Author Topic: VoIP seirvices that do not support rotary dials  (Read 8337 times)

Offline andre_janew

  • **
  • Posts: 1666
Re: VoIP seirvices that do not support rotary dials
« Reply #15 on: November 11, 2014, 01:26:24 PM »
I have the latest magicjack.  It will make the 302 ring.  They may have increased the power on them as I am not familiar with the one they had a few years ago.

Offline GusHerb

  • *
  • Posts: 173
Re: VoIP seirvices that do not support rotary dials
« Reply #16 on: January 08, 2015, 02:09:51 AM »
When I first ditched our ailing POTS it was to Comcast Voice and to my dismay the Arris TG862 they sent us in the SIK doesn't support pulse. The Technicolor TC8305 they installed for my neighbor supported pulse dialing in March of 2013 when I tested it but can only assume that has been disabled since then. The Obihai ATA's I use for our various different locations don't support pulse either.

I setup a Vonage ATA for a relative about a year ago, a VDV23 and it supported pulse surprisingly.

I have one of those Dialgizmos and think it's crap, the feature to get # and * doesn't work, and when attached to the end of the ATA to the house wiring it puts an obnoxious low hum on the line. I wish there were a good quality pulse to tone converter available short of buying a whole PBX and rewiring all the lines again...
Jonathan

Offline Phonesrfun

  • **
  • Posts: 4868
  • "Number Please"
Re: VoIP seirvices that do not support rotary dials
« Reply #17 on: January 08, 2015, 02:26:49 AM »
The feature that supports the # and * might work on a 302, and might not work on a 500.  Have you tried it on a 302?  The reason I say this is because that feature, I seem to remember reading, is programmed to be based on how long the dial is held after wind-up before it is released.  I don't own one.


Since the 302 shorts the line during the time the dial is off normal, the dial gizmo can sense when the dial is off normal.  The 500 works differently, and I don't think any external device can sense when a 500 dial is off normal.


I have always been curious about that, so can you tell us what kind of phone it is that won't let the * and # work?  I also seem to remember that it uses the same sort of sensing to dial speed dial numbers.
-Bill G

Offline GusHerb

  • *
  • Posts: 173
Re: VoIP seirvices that do not support rotary dials
« Reply #18 on: January 08, 2015, 03:02:53 AM »
I've tried on at least 6 different 500's and my 302 with no luck. I think my Dialgizmo is a dud. It works fine otherwise, attached to a single phone and just dialing a number though.
Jonathan

unbeldi

  • Guest
Re: VoIP seirvices that do not support rotary dials
« Reply #19 on: January 08, 2015, 10:06:25 AM »
I never bothered to get interested in more detail in these devices (dial gizmos) until recently after it came up in a brief dialog with a friend. I had always sort of assumed casually without research that one must build the device into the phone, connected directly to the dial in order to provide the * and # features.  So, over the holidays I actually assembled my own design on the breadboard and thought more deeply about the issues that people have reported.

Indeed, in order to provide the feature of detecting the off-normal position reliably from outside the telephone, the dial must perfectly shunt the interior circuitry to provide near-zero resistance during dialing. Many phones don't do that, but leave some component, usually a winding of the induction coil, in the signal path. The WECo 500s for example do so, including the transmitter!, nothing in the transmitting path is shunted by the dial, only the receiver is to avoid popping noise to the ear.  In that case, the success of the method depends on the resistance of the internal path.

Of course, the providers of telephone service faced the same issues in maintaining dial service in general.  Strowger switches require a clean dial pulse to actuate the electromechanical switches properly, and the line interfaces and digit registers in the later switches had to have the line tuned properly for reliable line state decoding.  This was established by stringent requirements for outside plant, loop lengths, wire gauge, zoning, and policing (keeping unknown third-party equipment off-net).

For reliable operation with any phone the gizmo would need to be calibrated to the internal resistance of the phone while being in the off-normal dial position. If multiple phones are on the same line and the gizmo is ahead of them all, then it would need to have a method to know the internal resistance of each or be trained by a procedure to set tolerances for the entire setup.

Calibration against the internal resistance of the phone is not easy, because the 'gizmo' cannot just send out a known voltage and measure what comes back, because the telephone is connected to the telephone line at the same time and the current in the loop would come from multiple sources. The procedure must account for the DC voltage of the loop from the CO or PBX and the current available when perfectly shunted. ... many variables to account for.  This explains the inconsistent behaviors--even a 302 may not always consistently work in all situations.

So, my conclusion was that the method of holding the dial in the off-normal position for a couple seconds is clever, but not universally reliable.  Instead I implemented the same feature by pressing the hookswitch twice (two flash signals) before dialing substitute digits, 2 for * and 3 for #, not as convenient, but universally applicable. I was using a line sense relay, that only detects loop current, not voltages or resistances.  However, it requires some practice to provide just the right amount of timing for the flash event, because a flash too long is a hangup, and a flash too short is transient noise or the digit 1.



« Last Edit: January 08, 2015, 11:41:37 AM by unbeldi »

Offline Fabius

  • **
  • Posts: 2284
  • Porcelain Telephone Sign Collector
Re: VoIP seirvices that do not support rotary dials
« Reply #20 on: January 08, 2015, 10:37:57 AM »
I haven't tried Magic Jack for a couple years, at least.  The one I had was about the size of an over-sized thumb drive and of course, getting all its power from the USB port, did not have enough oomf to drive even a single REN 1.0 ringer.  Did they increase the size of the MJ ATA, or is it still the thumb drive concept?  If so, you must not use the ringer in the 302.

I had Magic Jack a few years ago but didn't renew. We have an apartment where the cell reception is not great so I renewed the Magic Jack since we have high speed internet. I have a touch tone payphone on it and it rings fine.

I was buying some quarter modular line cords from Mike Sandman Telcom and notice they have a ring current/voltage boosters. Here's the link:

http://www.sandman.com/LongLoop.html
Tom Vaughn
La Porte, Indiana
ATCA Past President
ATCA #765
C*NET 1+ 821-9905

Offline Phonesrfun

  • **
  • Posts: 4868
  • "Number Please"
Re: VoIP seirvices that do not support rotary dials
« Reply #21 on: January 08, 2015, 12:28:52 PM »
So, I'll bet that if someone could come up with a reliable and inexpensive circuit that only converts digits 1 through 0, more people would be happier than having one that is supposed to dial # and * and speed dial numbers, but only works sometimes or not at all.  After all, the Panasonic PBX will only translate 1 through 0, and that solution has often been touted as an ultimate solution.  I have a Panasonic PBX, but I don't think it is very good as an ultimate solution.  The reasons why are:
  • Many collectors do not have the desire to deal with having a PBX, extensions and home run wiring in their homes
  • Spouses and family often don't like the fact that extension phones ring at a different time and with a different cadence as a phone connected directly to the line.  In fact, it drives most people nuts.
  • It confuses people to have to dial a 9 for an outside line in a home/residence
  • Many collectors don't have a dedicated space for a PBX that is out of the way and permanently wired in, which is the best way to have one.  They weren't designed to be on the floor propped up against a wall, although admitidly that is what many do.  I finally mounted mine on the wall after months of tripping over the wires.
  • The PBX, while small as PBX's go, are HUGE compared to the circuit that would be needed for a pulse to tone converter.
-Bill G

unbeldi

  • Guest
Re: VoIP seirvices that do not support rotary dials
« Reply #22 on: January 08, 2015, 12:34:52 PM »
So, I'll bet that if someone could come up with a reliable and inexpensive circuit that only converts digits 1 through 0, more people would be happier than having one that is supposed to dial # and * and speed dial numbers, but only works sometimes or not at all.  After all, the Panasonic PBX will only translate 1 through 0, and that solution has often been touted as an ultimate solution.  I have a Panasonic PBX, but I don't think it is very good as an ultimate solution.  The reasons why are:
  • Many collectors do not have the desire to deal with having a PBX, extensions and home run wiring in their homes
  • Spouses and family often don't like the fact that extension phones ring at a different time and with a different cadence as a phone connected directly to the line.  In fact, it drives most people nuts.
  • It confuses people to have to dial a 9 for an outside line in a home/residence
  • Many collectors don't have a dedicated space for a PBX that is out of the way and permanently wired in, which is the best way to have one.  They weren't designed to be on the floor propped up against a wall, although admitidly that is what many do.  I finally mounted mine on the wall after months of tripping over the wires.
  • The PBX, while small as PBX's go, are HUGE compared to the circuit that would be needed for a pulse to tone converter.

Thanks for the market research !  LOL.
Perhaps you're right. It might just be that more features not always make a better product.
KISS. :-*
(keep it simple stupid.)


« Last Edit: January 08, 2015, 12:45:21 PM by unbeldi »

Offline poplar1

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6280
  • 1051-AL
Re: VoIP seirvices that do not support rotary dials
« Reply #23 on: January 08, 2015, 01:35:35 PM »
DSK may have suggested this already:
In a 500, move the 2 white wires from the dial from R and GN (shorting the receiver) to F   RR and C (to short the line).

Thanks unbeldi and dsk for the correction.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2015, 03:16:53 PM by poplar1 »
"C'est pas une restauration, c'est une rénovation."--François Martin.

Offline dsk

  • **
  • Posts: 3959
Re: VoIP seirvices that do not support rotary dials
« Reply #24 on: January 08, 2015, 02:42:12 PM »
Thanks for that: it should be moved to RR and C to not short the pulse contacts.

dsk

Offline andre_janew

  • **
  • Posts: 1666
Re: VoIP seirvices that do not support rotary dials
« Reply #25 on: January 08, 2015, 06:59:25 PM »
That may work for a 500 with a 425E network.  What about one with a 425B network?  There is no C terminal on the 425B.

unbeldi

  • Guest
Re: VoIP seirvices that do not support rotary dials
« Reply #26 on: January 08, 2015, 07:46:15 PM »
On the earlier 500s you could move the second white wire to the L2 terminal, instead of C, bypassing the hookswitch which is somewhat redundant.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2015, 07:51:48 PM by unbeldi »

unbeldi

  • Guest
Re: VoIP seirvices that do not support rotary dials
« Reply #27 on: January 08, 2015, 08:15:17 PM »
I haven't tried this, but I suspect rewiring the dial shunt this way, may cause popping noises in the ear at the beginning and end of each digit dialed.  At least the 500 sets have a varistor on the receiver to subdue any such pulses.

Offline Dave203

  • *
  • Posts: 66
  • Phone/Cable Guy
Re: VoIP seirvices that do not support rotary dials
« Reply #28 on: February 06, 2015, 01:42:19 AM »
I have 1 line Comcast voice service at home with a 2 line Arris modem and pulse dialing does work on that but at my shop I have 1 line business voice service on a 4 line Arris modem and pulse is ignored. It could be firmware or it could be the modem or any number of things like a check box not selected in the optional services.

Offline Fabius

  • **
  • Posts: 2284
  • Porcelain Telephone Sign Collector
Re: VoIP seirvices that do not support rotary dials
« Reply #29 on: February 06, 2015, 11:35:09 AM »
  I have a Panasonic PBX, but I don't think it is very good as an ultimate solution.  The reasons why are:
  • Many collectors do not have the desire to deal with having a PBX, extensions and home run wiring in their homes
  • Spouses and family often don't like the fact that extension phones ring at a different time and with a different cadence as a phone connected directly to the line.  In fact, it drives most people nuts.
  • It confuses people to have to dial a 9 for an outside line in a home/residence
  • Many collectors don't have a dedicated space for a PBX that is out of the way and permanently wired in, which is the best way to have one.  They weren't designed to be on the floor propped up against a wall, although admitidly that is what many do.  I finally mounted mine on the wall after months of tripping over the wires.
  • The PBX, while small as PBX's go, are HUGE compared to the circuit that would be needed for a pulse to tone converter.
Commenting some of the concerns mentioned:

I plugged existing IW (inside wiring) into the OBX extension jack and that allowed me to get to jacks in other locations. I opened the line back to the central office (Comcast) so it didn't interfere with my system (and visa versa). For locations without a jack I have a cordless phone serving them off the PBX.

I've been told that the ringing cadence is the same on every 4th ext. I haven't tried that yet but if true that would help if you want phones to ring at the same time.

My Panasonic sits on a shelf on my computer desk and the wiring is unobtrusive as I'm using the existing IW (3 feet away from the RJ11 IW wall jack) and cordless phones. The wiring is kept neat by using tie wraps.
Tom Vaughn
La Porte, Indiana
ATCA Past President
ATCA #765
C*NET 1+ 821-9905