cramer@sun.com (Sam Cramer) (08/30/89)
The latest DAK catalog has this cordless, hands-free phone for $69. It looks pretty neat - does anyone have any comments on this particular set? Sam
onymouse@ames.arc.nasa.gov (John DeBert) (08/31/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0333m06@vector.dallas.tx.us>, cramer@sun.com (Sam Cramer) says: > The latest DAK catalog has this cordless, hands-free phone for $69. It > looks pretty neat - does anyone have any comments on this particular set? > > Sam I have one which I find to be extremely handy. I can put the set in my ear and leave it there, going about the house to do whatever. To answer a call, I need only press one button but I usually hold the mute button down as well because the mike on it is very sensitive and will pick up background noise. Though it does pick up background noise, you can be heard very well on the other end. THe mike is a directional electret that is normally aimed toward the mouth. The reception is fair but it is a little noisier that other cordless phones and the 60Hz hum is louder than even the noise. Even so, the caller can be heard over all that. Plantronics claims that the range is 200 feet. In practice, I find that the reception range is actually less than fifty feet. I increased the range by taking a meter of wire wrap wire and clipping it about one fourth ofthe way up the fully extended antenna from the base. By doing that I increased the range about tenfold, to at least 500 feet: I can go down the street about seven houses or nearly half a block and still get a good signal from the base which is inside a frame house with stucco (and wire mesh). I would like to see some improvements on the set such as a boom extension similar to those on the Starset to bring the mike "closer" to the mouth and an external antenna but Plantronics will no longer make the Liteset. I suspect that the hum is coming from the "el cheapo" power supply which is a small 500mW or less wall transformer. I haven't yet tried a battery on the base but I just got a "round tuit" so that will be done soon. The Liteset portable is made using surface-mount technology throughout. That's why it is so small. There are two small PC boards measuring approximately 1.25x3 inches with components on both sides within the case as well as the keyboard and another tiny PC board for the top buttons, all solidly soldered together. Do-it-yourself repairs would be extremely difficult for experts and impossible for amateurs even with the right tools. For $69.00 the LiteSet is a good buy for those who don't want to be tied to their phone and are tired of the trips to answer a ringing phone. I bought mine from DAK when they were $99.00 and I don't regret it, though the price has dropped. It's worth the money just for the convenience. In other words, the advantages far outweigh the price. Ordering from DAK, though is a bit of a problem: If you pay by check, expect your order to arrive in 4 to 6 weeks. They hold merchandise until your check clears through their tiny bank which does not seem to be a clearinghouse member. It took two weeks for my check to get to my bank (they say that they deposit checks the nest day) then another two weeks or so for their bank to tell DAK that it was OK. I would suspect that interstate transactions take much longer. JJD onymouse@netcom.UUCP (not associated with Plantronics or DAK - just satified with the Liteset [but NOT with DAK service])
jst@cca.ucsf.edu (Joe Stong) (08/31/89)
The Plantronics LiteSet at the downtown office worked fine for a hundred feet in a building with lots of metal. I found it to be joy, except for the ribbing from the folks about talking to myself. Sound quality seemed to be good for both ends, for the most part. I faintly remember something odd, like a peculiar circumstance that happened on certain medium-distance calls, that made reception faint; I don't remember the exact details. Its AGC may have been swamped by the chopper frequency of the bi-directional amp on an analog line. Trying to use it under the massive RF spew from Spewtro Tower (that great ugly thing on top of San Francisco) about a mile away resulted in it's having a range of about 3 feet. It would maintain the connection but you couldn't hear anything but a great sizzling noise, further away than 3 feet from the base station. Just a rant about Spewtro (Sutro) Tower: I can't use an inexpensive oscilliscope at UCSF for the RF "hair" on the traces. Local residents complain about the interference that gets IN to the local CATV system, which shows up as hash in their TV pictures. Someone claimed that they could get KPIX on their bathroom mirror. :-) Goddess only knows how mutagenic the silly thing is. Joe Stong jst@dorothy.UUCP jst@cca.ucsf.edu pacbell!dorothy!jst
gould@pilot.njin.net (Brian Jay Gould) (08/31/89)
Yes, I bought one for about $100 from DAK. Its pretty much garbage. Reception is awful and if finally broke completely after two months of light use. I sent it in for warranty repairs over two months ago and haven't gotten anything back. *********************************************** * Brian Jay Gould - Manager, Systems Support * * General Logistics International * * * * internet: gould@pilot.njin.net * * Bitnet: gould@jvncc.csc.org * * UUCP: rutgers!pilot!gould * * phone: (201) 403-1566 * * fax (201) 403-1573 * * * * 103 Eisenhower Pkwy, Roseland, NJ 07068 * ***********************************************
gt0818a%prism@gatech.edu (Paul E. Robichaux) (09/01/89)
I bought one from DAK and was super pleased with it..except that none of the supplied earpieces was comfortable! Wearing it for <10 min gave me a killer headache. Since Plantronics can't/won't make custom earpieces, back it went. -Paul -- Paul E. Robichaux |"Collateral damage is the number of women Georgia Institute of Technology | and children you kill when attempting to do GT PO Box 30818; Atlanta, GA 30332 | something else."- Cap Weinberger. Internet: gt0818a@prism.gatech.edu | All opinions in this message are mine.
brian@network.edu (Brian Kantor) (09/02/89)
I have one. The portable transmits on 46.6 megs, receives on 49.6. Clearly the base is the other way 'round. It is FM, and uses a digital pulse train to control the hookswitch and dialing. Mine worked well at home, poorly at work near all the old unshielded computers. I found that the receiver was grossly out of alignment and more than tripled the range by retuning it - my conjecture is that the coils had vibrated out of adjustment during shipping, plus the usual cheap parts aging. It's really made by Uniden, BTW. At least, it says UNIDEN all over the inside, and it is of typical Taiwan/Japan low-end consumer construction. Note that the FCC regs prohibit extending the range by making the transmit antenna longer. If you want to go to the trouble, you could legally separate the receiver from the transmit antenna connections in the base unit and put a big receive antenna on it. BTW, if you use the remote to tell the base to go off-hook and then pull the power cord off the base, you can listen to all the other cordless phones and baby monitors in the neighbor's houses.
jay@hermix.UUCP (Jay Skeer) (09/02/89)
In-reply-to: claris!netcom!onymouse@ames.arc.nasa.gov's message of 31 Aug 89 08:31:57 GMT John said: >... [about a cordless telephone j'] ... I increased the range by >taking a meter of wire wrap wire and clipping it about one fourth ofthe way >up the fully extended antenna from the base. John, your antenna extension is a (technically) good idea (and you may want to check the actual circuit used in the base to determine ideal lengths of wire). However your improved antenna may be illegal. The FCC allows unlicensed use of certain low power radio frequency devices on certain frequencies. However the FCC often places restrictions on the antenna length and or height (usually they want your antenna to be shorter than some reference length, and lower than a certain reference height). Your antenna may also allow your neighbors to listen in, or even dial out. Thanks for the product review. j'
dgrif@hpfcdj.HP.COM (Dan Griffin) (09/03/89)
I purchased one the first time they offered the unit at $99. At $69 it is
a very good value. The microphone is very sensitive, so if you are moving
around very much the person on the other end of the conversation will hear
the rustling. As originally received, it had good sound quality and was
quite free of electronic noise. However after my wife dropped the earphone/
microphone module and broke it open, things haven't been quite the same. I
put everything back together, but it does now have a noticable background
hiss. Range is moderate, but around the house if is fairly handy for
"hands free" communication. As always, a person's expectations and usage
affect their perception of any product.
Dan Griffin (Hewlett Packard Co. griffin%hpfcla@sde.HP.COM )usenet@ucbvax.berkeley.edu (09/03/89)
I purchased one the first time they offered the unit at $99. At $69 it is
a very good value. The microphone is very sensitive, so if you are moving
around very much the person on the other end of the conversation will hear
the rustling. As originally received, it had good sound quality and was
quite free of electronic noise. However after my wife dropped the earphone/
microphone module and broke it open, things haven't been quite the same. I
put everything back together, but it does now have a noticable background
hiss. Range is moderate, but around the house if is fairly handy for
"hands free" communication. As always, a person's expectations and usage
affect their perception of any product.
Dan Griffin (Hewlett Packard Co. griffin%hpfcla@sde.HP.COM )onymouse@ames.arc.nasa.gov (John DeBert) (09/04/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0343m04@vector.dallas.tx.us>, jay@hermix.UUCP (Jay Skeer) says: > In-reply-to: claris!netcom!onymouse@ames.arc.nasa.gov's message of 31 Aug 89> 08:31:57 GMT >> [...] > However your improved antenna may be illegal. > FCC allows unlicensed use of certain low power radio frequency devices > on certain frequencies. However the FCC often places restrictions on > the antenna length and or height (usually they want your antenna to be > shorter than some reference length, and lower than a certain reference > height). As I recall, part 15 requires an antenna length for this band of one meter or less. I don't recall any prohibition to attaching an extension - subject to the length limitation, of course! Does part 68 have an exception that I have missed? > Your antenna may also allow your neighbors to listen in, or even dial out. With or without the extension, the signal may be heard by others. There is another cordless phone on the same channel nearby that can be heard but it has a similar access coding scheme, though different enough that my phone won't ring when their line does and vice-versa. As for dialing out, without another LiteSet, phone with the same coding signals or other device capable of producing such codes, my phone cannot be used by anyone else. No unauthorized use of my phones have occurred so far. I have not increased the range beyond that which would normally be expected for equipment of this type nor have I increased it much beyond the manufacturers alleged maximum range. With or without the extension my set is still subject to interference from nearby stations and it seems to make no difference to the other users on the channel whether I am using my phone at the same time or not. I have no nearby neighbours with receivers capable of receiving my signals and even if there were, my use of the set is so infrequent and the subjects of the calls so ordinary that they would quickly lose interest. I never use radio for confidential or sensitive calls, so there's nothing to get anyone excited about. JJD onymouse@netcom.UUCP
sandy@beaver.cs.washington.edu (Sandy Fifer) (09/05/89)
I have the Plantronics LiteSet and I like it a lot. It does what I want -- it leaves my hands free to work while I'm on the phone. It works pretty well all over my house, with occasional noise, probably caused by the fact that the headphone cord doubles as an antenna. I don't use other cordless phones so I can't say how it compares. I've been told by someone with Call Waiting (my sister) that she can't answer a new call without losing the old one -- maybe it doesn't flash the hook switch fast enough. Plantronics told her that this is a known flaw in the design. Also, for the person who got headaches from the earpice not fitting: If you get replacement pads for the stereo headphones known as "ear buds" that fit right in your ear, the earpiece might be more comfortable and won't fall out. Sandy Fifer
Schwartz.osbunorth@xerox.com (09/07/89)
A local stereo and electronics chain ("The Good Guys") is advertising
"RECOTON Hands-Off" Telephone Headset for $34. Can anyone "compare and
contrast" this to the "Plantronics LiteSet"?
Victor Schwartz
Xerox Corporation, Sunnyvale CADPHARP01@ulkyvx.bitnet (09/08/89)
I received one of these for a birthday a few weeks back. Initally, I
didn't like it, but with a few modifications described below, I find it to be
an indespensible tool.
The first thing I noticed about the Liteset was the fact that I
couldn't get the thing to stay in my ear comfortably. I went through all nine
earpieces with marginal success. The cone type seemed to work ok, although it
was a little uncomfortable.
When using the Liteset, I was annoyed by the amount of background noise
that the microphone picked up. Since the actual mike element is several inches
from your mouth, they boost the gain to compensate. This also boosts the
volume of any noise in the room. I haven't tried it, but I would imagine using
one of these things in a computer room would be very annoying to the person on
the other end.
To compensate for the background noise problem, I took a 2" piece of
insulation from a 50-pair phone cable and slipped it over the end of the
microphone. This made the voice a little tinny, but cut down on the noise a
great deal.
I used it this way for a few more hours and still couldn't get used to
something hanging free in my ear like that. So, I took the Liteset ear/mike
assembly apart, desoldered the leads from the little circuit board inside,
disassembled an old Plantronics Starset ear/mike assembly and soldered the
wires to it. The various impedances matched pretty well. In fact, the Starset
volume is actually higher than the Liteset. The microphone is crystal-clear
and loud on the other end...plenty of gain to punch through a noisy
long-distance phone call.
Aside from the lousy ear/mike assembly that originally comes with the
unit, it's a great cordless phone. The keypad dialing is nice, along with the
mute button. An earlier posting mentioned the ability to listen to other
cordless phones by disconnecting the power on the base unit while off-hook. A
much more elegant way to do the same thing is to press and hold the mute button
while powering up the cordless unit with the on/off switch. The base unit does
not go off-hook, but the receiver in the cordless unit turns on, allowing you
to listen to other phones on the channel.
If anyone is interested in the details on how to modify the Liteset to
use a Starset capsule, send me mail. I'll respond directly, and if there are
enough inquiries I'll post to the net.
David Harpe
University of Louisville
DPHARP01@ULKYVX.bitnet