Thanks for the advice.
I have my home network managed / core switch (2.5/5/10G) directly connected to my ISP router/modem. Then I distribute my network connections from that switch down to an access level switch (1/2.5/5/10G) and out to individual devices / equipment. This allows separation of my various LANs. I have one each for visitors-guests / work / video streaming / gaming / audio streaming / and my home lab on several additional LANs… I like to keep things separated… Seems to work really well. I have a NAS with various accessibility and a separate audio library on a volume/pool so it can be backed up separately. My streaming source is a NUC separate via a fiber connection multi mode and through a small media converter to isolate the audio streaming signal… My DAC loves it!!! My audio system is modest with mid tier components… I really enjoy the fun of collecting and streaming audio …I swear by Roon with Qobuz and also HQPlayer… I would not have it any other way!!! HQPlayer was a game changer for me…
21 posts were split to a new topic: Adding a network switch improved in sound
I’m late to this thread but this comment made me chuckle. I also live in the Seattle area and the $300 estimate from @David_Snyder sounds optimistic to me, too. That said, I like the push towards hard wiring at least from the router to the Roon server.
These days, there are plenty of competent people doing low-voltage wiring in our area. If you go to Yelp and search for “Low Voltage Cabling” that should give you a bunch of options. Residential alarm companies are also a good option - those companies are good at getting wires from one place to another and concealing the runs.
I’m in the same camp as others that have commented on this thread - the investment in a robust network is money well spent. By this, I mean in wired runs and and solid WiFi. As others mentioned, eero may be an option but I would personally suggest that you wire your server and use something like eero mesh to support your devices. Don’t spend money on any “audio” grade network equipment including routers, cables, and switches.
I hope this helps.
Thanks. I do have a hard wire connection from my Roon Core (my iMac) to the router. It’s the connection from the router (and the Cisco switch adjacent to it) to the DAC/network bridge that is using power line adapters.
Wi-Fi (IEEE 802.11 family) is a communications protocol that is inefficient by nature. This is not a critic to the original engineering team, I think they did a nice work. The core CSMA/CA is still in use after these years.
Of course, a nice signal is recommendable for a nice operation, as stated in prior messages but there are other factors out of our control that can negatively impact on our wireless links throughput: surrounding AP specially on urban environments, associated devices with poor signal, etc.
The use of wider wireless channels increases throughput but at the same time, it also increases the probability of collisions and delays, because of CSMA/CA. It depends on your environment.
Said that, when there is no option to reach a location within our home with wires, Wi-Fi can be a great option the extend de network coverage. However, I am not a big fan of mesh networking. If possible, my choice uses to be a wireless bridge to provide wired access to devices located in an area without option of wired coverage.
I have been using a wireless bridge for years, far of optimized signal strength, in order to provide wired access to a few devices with no Wi-Fi option. I installed an Ubiquiti AP over the ceiling between two flats and in the upper flat there was Wi-Fi bridge device with 4 Ethernet ports where I linked, among others, a RPi 3 + HifiBerry Digi+ as a Roon Bridge for my ancient Pioneer SC-LX75 AVR. Because a bug in AVR’s DAC, it has problems when changes from 44,1/48 kHz to 88,2/96 kHz and/or 176,4/192 kHz so I upsample to 4x (176,4/192 kHz) everything to this Roon Bridge. It works fine, with no clicks nor pops at all.
I even had an IPTV STB, that uses multicast traffic for live channels and it worked. The point was the control of IGMP traffic at switch and the use of Ubiquit’s options at SSID level.
When the wireless bridge passed away a few weeks ago, I replaced it by a Ubiquity UDB and a Ubiqiti Flex Mini switch (powerd by the UDB itself). It also works except for the STB’s multicast traffic. Why? Because, the UDB links to an internal predefined SSID that I can not configure and I lose control for multicast traffic. Except for this, it still works fine.
This informative well balanced topic had morphed into yet another “bits are bits” polarised ping pong match and was rapidly spiralling down the rabbit heard towards closure (as they all do).
Thus in an attempt to save this one I’ve split out that “off topic” content to its own topic.
Please refrain from discussing AQ and reopening that can of worms in this topic.
If you wish to continue that circular debate please follow the link, but remember to discuss the topic not the authors.
1 Like
A very thorough and well stated response. I would hope this helps resolve the question at hand.
I was forced to switch from hardwire to wifi after a move. I use an Eero system throughout the house. I have one dedicated to my stereo.
As with hardwiring, I convert right away to fiber optic to feed my switch. I also power the Eero directly from the wall outlet. Everything else is fed by robust isolation transformers to keep the noise out.
It works just fine.
I didn’t read the whole thing but I’ll throw out an opinion anyway.
Mesh wifi can be good, reliable, and fast. This will give you a wired to air back to wired solution. But, in my recent research to get all 3 of those things, mesh is $$$ compared to paying someone $ to run a few cables. Find your local HAM radio club and ask for a good low voltage individual who runs cables.
Otherwise, you’ll spend some decent money on the suggestions here and, it will be more reliable, if you learn a bit about wifi and can manage channels and frequency spacing yourself.
And, yes, I agree with MBL that modern mesh > powerline adapters.
1 Like