I struggled with several Bluesound devices using their native BluOS app for iOS using WiFi for the last 3 years or so. My only real solution was to hard wire ALL of them. 
Now using Roon, I can set up an endpoint INCLUDING a DAC with a nice metal case (RPi4 2GB + HiFiBerry DAC+ Pro + HiFiBerry case) for about $100 that works just as well, if not better, than a Node 2 for non-critical listening. I am considering selling my other Bluesound devices, except my surround sound setup.
I agree. I have several Bluesound 2i devices. They are useless via WiFi but reliable with a wired Ethernet connection. They should be certified “Roon Ready” ONLY for the Ethernet port, not WiFi. Roon Ready certification should be to benefit the Roon users like us that have to make purchasing decisions based upon this certification. Roon did acknowledge the problem with WiFi and is “working” on it with Bluesound. We will see. For now, I have put wireless bridges on all of my Bluesound 2i’s and have the WiFi Ethernet bridge connected to the Ethernet port of the Bluesound 2i and everything works. But I should not have to have use a WiFi bridge to make up for the unreliable WiFi adapter in the Bluesound hardware.
I use my ISP’s router/modem with its two ethernet ports in a system with one ethernet cable connecting directly to an NUC Rock & the other to a smart tv via one Netgear switch.
I don’t use Roon’s sample rate conversion or any filters.
My Bluesound Node 2i uses wifi in the living room.
In a bedroom is a Raspberry pi with Ropieee and a Hifiberry Amp 2 Hat , again using wifi.
My internet speed is 35 mbps and the only other devices on the wifi are a couple of phones and
laptops.
The Node 2i and Pi work flawlessly.
Maybe when relatives visit and their devices are added to the LAN the wifi may struggle, if that occurs then I’ll connect the Node 2i to an ethernet cable via the existing switch.
I hope this can be useful to someone.
which WiFi Ethernet bridge are you using?
I use exactly the same thing… may be obsolete, but works great and 100Mb/s is all you need for audio (even with Roon), unless you are flinging around DXD files.
1 Like
As the original creator of this thread, I wanted to provide an epilog. First, I am pleased to report that V3.10.3 of BluOS seems to fully resolve all problems related to WiFi and Bluesound Node devices – this is great news for owners and anyone considering the purchase of such a device.
Having said this, allowing this basic and disabling bug to persist in the product for so long (years) has done a real disservice to all the customers who have with great exacerbation reported the problem(s) and been met with responses ranging from ‘it’s your network’ to ‘it’s Roon not us’ (or ‘it’s Bluesound not us’). The fact that a software release finally resolved all these issues highlights the mendacity of the vendor’s claims regarding the cause of the problems while illuminating both the source of the problem (the quality of the software from Bluesound) and the poor level of service we as customers have received.
While I am pleased that this has been resolved, I fear this experience has left an indelible mark on my view of the quality and testing of products coming out of Bluesound and the other Lenbrook companies that share the same Bluesound software – that’s you NAD. This wasn’t a corner case problem, it was both widely experienced and easy to reproduce.
Perhaps this experience demonstrates a fundamental weakness in the ‘Roon Ready’ certification/partnership approach embraced by Roon. While sensible, the failure to hold hardware partners to continuous account erodes faith in both Roon and the value of ‘Roon Ready.’ I would have liked to have seen Roon drop Bluesound from their list of approved HW vendors until Bluesound had resolved this priority one issue – particularly given the duration of the problem. Roon’s agreement with HW vendors should have a SLA provision that provides for this.
I’ve seen some statements from Roon that they are trying to improve when it comes to management of their hardware partners and continuous compliance with the Roon Ready program. I for one laud the intent of such an initiative and wish them all the best in doing it better in the future than has been the record heretofore.
11 Likes
What are bluOS alternatives for multi room? (To have multi room in addition to Roon)?
does the Naim ecosystem support multiroom?
NAD products have been very high quality; at least for me, anyway. Roon Ready went through some teething issues with Bluesound, but it appears to me that both parties worked to resolve the issues, which even you acknowledge.
For the record, and from a lifetime of software experience as a developer, a designer, and a product owner, just because something is “widely experienced and easy to reproduce” doesn’t mean it is easy to identify and fix the root cause.
Don’t leave because of Bluesound and/or Roon; just leave.
1 Like
Perhaps a few RoPiees with Amp hats?
I’m testing for my non critical zones…
Sonos or Airplay2/iOS? My understanding is that this would work:
- inside of Roon ecosystem provided all other devices are from the Sonos or Airplay ecosystem (they are not “Roon Ready” to be paired with other Roon endpoints… what I don’t know (someone please confirm) is whether the Sonos / Airplay devices will play in sync with your Roon Core (say a ROCK/Nucleus)?
- outside the roon ecosystem you’d have the native Sonos or Airplay functionality for multi-room
I’ve had “red led of death” on two BluOS devices over the years and if one of my remaining 5 conks out on me I will certainly consider a Nucleus + Sonos/airplay for secondary rooms… I just want to be sure the Nucleus can be paired in sync with Sonos/Airplay (or if all devices including the core must be Sonos/Airplay).
I want to buy a BS Node2i and connect to an an external DAC using coax output.
My DAC is T+A DAC8 ( not the DSD version). My core is on a dedicated MAC mini which is in another room so I dont want to use the USB output on macmini.
My dilemma is that the reviews usually define the node2i as a good budget product not very suitable for 10000+ dollars systems. However i cant stop thinking why it should matter as long as I connect the coax output to an external DAC. Does it really make a huge difference when used as a bridge? (ethenet to digital out)
I would really appreciate opinions of you who are using the the digital out to an external DAC.
1 Like
Get a demo from a dealer, that’s what they are paid for.
Good thinking! Price is overrated as a guideline.
As an experiment I switched my RME ADI2PRO to be attached via AES to RoPieee through a Pi2Designs Pi2AES Hat. The measurements are top notch - and in any case the RME reclocks the signal.
While the streamer and HAT are not expensive in Hi Fi terms I gather measure they measure very well and the combination sounds excellent.
I haven’t found any reason to switch back so far.
Don’t write that off as an option. The OS is well supported here - and the roon streaming software is direct from roon - so IMHO the combination is better supported than most commercial streamers.
2 Likes
I have used the Bluesound Node 2 digital out to a very high end DAC, I used the coax connection (not the optical). I have found this configuration to work reasonably well with a few caveats:
- Sounds pretty good, but not quite up to the level of some of the best DACs I’ve auditioned that have a built-in network interface (DCS Bartok for example sounds much better via the direct network connection versus when the BS was in the path).
- The latest couple of versions of BlueOS have introduced some weird artifacts and behavior when switching resolutions. The work around I’ve used is to have Roon always resample to 192/24 regardless of the source material so the BS never has to change the resolution its receiving/sending. Not my preferred way to operate but acceptable at the moment.
I didn’t want to buy a dedicated high end bridge as I don’t view it as a long term need. In the short term, while using an ‘older’ DAC, Bluesound works fine. Going forward, I would probably not purchase a DAC that didn’t have a high-performance network interface. The days of a USB or similar (with their length limitations) as the only digital inputs to a DAC are over (or should be). Who wants to put a computer by their audio system? Not I.
1 Like
Well, of course, that’s just putting the computer inside the audio system, but I take your point. Any DAC that has a USB input, for instance, already has a computer inside, so why not make it talk Ethernet, as well?
1 Like
+1 Completely agree. I’m glad I got it on a super special deal. It replaced a DigiOne which went elsewhere, and I now miss the DigiOne.
At least to my way of thinking about it, the dedicated electronics to convert the packetized network traffic coming in over Ethernet to S/PDIF or some other equivalent digital format are far lower in the stack than where a “computer” would come into play. These are both data link layer (layer 2 in the seven layer OSI model) protocols and the conversion between them is typically handled by dedicated low-level communications hardware. To your point, not conceptually dissimilar from the USB interface.
If the processing involved was more than this simple conversion and indeed required a more powerful general purpose computer, I would probably consider the merits of externalizing it from the DAC.