Talk:DSL filter

why is this forwarded from DSL splitter? Aren't a DSL splitter and a DSL filter different?

A DSL splitter is just a regular phone splitter with a filter on one of the outputs. I think they are the same, in so much as they should be on the same page, because they are basically the same topic. However, it could be said that some more explanation of the diff between a filter and splitter should be added to the topic. Jrouvier 08:38, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, a DSL splitter contains 2 filters: a low-pass filter on the POTS output and a high-pass filter on the DSL output. JanCeuleers 17:01, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, actually, it doesn't. In almost all "splitters" (at least all the ones I've seen), the DSL output is connected directly to the incoming line. There is only an LPF for the phone line. I've not taken a DSL modem apart, but I suspect they have an HPF on the input anyway to filter out main noise (ie 50/60Hz).81.153.169.192 (talk) 22:53, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

I think it should be lined out, that each analog phone, fax, ... needs to behind a filter. So you may need more than one filter.

In most cases you need to supply a filter for each outlet (except the one where you plug in the DSL).

In rare cases you will be able to intercept the analog singal where it enteres the house or flat, split it up into a filtered and an unfiltered signal. The filtered signal is fed back into your existing cabeling, the unfiltered signal is connected to the DSL.

In Germany it seems you have to use a splitter. All manuals about installation of DSL tell you to use a (=one) splitter and there is no mention of using several filters for analog devices. I have also seen online shops that sell "filters" for some countries in the EU, but not Germany. Am I getting this right? Is there a reason why it seems to be prohibited to use filters in Germany? -- 91.7.159.200 11:27, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Given the high penetration of ISDN in Germany, DTAG has decided to standardise on the ADSL-over-ISDN variant, regardless of whether a particular subscriber uses POTS or ISDN. A simple filter at the customer prem isn't enough to keep the ISDN signal from interfering with the ADSL signal, so a full-blown splitter is needed. JanCeuleers 15:43, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * What is a "full-blown splitter" vs. a less-blown one? 31.142.12.46 (talk) 13:06, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

re: Other problems which have been reported by users are the failure of their telephone to ring when receiving an incoming call

Where does this come from? I added Fact to this

I work with these things and I've never heard of it. They generate the ring notification from the incoming signal lines, just need a capacitor. So, can you cite a source for this statement? 192.118.34.229 09:19, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

This does happen to me. I have no idea why though.125.27.197.204 17:33, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

micro-filter
We need better pictures showing/explaining filter vs. splitter. We need to include the term micro-filter, often used for DSL filters. Some discussions claim that an unloaded (not connected to a phone) filter plugged in will mess up the DSL; is this true? How are filters for wall-mount phones implemented? Please add pictures. -69.87.199.60 (talk) 03:57, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

blatant advertising
I tried to change the link to point to a wall mounted filter that was not a blatent advert for a product. I appear to be unsuccesfull in doing so and do not want to damage the article.

I propose this link, rather than the current link which entices me to purchase a filter.
 * FYI that's an image. If you can find a source to use to make a caption I will add this for you. Kiko4564 (talk) 19:40, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Point of view
"Typical installation for an existing home involves installing DSL filters on every telephone, fax machine, voice band modem, and other voiceband device in the home, leaving the DSL modem as the only unfiltered device." -- this might be true in some countries, but for example in Sweden, the most typical installation is to connect just put a splitter on the "first" jacket in the home, which then effectively makes all other jackets in the house automagically filtered. 46.162.96.221 (talk) 01:45, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

merge
I suggest merging Splitter ADSL into DSL filter. My understanding is that a "ADSL splitter" and a "DSL splitter" are exactly the same, and a "ADSL filter" and a "DSL filter" are exactly the same. My understanding is that a "DSL filter" and a "DSL splitter" are so closely related that a single article can cover both devices and the small difference between them. --DavidCary (talk) 14:54, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Agreed. Given that (in general) the DSL is not filtered, but connected to the incoming line, the only difference between a "splitter" and a "filter" is the presence of a DSL socket.Mesdale (talk) 22:56, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, they definitely should be merged. If a decision is made not to merge them, the splitter article needs a complete rewrite as the standard of English is close to incomprehensible. Marchino61 (talk) 05:00, 26 September 2013 (UTC)


 * ✅ The previous article is now moved to a section in this page. I have rewritten the merged article before moving it to DSL filter. Danielh32 (talk) 04:49, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Unnecessary article link
Under "See also" there is a link to an article named "MDF splitter", which redirects back to this article. Is there a reason behind it, or maybe the link is simply overlooked when the article was rewritten? Excubated (talk) 01:51, 28 September 2014 (UTC)