ANSWERING MACHINE RINGS

Page 1 of 3  
My answering machine was answering on four rings, all of a sudden it has started answering on 1 and a half rings.
It is still set up to answer on four rings. I thought maybe my machine had gone bad, so I bought another one. The same thing happens with the new one. Can any one tell me how to correct rhis?
Thanks,
Puzzlement
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
puzzlement wrote:

No voice mail box with your phone?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/20/2015 10:56 PM, puzzlement wrote:

Did you buy another of the EXACT SAME MODEL?
If yes, then go buy one that's a different make & model and ask again! Or, walk over to your neighbor's and try it there.
There's no way to correct something if its inherent in the design of the device (hence the suggestion to try a different unit) *or* in the characteristics of the line to your home (hence the suggestion to try it at a neighbor's)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/21/2015 7:11 AM, Don Y wrote:

Without knowing the make and model of his TAD, or what other devices he may have on his line (nuisance call intercept, Caller ID device, etc) it's pretty hard to diagnose.
With it being set on 4 rings and answering on 1½-2, it had me thinking there was a problem with the Toll Saver feature (if it has one) on the device(s).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/21/2015 6:20 AM, Unquestionably Confused wrote:

Possible. But, that would have to be documented as picking up on the second ring in some case (messages waiting) and fourth otherwise (no messages waiting).
The fact that the behavior allegedly *changed*: "all of a sudden it has started answering on 1 and a half rings" suggests something BROKE (but, his purchase of a replacement discounts that possibility -- replacement was broken, too??) *or* something in his environment has changed that "he" can't see -- but that his machine can! *Both* of the machines (the original and replacement)!
There are lots of different ways to "detect ring" that can be employed in an answering machine. A crude one looks for a "high" voltage that is associated with the ring signal (higher than "talk battery"). You can also look at the frequency ("tone") of the signal as it is much lower than any speech signal. Finally, you can look at the cadence (the "pattern" -- ring..... ring..... ring.....).
Ideally, you look at some combination of these so you don't get tricked. I.e., the high voltage AT the low frequency HAPPENING in the expected pattern.
But, some places have "distinctive ring" -- so, the pattern can change from one call to the next. E.g., if the ring pattern for this particular CALLER was ring,ring..... ring,ring..... etc. you could trick an algorithm that wasn't smart enough into thinking this was 4 rings instead of two.
Likewise, if there is a tiny break in the ring -- too short for a person to perceive -- a detector might conclude that the "first ring" is over and get ready to count the *next* ring; not clever enough to realize that two rings occurring so close together are really just ONE ring cycle with a glitch between.
[One could argue that a "bug" in the "distinctive ring" pattern generator could cause these gaps to occur in normal operation]
Also, caller ID imposes tones on the line before you lift the handset (i.e., while the phone is still on-hook, ringing). It is conceivable that the machine is detecting these. Or, that these have become exaggerated in some way from the central office.
<shrug> Without being able to look at the line (oscilloscope) it's hard to GUESS how the detector is designed or anticipate how it may be mistriggering.
Return the "new" machine -- cuz it hasn't fixed the problem! ASSUME the old one is working properly -- cuz the new one behaves identically. The next step is to swap out the telephone *line* -- by trying it at a neighbor's house!
[Of course, this could be a systemic problem that affects all lines served by that CO. Or, a problem related to the branch that feeds your neighborhood, etc. Or, "user error" for failing to understand all of the available settings in the machine]
Or, learn to pick up the phone quicker. Or, apologize to callers that you were "slow getting to the phone".
I'd imagine the worse problem would be a machine waiting until the *eighth* ring to pick up -- at which point, many may have abandoned the call (and you've no record of it).
Isn't technology wonderful??! :>
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 08:35:38 -0700, Don Y

anything, changed at the same time? Did he start or stop using some feature of the answering machine or phone, add another phone, etc.???
If 2 machines behave the same, and one previously worked properly, it os almost obvious that something else changed. The questio is what? and where? and who or what was responsible. When that's figured out it should be easy to fix --- unless it was something outside the user's control.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You have the caller ID record.

I have my answering machine set to answer after 2 rings. Almost all the calls I get now on the home phone are junk calls (caller ID shows city, state like "AUSTIN TX" or "TOLL FREE CALL" in most cases). I won't answer unless I see a familiar caller ID, and in that case will be holding the phone and can answer quickly.
--
4 days until the winter celebration (Friday December 25, 2015 12:00:00
AM for 1 day).
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/21/2015 8:56 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:

If the machine -- and the subscriber -- have CID! :>

Ours is set to 2 rings but the ringer is turned off. We try to look at the machine every day or two to see if anyone called AND waited through the outgoing message (if they hang up before then, the machine doesn't record the call -- so we see no notification).
Folks that want to get in touch with us use email or the front door. Cuts down on the "nuisance contacts" as very few junk callers are willing to come to the door *or* know any of our email addresses! :>
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/21/2015 10:40 PM, Don Y wrote:

It's a very useful thing to have. Yes, junk callers do spoof the number you see on caller ID, but the seldom take the time to find one of the few that could really fool you. CID is still useful.
BTW, answering machines may not have CID. That appears to be a phone function.

I'm about to do that (turn off the ringer). There's just too many of those annoying calls.
BTW, I also never answer calls from charities. If I did I feel like saying "I'm not your ATM" and hanging up.

There's also cell phones. AFAIK, most allow you to assign a different ringtone to a specific number. You may even be able to make others silent. Then you know which calls to ignore.
--
3 days until the winter celebration (Friday December 25, 2015 12:00:00
AM for 1 day).
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/22/2015 12:51 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:

Yes. But for most folks, CID means you have to interact with the phone when it is ringing -- to see *who* is calling ("Do I want to answer this?") As I don't want to have to acknowledge the "interruption" (that the ringing phone represents), my only solution is to silence the ringer and defer interaction until some time when it is more convenient for me.
This is where email excels -- I can overnight -- rearrange who has access to me via email. Not so with the phone (I can't change my phone number without involving TPC!)
So, I can monitor particular email accounts based on the sorts of people with which I might want to interact at any given time (e.g., don't watch the email account that friends use if I'm busy working but *do* watch the one associated with business contacts).
My goal has been to come up with a scheme whereby the "watching" can be done by something intelligent -- the equivalent of a "secretary" -- so I need only specify the criteria that are important to me at any given time (e.g., I'm asleep! I sure as hell don't want to be disturbed by a friend calling to chat!)

Yup. There are some times when we are waiting a "call back" from a friend, provider, etc. In even those narrow windows (where we have to actively be prepared to interact with the phone) it is amazing how many "hang up" calls come in (folks who encountered the outgoing message and aborted the call).

SWMBO is slowly beginning to understand my preference for "anonymous giving"; cut a cashier's check for the amount you want to give, save the receipt and then mail the check with no return address. Worst case, the check gets lost in the mail (but never cashed by anyone other than the intended recipient).
Regardless, there's no trail BACk to you from the charity. No way they can spend THAT money trying to get MORE MONEY from you!
I.e., think of it as doing them a FAVOR by cutting that potential expenditure! :>

I refuse to carry a cell phone (other than one with no service for a "911 phone" -- or, one to use solely as a portable WiFi terminal!) If I need to make a call, I can *find* a phone. Somewhere. If someone needs to get in touch with me, they can leave me a voice message or an email and I'll get back to them. Rarely is anything THAT important that it needs to be addressed IMMEDIATELY.
"Your failure to plan ahead does not obligate me to respond immediately"
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 22 Dec 2015 13:10:51 -0700, Don Y

Automatic blacklist/whitelist management on the VOIP means I can get the rings from those I want to hear from, and not from thespammers.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/22/2015 7:09 PM, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

How do you deal with the local library calling to tell you a book is overdue?
Or, the store that you had back-order a pair of slacks calling to tell you they've arrived?
Or, a friend calling from someone else's phone?
Or...
Black/white-lists don't work, in practice. There are too many exceptions.
An organization can have many telephone numbers; how do I know which one will be placing the call to me?
What you want/need is something that is tied intimately to individuals, not their phones or phone numbers. And, something that allows the system to adapt to new conditions as they arise without having to be "reprogrammed" (adding/removing numbers from black/white lists is considered programming)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 22 Dec 2015 19:22:11 -0700, Don Y

You use the basic blacklist - whitelist basically not required. The library or store won't be on the "universal" blacklist.. Nor will your friends' friend's phone your friend borrowed. If you get a call from a caller you don't want to hear from a gain you add it to the "personal" blacklist.

You don't have to. As I said, the whiltelist is only for "bad guys" you want to hear from.

Perfect it and be the "Next American Billionaire"
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/22/2015 7:38 PM, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

Goal is not to "perfect" anything but, rather, put a framework in place (hardware and software) that allows others (who typically can't do BOTH hardware and software NOR "design from scratch) to "enhance it" to more easily address these needs. I.e., speech recognizer, voice recognizer, expert system, TELCO interface, subscriber set interface, etc. and *they* figure out how to exploit each of these mechanisms!
Like providing basic tools to some "craftsman" so he can perfect his craft -- instead of having to first figure out how to make the tools that he will need!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
[snip]

That blacklist won't include the 8 numbers junk callers use today, the 12 (different) ones they use tomorrow, the 9 new ones they use the next day, ....
[snip]
--
2 days until the winter celebration (Friday December 25, 2015 12:00:00
AM for 1 day).
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I get about 1 a month now instead of 5 or 6 a day!!!!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/22/2015 02:10 PM, Don Y wrote:
[snip]

IIRC, I've never seen a CID device that doesn't store the info.

Yes. Of course, I'm now dealing with someone who takes months to read email.
[snip]
--
2 days until the winter celebration (Friday December 25, 2015 12:00:00
AM for 1 day).
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/23/2015 1:27 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:

There's also an issue of buffer depth...
One of our friends has a telco service that refuses to accept inbound calls from folks who've "blocked" CID's (i.e., us). "Press 1 to unblock your id for and be connected to the caller".
So, I've been dutifully pressing 1 to get through to him.
Recently, he mentioned (in passing) that we appear as "Tucson caller" when I do this. So, he's never had any indication as to *who* we are! He's just as likely to let our call go through to his voice mail (which is almost always "full")
I've now reprogrammed his number in the autodialer to preface it with *82 so our real names are conveyed through to him. He was surprised the first time he saw it in his CID display (which is apparently a voice display that often mangles the pronunciation of names!)

<shrug> You have to hope they have an incentive for reading YOUR email. It took a while for me to "train" clients to avoid using the phone and, instead, use email. I simply took a week to return voice mail (often "after hours"/weekends so they had to call me *back* the next day -- getting routed to my voice mail, again) and PROMPTLY (less than 24 hours) to return email.
Wasn't long before folks "learned" that the best way to get an answer was to put it in writing! Which saved me the hassle of transcribing telephone calls so I had a record of what was said, agreed to, etc. in a "searchable" form! Goes a long way to keeping folks honest when you can send a copy of THEIR email back to them at a later date: "I thought THIS is what we agreed to? Do you have something more current that I've misplaced??" (knowing, of course, that there IS nothing more current!)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

My answering system is part of my cordless phone "network" - one base connected to my VOIP box, with hadsets scattered around the house in different rooms - CID is on the base and the handsets courtesy my VOIP provider.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
puzzlement wrote:

No voice mail box?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.