Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.acorn.misc > #2684 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2011-11-24 23:46 +0000 |
| Last post | 2011-12-01 07:24 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 90 — 27 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.acorn.misc
Had a bit of fun today... "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2011-11-24 23:46 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2011-11-25 08:47 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2011-11-25 09:39 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Martin <News03@avisoft.f9.co.uk> - 2011-11-25 10:12 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Alan Griffin <ajg@argonet.co.uk> - 2011-11-25 10:23 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Grahame Parish <maillist.parish@millers-way.net> - 2011-11-25 10:57 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2011-11-25 11:03 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Chris <decordova@ukgateway.net> - 2011-11-26 01:03 +0100
Re: Had a bit of fun today... "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2011-11-26 11:18 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Chris Bell <news@highpath.net> - 2011-11-25 11:29 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Bryn Evans <d@a.invalid> - 2011-11-25 16:29 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2011-11-26 15:51 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Fred Bambrough <fred@[127.0.0.1]> - 2011-11-26 16:20 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Folderol <folderol@ukfsn.org> - 2011-11-26 16:28 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Barry Gray <barrygray@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-11-28 10:38 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2011-11-30 20:33 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-01 06:53 +0100
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2011-12-01 08:40 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2011-12-01 09:17 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2011-12-01 10:15 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2011-12-04 07:27 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> - 2011-12-04 07:50 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-05 15:41 +0100
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2011-12-04 11:03 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Martin <News03@avisoft.f9.co.uk> - 2011-12-04 11:44 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2011-12-04 15:26 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2011-12-04 19:07 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2011-12-04 21:05 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2011-12-04 23:36 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-05 15:49 +0100
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2011-12-12 10:57 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2011-12-12 11:18 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2011-12-12 11:47 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Brian Carroll <bric-nospam@argonet.co.uk> - 2011-12-12 12:22 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2011-12-12 14:19 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... charles <charles@charleshope.demon.co.uk> - 2011-12-12 13:47 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-12 16:40 +0100
Re: Had a bit of fun today... charles <charles@charleshope.demon.co.uk> - 2011-12-12 15:46 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-13 05:58 +0100
Re: Had a bit of fun today... "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2011-12-13 00:21 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-13 06:17 +0100
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> - 2011-12-13 09:29 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Folderol <folderol@ukfsn.org> - 2011-12-13 18:55 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-14 08:18 +0100
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Dave Higton <davehigton@dsl.pipex.com> - 2011-12-15 20:53 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Dave Higton <davehigton@dsl.pipex.com> - 2011-12-15 20:42 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2011-12-13 12:26 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> - 2011-12-12 11:18 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2011-12-12 19:43 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2011-12-13 13:25 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2011-12-04 23:48 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Dr Peter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> - 2011-12-04 16:00 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2011-12-04 20:56 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-05 15:53 +0100
Re: Had a bit of fun today... M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2011-12-05 15:11 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2011-12-05 15:19 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2011-12-05 16:51 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-05 18:40 +0100
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2011-12-05 18:59 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Martin Wynn <m.wynn@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-12-05 19:09 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2011-12-05 23:03 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-06 06:53 +0100
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Simon <simon.willcocks@t-online.de> - 2011-12-05 23:46 -0800
Re: Had a bit of fun today... "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2011-12-06 14:38 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Simon <simon.willcocks@t-online.de> - 2011-12-06 09:52 -0800
Re: Had a bit of fun today... "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2011-12-06 23:05 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2011-12-07 08:58 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-09 09:13 +0100
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2011-12-06 10:06 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2011-12-06 14:40 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2011-12-12 11:06 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Jeremy Nicoll - news posts <jn.nntp.scrap007@wingsandbeaks.org.uk> - 2011-12-06 19:56 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2011-12-06 20:58 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2011-12-06 23:10 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2011-12-07 10:24 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-12-09 09:22 +0100
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2011-12-12 11:09 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2011-12-05 21:14 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Chris Bell <news@highpath.net> - 2011-12-06 09:49 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2011-12-06 10:52 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Chris Bell <news@highpath.net> - 2011-12-06 11:47 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2011-11-26 16:32 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2011-11-26 16:27 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Steve Fryatt <news@stevefryatt.org.uk> - 2011-11-26 16:34 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2011-11-26 16:46 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-11-27 04:56 +0100
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> - 2011-11-29 08:23 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2011-11-29 10:54 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> - 2011-11-29 11:55 +0000
Re: Had a bit of fun today... Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> - 2011-12-01 07:24 +0000
Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →
| From | "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-12-05 23:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <523d0bc27ddave@davenoise.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #2819 |
In article <523cf56900Spambin@argonet.co.uk>,
Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > As long as the phone isn't ringing (easily solved with a switch),
> > jacking the line into a cheap transistor amp by way of a capacitor
> > seems to work - although as has been mentioned, the local voice is a
> > fair bit louder.
> I have a feeling that doing that in the UK could invoke the wrath of
> your telecoms supplier and result in a court appearance.
And just how would they find out? You are allowed to make your own
connections to the phone line after the master socket.
> Traditionally an inductive pick-up coil was used but I don't know whether
> that would work with modern systems
Probably not.
Of course I'm not suggesting those who don't know what they're doing
should play around with their phone line. The correct way is to connect to
the line via an isolating transformer to prevent dangerous voltages being
fed back up the phone line. If you have an old dial-up modem lying around
you'll find one in there.
--
*If love is blind, why is lingerie so popular?
Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-12-06 06:53 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <4eddade8$0$5672$ba4acef3@reader.news.orange.fr> |
| In reply to | #2823 |
On 06/12/2011 00:03, Dave Plowman (News) wrote: > If you have an old dial-up modem lying around you'll find one in there. If you're clever, you might salvage enough bits from an old Hayes modem to: 1. Cope safely with ring current. 2. Detect when the phone is taken off-hook. 3. Auto start/stop recording. I have a feeling it will be possible on a piece of vero with some salvaged bits, a small microcontroller, and a stack of datasheets. Best wishes, Rick.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Simon <simon.willcocks@t-online.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-12-05 23:46 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <abcc835e-2697-49f2-9c6b-53b4b25e9b04@da3g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #2825 |
On Dec 6, 5:53 am, Rick Murray <heyrickmail-use...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > On 06/12/2011 00:03, Dave Plowman (News) wrote: > > > If you have an old dial-up modem lying around you'll find one in there. > > If you're clever, you might salvage enough bits from an old Hayes modem to: > > 1. Cope safely with ring current. > 2. Detect when the phone is taken off-hook. > 3. Auto start/stop recording. > > I have a feeling it will be possible on a piece of vero with some > salvaged bits, a small microcontroller, and a stack of datasheets. Why take the modem apart? Wouldn't it be possible to simply connect it to a computer? (No soldering, no datasheets, except for the modem commands?) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_modem#Recording_audio_data It could be anything from an Arc to a BeagleBoard. (Possibly even a BBC micro, with modern storage.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-12-06 14:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <523d615a8cdave@davenoise.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #2826 |
In article
<abcc835e-2697-49f2-9c6b-53b4b25e9b04@da3g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
Simon <simon.willcocks@t-online.de> wrote:
> On Dec 6, 5:53 am, Rick Murray <heyrickmail-use...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > On 06/12/2011 00:03, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
> >
> > > If you have an old dial-up modem lying around you'll find one in there.
> >
> > If you're clever, you might salvage enough bits from an old Hayes modem to:
> >
> > 1. Cope safely with ring current.
> > 2. Detect when the phone is taken off-hook.
> > 3. Auto start/stop recording.
> >
> > I have a feeling it will be possible on a piece of vero with some
> > salvaged bits, a small microcontroller, and a stack of datasheets.
> Why take the modem apart?
> Wouldn't it be possible to simply connect it to a computer?
> (No soldering, no datasheets, except for the modem
> commands?)
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_modem#Recording_audio_data
> It could be anything from an Arc to a BeagleBoard. (Possibly even
> a BBC micro, with modern storage.)
I dunno of any RISC OS software that allowed the recording of an actual
telephone conversation using a dial up modem. Arcfax has all sorts of
additional software which may have been meant to do this - but I could
never get it to work with my modem(s).
--
*Upon the advice of my attorney, my shirt bears no message at this time
Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Simon <simon.willcocks@t-online.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-12-06 09:52 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <331d74a8-9d9b-4a2d-aa2a-a570640f942c@u5g2000vbd.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #2831 |
On Dec 6, 2:38 pm, "Dave Plowman (News)" <d...@davenoise.co.uk> wrote: > In article > <abcc835e-2697-49f2-9c6b-53b4b25e9...@da3g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, > Simon <simon.willco...@t-online.de> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 6, 5:53 am, Rick Murray <heyrickmail-use...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > > On 06/12/2011 00:03, Dave Plowman (News) wrote: > > > > > If you have an old dial-up modem lying around you'll find one in there. > > > > If you're clever, you might salvage enough bits from an old Hayes modem to: > > > > 1. Cope safely with ring current. > > > 2. Detect when the phone is taken off-hook. > > > 3. Auto start/stop recording. > > > > I have a feeling it will be possible on a piece of vero with some > > > salvaged bits, a small microcontroller, and a stack of datasheets. > > Why take the modem apart? > > Wouldn't it be possible to simply connect it to a computer? > > (No soldering, no datasheets, except for the modem > > commands?) > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_modem#Recording_audio_data > > It could be anything from an Arc to a BeagleBoard. (Possibly even > > a BBC micro, with modern storage.) > > I dunno of any RISC OS software that allowed the recording of an actual > telephone conversation using a dial up modem. Arcfax has all sorts of > additional software which may have been meant to do this - but I could > never get it to work with my modem(s). I can't seem to find my modem, I expect I passed it on some years ago, but it doesn't look too hard to do. If you'd only be interested in getting it to work with one of your existing modems, you could try typing AT#VRX (or AT+VRX) and see if it sends you something continuously until you type control-C. If there's no noise, you might get Contol-P (&10), followed by an 's'. If that works out, and you're interested, drop me a line and we could try to work out a simple program. Simon
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-12-06 23:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <523d8fc9a0dave@davenoise.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #2833 |
In article
<331d74a8-9d9b-4a2d-aa2a-a570640f942c@u5g2000vbd.googlegroups.com>,
Simon <simon.willcocks@t-online.de> wrote:
> > I dunno of any RISC OS software that allowed the recording of an actual
> > telephone conversation using a dial up modem. Arcfax has all sorts of
> > additional software which may have been meant to do this - but I could
> > never get it to work with my modem(s).
> I can't seem to find my modem, I expect I passed it on some years ago,
> but it doesn't look too hard to do. If you'd only be interested in
> getting it to work with one of your existing modems, you could try
> typing AT#VRX (or AT+VRX) and see if it sends you something continuously
> until you type control-C. If there's no noise, you might get Contol-P
> (&10), followed by an 's'.
> If that works out, and you're interested, drop me a line and we could
> try
> to work out a simple program.
I actually have a device made for recording off a phone line complete with
hybrid transformer etc which equalises the voice levels between ends. That
has an analogue output which I can plug into the Irlam sound card if I
wanted to record to the RPC.
--
*Acupuncture is a jab well done*
Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-12-07 08:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <523dc61849Spambin@argonet.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #2838 |
In article <523d8fc9a0dave@davenoise.co.uk>, Dave Plowman (News) <dave@davenoise.co.uk> wrote: > I actually have a device made for recording off a phone line complete > with hybrid transformer etc which equalises the voice levels between > ends. I thought you might :-) -- Stuart Winsor Only plain text for emails http://www.asciiribbon.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-12-09 09:13 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <4ee1c321$0$5658$ba4acef3@reader.news.orange.fr> |
| In reply to | #2826 |
On 06/12/2011 08:46, Simon wrote: > Why take the modem apart? 'cos I was thinking of a Hayes 2400 baud, or the like. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_modem#Recording_audio_data > It could be anything from an Arc to a BeagleBoard. (Possibly even > a BBC micro, with modern storage.) Mmm, now there's an interesting idea. Not sure if I have a compatible modem, I'll need to rummage. D'you know what the file format is? Some sort of PCM? Best wishes, Rick.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-12-06 10:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <523d4875dbSpambin@argonet.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #2823 |
In article <523d0bc27ddave@davenoise.co.uk>, Dave Plowman (News) <dave@davenoise.co.uk> wrote: > > I have a feeling that doing that in the UK could invoke the wrath of > > your telecoms supplier and result in a court appearance. > And just how would they find out? You are allowed to make your own > connections to the phone line after the master socket. That is certainly true but my understanding is that any /equipment/ you connect to the line still requires approval. As far as knowing, doesn't the equipment in modern exchanges run automatic line tests periodically? It could show up your home built kit as an anomaly. -- Stuart Winsor Only plain text for emails http://www.asciiribbon.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-12-06 14:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <523d6191f7dave@davenoise.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #2828 |
In article <523d4875dbSpambin@argonet.co.uk>,
Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <523d0bc27ddave@davenoise.co.uk>,
> Dave Plowman (News) <dave@davenoise.co.uk> wrote:
> > > I have a feeling that doing that in the UK could invoke the wrath of
> > > your telecoms supplier and result in a court appearance.
> > And just how would they find out? You are allowed to make your own
> > connections to the phone line after the master socket.
> That is certainly true but my understanding is that any /equipment/ you
> connect to the line still requires approval.
> As far as knowing, doesn't the equipment in modern exchanges run
> automatic line tests periodically?
Designed to find faults.
> It could show up your home built kit
> as an anomaly.
Not if it simply 'looks' like another telephone.
--
*Why does the sun lighten our hair, but darken our skin?
Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-12-12 11:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <524064fadatim@invalid.org.uk> |
| In reply to | #2819 |
In article <523cf56900Spambin@argonet.co.uk>, Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> wrote: [Snip] > Traditionally an inductive pick-up coil was used but I don't know > whether that would work with modern systems Dead easy too. Used to have a choke soldered on a cable in place of a mic which broke and used to connect it to the same Philips tape recorder I used for data with the BBC B. I merely placed this under the phone and it would pick up the call which I could record. As the analogue side of phone calls hasn't really changed in 30 years, I imagine it will still work. If I ever find it, I may try it with more modern equipment though will probably have to replace its 180deg DIN plug first. :-) -- Tim Hill of timil.com . . . * supports TFT & shares in cheaper ethical telecoms http://tjrh.eu/phone * has a genuine & spam-proof address for Usenet http://www.invalid.org.uk/ * accepts incoming email: substitute postmaster@ for tim@ ... "In nature there's no blemish but the mind; none can be called deform'd but the unkind" Twelfth N, Act iii, Sc.4
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeremy Nicoll - news posts <jn.nntp.scrap007@wingsandbeaks.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-12-06 19:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mpro.lvssps00are9x02lw@wingsandbeaks.org.uk.invalid> |
| In reply to | #2815 |
M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> wrote: > I've got a fair bit of technology, but . . how /do/ you record from > your telephone? The simplest way is to use a loudspeaker phone, and record the now easily audible sound it and you make, in whatever way you'd record any other ambient sound. -- Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own. Email sent to my from-address will be deleted. Instead, please reply to newsreplyaaa@wingsandbeaks.org.uk replacing "aaa" by "284".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-12-06 20:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <523d842ff7riscos@mdharding.org.uk> |
| In reply to | #2834 |
In article <mpro.lvssps00are9x02lw@wingsandbeaks.org.uk.invalid>, Jeremy Nicoll - news posts <jn.nntp.scrap007@wingsandbeaks.org.uk> wrote: > M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> wrote: > > I've got a fair bit of technology, but . . how /do/ you record > > from your telephone? > The simplest way is to use a loudspeaker phone, and record the now > easily audible sound it and you make, in whatever way you'd record > any other ambient sound. Funny, isn't it, how blinkered one can be in automatically seeking the best sound quality, and therefore tying everything in electronically - and the simple, blindingly obvious but lesser quality method passes one by?! So I have to hand a simple MiniDisc Walkman recorder with mic which will do the job! I do have an old modem; and ArcFax, which did work . . . 8-) Thanks for the ideas. Michael Harding Rev. Preb. M.D. Harding riscos@mdharding.org.uk
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-12-06 23:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <523d903c50dave@davenoise.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #2836 |
In article <523d842ff7riscos@mdharding.org.uk>,
M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> wrote:
> > The simplest way is to use a loudspeaker phone, and record the now
> > easily audible sound it and you make, in whatever way you'd record
> > any other ambient sound.
> Funny, isn't it, how blinkered one can be in automatically seeking the
> best sound quality, and therefore tying everything in electronically -
> and the simple, blindingly obvious but lesser quality method passes
> one by?! So I have to hand a simple MiniDisc Walkman recorder with mic
> which will do the job!
It will after a fashion, but speaker phones are usually much poorer
quality than is possible - and of course you'll also record any noises in
the room. The circuit Rick Murray gave would give much better results -
provided your recorder has a line, rather than mic input.
> I do have an old modem; and ArcFax, which did work . . . 8-)
I still use mine for sending the odd fax - and also text messages. I'm
much quicker on this keyboard than a phone one. Must be my age. ;-)
--
*Why don't sheep shrink when it rains?
Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-12-07 10:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <523dcdfdferiscos@mdharding.org.uk> |
| In reply to | #2839 |
In article <523d903c50dave@davenoise.co.uk>, Dave Plowman (News) <dave@davenoise.co.uk> wrote: > In article <523d842ff7riscos@mdharding.org.uk>, > M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> wrote: > > > The simplest way is to use a loudspeaker phone, and record the > > > now easily audible sound it and you make, in whatever way you'd > > > record any other ambient sound. > > Funny, isn't it, how blinkered one can be in automatically > > seeking the best sound quality, and therefore tying everything in > > electronically - and the simple, blindingly obvious but lesser > > quality method passes one by?! So I have to hand a simple > > MiniDisc Walkman recorder with mic which will do the job! > It will after a fashion, but speaker phones are usually much poorer > quality than is possible - and of course you'll also record any > noises in the room. The circuit Rick Murray gave would give much > better results - provided your recorder has a line, rather than mic > input. I once managed to solder up a Heathkit tuner but that was just join-the-dots stuff and when I looked at Rick's dotted lines I immediately thought: that's beyond me. But I've just looked at it again and it's quite straightforward isn't it? I may have a go at it. And yes, the MiniDisc recorder has mic & line inputs. Until then, it's the cheap-&-cheerful setting, even if the cat's joining in the conversation. Thanks then to Rick for the method and Dave for the encouragement and Jeremy for the work-around. Is one obliged to state that it's being recorded? I sometimes bluff them and say "This is being recorded for training purposes in how to deal with cold-callers." 8-) Michael Harding Rev. Preb. M.D. Harding riscos@mdharding.org.uk
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-12-09 09:22 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <4ee1c540$0$5688$ba4acef3@reader.news.orange.fr> |
| In reply to | #2842 |
On 07/12/2011 11:24, M Harding wrote: > Is one obliged to state that it's being recorded? I sometimes bluff > them and say "This is being recorded for training purposes in how to > deal with cold-callers." 8-) I am not a lawyer... --8<-------- Can I record telephone conversations on my home phone? Yes. The relevant law, RIPA, does not prohibit individuals from recording their own communications provided that the recording is for their own use. Recording or monitoring are only prohibited where some of the contents of the communication - which can be a phone conversation or an e-mail - are made available to a third party, ie someone who was neither the caller or sender nor the intended recipient of the original communication. For further information see the Home Office website where RIPA is posted. Do I have to let people know that I intend to record their telephone conversations with me? No, provided you are not intending to make the contents of the communication available to a third party. If you are you will need the consent of the person you are recording. --8<-------- [ http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/archive/oftel/consumer/advice/faqs/prvfaq3.htm ] Given the third party notification, it would be an interesting case as to whether "the police" would count in recording such calls for the purposes of providing evidence of threatening behaviour... Best wishes, Rick.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-12-12 11:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <5240654ba0tim@invalid.org.uk> |
| In reply to | #2865 |
In article <4ee1c540$0$5688$ba4acef3@reader.news.orange.fr>, Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: [Snip] > Given the third party notification, it would be an interesting case as > to whether "the police" would count in recording such calls for the > purposes of providing evidence of threatening behaviour... ...and firms which say they may record calls for training purposes don't give you the option tom say 'no'. And police may /suggest/ you record nuisance calls so, go figure. -- Tim Hill of timil.com . . . * supports TFT & shares in cheaper ethical telecoms http://tjrh.eu/phone * has a genuine & spam-proof address for Usenet http://www.invalid.org.uk/ * accepts incoming email: substitute postmaster@ for tim@ ... "My endeavours have ever come too short of my desires" Henry VIII, Act iii, Sc.2
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-12-05 21:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <523d01d390see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> |
| In reply to | #2814 |
In article <4edcdacc$0$2541$ba4acef3@reader.news.orange.fr>, Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > On 04/12/2011 21:56, Russell Hafter News wrote: > > so they hung up on me and a 'supervisor' phoned back > > wanting to know why I had hung up on them. He then > > threatened to keep phoning back until I listened to him > > 'politely'. > AFAIK the CLI is blocked at your local exchange. This is > perhaps when you want to report it as a *threatening* > nuisance caller. Be careful not to confuse WITHHELD, UNAVAILABLE, AND INTERNATIONAL. WITHHELD = a) a command string to withhold the number has been issued by the caller (141 in the UK). b) The caller's exchange has been asked to withhold the number on all calls issuing from that number (can be overridden on a per call basis by the 1470 prefix) c) (In a larger organisation with its own PBX or Switch) the PBX/Switch has been configured to withhold the number, either for security reasons (eg Police, NHS) or because the installing engineer found it much easier to install the equipment that way. In any situation, CLI is, in fact provided and only withheld at the final step. Calls to certain numbers, including 112/999 ignore the withheld flag and CLI is always presented. UNAVAILABLE = no CLI supplied in the first place, either because the call comes from a primitive exchange that does not provide CLI, or because the sending equipment is deliberately configured not to send any CLI. INTERNATIONAL = call from outwith the UK. CLI is provided, but BT, in their infinite wisdom, have decided that they do not trust any other country to reliably send the withheld flag. They therefore decide to withhold the CLI, and set the international flag instead, thus depriving us of what can be very useful information. Mobile operators *do* display incoming CLI from outwith the UK. So, if someone calls my ofice from Germany while I am out, it displays INTERNATIONAL on the landline equipment, but once diverted to my mobile, the CLI gets resent before the handset rings, and so is displayed on the mobile. Bonkers. Complexity is added by the fact that while most dedicated CLI units seem to understand the international flag, and display INTERNATIONAL, the hardware in many phones does not, and so displays UNAVAILABLE. Even more complex, my Gigaset DECT handsets alternately display Unavailable + INTERNATIONAL when actually ringing, but store Unavailable. BT have a lot to answer for. -- Russell http://www.russell-hafter-holidays.co.uk Russell Hafter Holidays E-mail to enquiries at our domain Need a hotel? <http://www.hrs.com/?client=en__blue&customerId=416873103>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Bell <news@highpath.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-12-06 09:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <523d46e5f8news@highpath.net> |
| In reply to | #2821 |
Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> wrote: > Be careful not to confuse WITHHELD, UNAVAILABLE, AND > INTERNATIONAL. What triggers the helpful EXTERNAL CALL message, which usually indicates that the caller is someone intent on wasting our time? Our friends often see our UK number replaced by INTERNATIONAL because, as users of 1899.com, I understand our calls are routed via Portugal. Very confusing! Chris Bell.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-12-06 10:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <523d4caa3bsee.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> |
| In reply to | #2827 |
In article <523d46e5f8news@highpath.net>, Chris Bell <news@highpath.net> wrote: > Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> > wrote: > > Be careful not to confuse WITHHELD, UNAVAILABLE, AND > > INTERNATIONAL. > What triggers the helpful EXTERNAL CALL message, which > usually indicates that the caller is someone intent on > wasting our time? I have never seen, or heard about that one! > Our friends often see our UK number replaced by > INTERNATIONAL because, as users of 1899.com, I understand > our calls are routed via Portugal. Very confusing! I have read far too many horror stories about 1899 and its various clones from other users to even consider using any of them. The service seems to go down with no warning, and the call quality appears to to vary from adequate to appalling. When I am speaking a foreign langauage on the phone, sound quality is crucial! I believe that 1899 etc involve VOIP and so the routing could be via almost anywhere. I find that Skype presents international too, even within the UK. -- Russell http://www.russell-hafter-holidays.co.uk Russell Hafter Holidays E-mail to enquiries at our domain Need a hotel? <http://www.hrs.com/?client=en__blue&customerId=416873103>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.acorn.misc
csiph-web