foot pole!).  If the installer says he needs to test the setup, tell him he’s welcome to use his laptop computer, but he’s not touching yours.

Unfortunately, far too many customers are way too trusting when the installer arrives, and the problem is that if their only previous experience was with dial-up, even a slow browser will seem faster than what they are used to, so they may not realize it immediately if a browser that gives less than optimal performance has been installed. What they may notice is that their friends who get their broadband from the cable company seem to be able to load web pages much faster. That’s why providing any browser that slows down the customer’s computer, even by just a little, is a really crazy thing to do – it gives customers another reason to go to the competition.

At any given time, I may have as many as four or five different browsers installed on my computer, none of which are from Microsoft or any phone or cable company.  The only one I use for day to day web surfing is Firefox, and when the release version of Firefox 3 comes out I would recommend that everyone try it – it fixes many of the memory leak problems of previous versions. I also have Opera (which will actually render an occasional site that Firefox won’t), Safari (came with my Mac), and Camino, just to mention the ones I can think of offhand – so I’m not exactly adverse to trying new browsers.  But a branded one from a phone or cable company?  Ain’t gonna happen!

Leave a Comment

Big phone companies are run by crazy people

One phone in each handImage from Wikipedia

I came across an article from Fortune entitled “Verizon’s tough call“, which again confirmed what I’ve long suspected:

….. [Craig Moffett, an analyst with Bernstein Research] noted, Verizon primary customer lines were cancelled at a rate of 10.6% last year as more customers switched to cable or wireless phone services. The pace of that decline is accelerating, according to Moffett, who points out that Verizon’s primary residential phone lines have dropped by 27% since 2002.

Home phone service is still Verizon’s biggest business, but it now accounts for only 29% of sales, according to Moffett. Verizon reported revenues of $93.5 billion in 2007.

There is a popular saying (I don’t know where it originated) that one definition of insanity is to do the same things you’ve always done and expect different results.  The phone companies have traditionally tried to nickel-and-dime people to death, while the new technology companies have realized that people want all-inclusive bundles.

It is insane to think that you can continue to charge upwards of ten cents a minute for long distance service and that people will just pay it.

It’s crazy to charge over five dollars a month for a “custom calling service” such as Caller ID and think that people won’t find a competing offer that includes ALL of the custom calling features at NO extra charge attractive.

It is insanity to hit people up with bogus extra charges on their phone bill (for example, the charge for a three-way call if you don’t subscribe to three-way calling and don’t leave the receiver on-hook long enough between calls, so that the switch thinks you made a three-way call) and think that people won’t resent it.

My point is, the big phone companies seem to think they can run their wireline business as they have for the past 100 years, only with LESS customer service and (in some cases) with deteriorating wireline facilities, and still keep their wireline business.

Or, maybe not. Maybe the real goal is to move customers off of regulated wireline services and onto unregulated, supposedly competitive wireless service.  And yes, wireless IS competitive today – but what happens if AT&T and Verizon decide to merge? An administration like the one we have today would probably allow it to happen!

Anyway, for many years I’ve tried to warn people about the big phone companies. You may have noticed that this blog has tried to find an audience and sputtered, and as a result I’ve been less inspired to write (and when I have written it’s been about things that interest me, rather than the nominal topic of this blog). When you look at the list of top posts (that is, the ones that are most read, usually as a result of people arriving here from search engines) you see that a high percentage are NOT “on topic” for this blog.  I go back to the definition of insanity – for me to continue posting telecommunications-related material and expect that this blog will suddenly become popular is insane.  I know there are better blogs on the subject, with more dedicated writers (some of which are listed in the sidebar).

As I get older, I find myself less drawn to the topic matter of this blog.  So, while I’m not ruling out the possibility of future posts should I get fired up about some topic, you can expect them to be fewer and further between – and possibly even less on-topic.  I’d rather write about things I can get enthused about, and while VoIP was a topic I was very enthused about in its infancy, it seems to have already become a mature industry (I am still enthused about VoIP, but find there is little new to write about on the subject).  A surprising number of the early players in that industry are still around (Sunrocket and a couple other notable failures not withstanding) and some are thriving, particularly the ones that don’t spend a lot of money on advertising and prefer to let word-of-mouth and customer recommendations sell their service.

There is a new Macintosh-related blog, called CrabApple Forest. The owner of that blog would like me to contribute articles to that site but at the moment I can’t get much more enthused about writing on that subject than on the nominal topics of this blog. One thing I have noticed is that there’s kind of a general malaise that seems to be affecting a lot of people these days – it’s just a lot harder to get things done, though not everyone seems to be affected. I don’t know if that’s what’s affecting me, or if it’s just a general depression that seems to afflict me every spring (thankfully it’s usually very short-lived). Point is, don’t be surprised if posts to this blog become fewer and further between (again). And to those few who have continued to read this blog, I thank you for hanging in there!

Leave a Comment

For a very important message, call 1-248-434-5508

EDIT:  Note the date on this post – that means you probably shouldn’t take it all that seriously! Also, please note that I have no control over the content on that number, so if it changes or goes away (and it might at some point) don’t blame me – I’m just passing along the latest Internet meme.

You simply must call and hear this important message – it will only take a couple of minutes.  Alternately, or if you are hearing-impaired, you can get the vital news by firing up a terminal program and typing:

telnet psyduck.timminstechnologies.com

This might not work if your organization or ISP blocks the use of telnet (which they should not, but you never know).  By the way, the call to the 248 number is charged as a regular toll call if you dial it in the normal way, but it’s a registered ENUM number, so if you can make a local call to a Sipbroker dial-in anywhere in the world, you should be able to first dial that number and then *013-1-248-434-5508 and get the same result without paying the normal toll charge.

Ah, but you are of the video generation.  Well, if you must have moving pictures with your vital information, then go here. Be sure to pass this along to your friends, it may make a huge difference in your world view and your outlook on life.  Or not.  But you will thank me for having passed this along!

Comments (2)

Researcher: Cell Phones ‘More Dangerous Than Smoking’

Pronto Nenna?!Image by Simone ver.β via FlickrI wish this were an April Fools’ joke, but unfortunately it is not. This is from ConsumerAffairs.com:

There have been a number of health warnings over the years about possible radiation risks associated with the use of mobile phones. In case anyone is not taking these warnings seriously, British health researcher Dr. Vini Khurana puts it in language designed to get your attention:

“Mobile phones could have health consequences far greater than asbestos and smoking,” he said.

Khurana – a neurosurgeon who has published more than 30 scientific papers – reviewed more than 100 studies on the effects of mobile phones. He has written a paper based on the research, which is currently being peer-reviewed for publication in a scientific journal.

Full story here:
Researcher: Cell Phones ‘More Dangerous Than Smoking’

Personally, I’ve suspected this might be a problem for years.  I never minded using the first generation cordless phones, that operated at much lower frequencies (and consequently longer bandwidths) – you know, the ones with the telescoping antenna – but my first cordless phone was taken out by a lightning strike (the base, not the handset) and ever since then I’ve tended to avoid using any sort of cordless phone.  If, for some reason, I have to use one, I tend to keep the conversation as short as possible, and hold the receiver as far as I can from my head (without making it so I can’t hear the other party). I really dislike the 2.4 GHz models and above – that’s microwave frequencies, and you know what microwaves do to food when concentrated.

I have a feeling that the old cellular “bag phones” were probably safer than anything since (provided you didn’t hold the phone in your lap!), because they kept the transmitter a respectable distance from vital body organs, and in most cases had their antenna on the roof of the car, putting a respectable distance (and/or metal shielding) between the user’s head and the antenna.

I don’t know if cell phone customers will ever get the full truth about this, but I doubt it will be trumpeted in their billing statements.  I’d be willing to bet that the cellular industry is already discreetly making inquiries to try and located some “respectable” scientific laboratory that will be willing to go on the record say that it’s all nonsense (it’s not as though large corporations have never paid to get the results they want).  Cellular calling is a HUGE industry worldwide, and the last thing the cell phone companies want is their customers spooked about using their phones.  Of course, they could do the right thing and build phones that don’t put excessive radiation next to vital organs, but I’m not holding my breath on that one.  I’m betting they’ll pay well for the favorable (but dubious) “scientific” studies attempting to discredit Dr. Khurana’s research. I hope I’m wrong, but phone companies rarely disappoint me when I think they are probably going to put profit above doing the right thing.

Related articles

Comments (4)