A novel way to massively improve the SQ of computer audio streaming

[lmitche]

For those of us running the music server (like MinimServer) directly on the NAS, this may be a "bridge too far!"

 

So far, I haven't found any easy way to set up bridging on a Synology NAS with 2 Ethernet ports.

 

Start here:

 

https://forum.synology.com/enu/viewtopic.php?f=145&t=56929&p=293971&hilit=brctl#p293971

[lmitche]

Scan, can the NAA in the new subnet access the internet?

[lmitche]

So I am a mess. Win10 did not want me to save two IP settings (direct and ethernet) with same gateway, and now where the f do I even have a chance to put the microRendu ip address in? All I get is my two NICs and a new ethernet 3, which I assume is the bridge? They simply ask for THEIR ip addresses.

Ted, the bridge will use the existing dhcp server in your router. Just make sure the bridged device is running before booting the microRendu. Once it boots, most of the time you can assign an tcpip address in the DHCP server via the microRendu Mac address.

[lmitche]

Well, I tried this, and was able to get the commands to complete successfully, but after completion, my NAS is unreachable at the eth0 address (also the br0 address). Luckily a reboot fixed everything back to before.

 

I was hoping to just try this out, but given my experience, I may have to wait and see.

 

 

Do you have a link to Jelt2359 results?

 

Has anyone else validated romaz's specific results - i.e.

• configure network bridging on music server with 2+ ethernet ports
  
• remove endpoint (NAA/Roon endpoint/UPnP renderer) connection to router/switch
  
• connect endpoint to second port on bridged music server
  
• change NOTHING else
  

 

What SQ difference did you get?

What address did you set the default gateway to? That could be your problem as the instructions are cryptic at best.

 

Removing your switch yields a significant SQ improvement and is very much worth pursuing.

[lmitche]

Router <-> NAS with bridging (my music server) <-> renderer

 

You got it!

[lmitche]

OK, so my network's gateway address is 192.18.0.2. My NAS (unbridged) has a static IP of 192.168.0.240. I allocated another static address 192.168.0.241 for my 2nd port.

 

Here are the commands I tried - exactly like the link you posted, with edits for my situation:

 

Synology# insmod /lib/modules/stp.ko

Synology# insmod /lib/modules/bridge.ko

Synology# brctl addbr br0

Synology# brctl stp br0 off

Synology# ifconfig br0 192.168.0.240 netmask 255.255.255.0 up

Synology# brctl addif br0 eth0

Synology# brctl addif br0 eth1

Synology# ifconfig eth0 192.168.0.240 promisc up

Synology# ifconfig eth1 192.168.0.241 promisc up

Synology# route add default gw 192.168.0.2 dev br0

 

Looking at this, I do have some questions:

• is the IP address of the bridge interface (br0) supposed to the be the same as the eth0?
  
• What is the correct default gateway address?
  
• I didn't try bouncing br0 after this sequence - maybe I should have
  

 

Thanks for any suggestions.

 

There is only one IP address on a bridge. The two devices don't have addresses any more. The gateway should be the address of your router.

 

Try getting rid of the two lines with the string " promisc up". I don't use them here and don't think you need them. I would also set STP on.

[lmitche]

Also "brctl show" should enumerate the bridge config when you are done with the config.

[lmitche]

Also "brctl show" should enumerate the bridge config when you are done with the config.

 

Here is what I run:

 

ifconfig eth0 0.0.0.0

ifconfig eth1 0.0.0.0

brctl addbr br0

brctl addif br0 eth0 eth1

ifconfig br0 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx netmask 255.255.255.0

route add default gw yyy.yyy.yyy.yyy br0

 

#where xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx is the static IP for the bridged machine and yyy.yyy.yyy.yyy is the address of the gateway (router)

[lmitche]

Sorry Larry, this is greek to me. I currently have a Mellanox fiber card that goes to a fiber switch, and a fiber cable from swith to uRendu. My second ethernet is emtpty.

 

What I tried to do was first connect the second ethernet (via FMC) to the fiber switch and capture both ip addresses (and that way not lose my RDC to the HQPlayer machine). Then moved uRendu-destined-fiber from switch to Mellanox. Then went to each properties, IPV4, and set static addresses that they had when not static. Did not then know what to do with Ethernet 3 (a green wireless box icon) that was created when I gave the bridge command. I tried many things. Nothing worked.

Ted, net net, you probably don't need to worry about dhcp at all.

 

When you create a bridge, addresses are not needed at the individual device level. You need to configure the network address of the new bridge device, not the individual physical ports. On Windows you assign addresses the normal way by right clicking on new device and using the properties choice to the config panel.

 

It is going to be next to impossible to do this without a local keyboard and monitor.

 

Also, just a suggestion, dump rdp and use tightvnc server instead.

[lmitche]

Yes, you will lose connectivity. I have this script run at boot and used a locally attached monitor and keyboard to debug the script.

[lmitche]

Bummer! In the end I gave away my Qnap-251 and built a LPS powered NAS machine for $300, running Linux, sans HDDs.

 

Anyway, just don't execute the ifconfig eth0 0.0.0.0 line.

[lmitche]

You can also concatenate lines to a single line with a semi colon and hit return to execute once.

 

If you lose control just reboot.

[lmitche]

OK I might try that. BTW do I need an "ifconfig br0 up" at the end? or "up" on that last line?

 

EDIT: Never mind. Should have RTFM.

 

up: This flag causes the interface to be activated. It is implicitly specified if an address is assigned to the interface.

Nope, no need to add "up" to my knowledge, but I'm using a different Linux, so YMMV.

[lmitche]

Tried the concatenated command sequence on one line, but didn't work. No connectivity, had to reboot. Trying to test over a remote ssh is severely limiting.

 

Oh well. This goes on the shelf for now. Many more tweaks to try!

Too bad, but there is hope. Qnap recently listened to its customers and enabled network bridging and configuration from their web based user interface. Perhaps Synology will do the same. You may want to ask them.

 

Or buy an Intel based Qnap fanless NAS and power it with an LPS. An El cheapo powered mine perfectly.

[lmitche]

When I first added a NIC to my PC I expected to use it as a dedicated connection to my streamer. I quickly realized that while the concept seemed simple enough it wasn't. Now, after reading the OP's claim of better sound quality I decided to try it again. Instead of listening to music and relaxing I just spent all morning trying to get this fix to work between my Win10 PC and SB Touch. I connected my Intel NIC (ethernet) directly to my SB Touch and connected my router to my motherboard's Marvell adapter (Local area connection). I created a bridge between the two and entered IP info manually as recommended. I tried entering same info in the SB ethernet connection section but I just couldn't get it to hook up. Tried automatic configuration also, no dice Enabled DHCP, still nothing. Clueless, removed bridge and went back to listening to music (albeit with lesser sound quality). Will try again later.

There is no need to enter ip address information into any device but the bridge adapter created by Windows.

[lmitche]

OK, so when we do, do we make both ethernet 1 and 2 static, or do we tell the bridge to use DHCP on the internet-connected one? Then, after that, where do we tell (something) what to do with microRendu?

The NICs, ethernet 1 and 2, don't need an IP address as they only transmit and receive data. The host machine is an endpoint and needs an address, which is assigned from DHCP or statically as configured in the bridge interface settings.

 

Got it?

 

I usually set a static address as I'm connecting to this machine from multiple points in one or both physical segments and subnets and don't want to search for a dynamic address.

[lmitche]

Rajiv, i have a hunch, please comment out the line "brctl STP br0 off" and give it another go. I also don't think you need the promiscuous port settings, but try that later.

 

I think you are creating a bridge named STP not br0.

[lmitche]

Rajiv, i have a hunch, please comment out the line "brctl STP br0 off" and give it another go. I also don't think you need the promiscuous port settings, but try that later.

 

I think you are creating a bridge named STP not br0.

Sorry ignore this, I was wrong, you are good up to this point.

 

Try removing the "up" on the line that assigns the bridge address. I hope you also realize you will need reconnect after the bridge is established using the bridge address as the nic is reset.

 

You could try making an eth1 bridge and test the script that way, adding eth0 later. This lets you test the syntax.

[lmitche]

I see why you think that, but I did get the output of "brctl show" on my screen and it was:

"bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces"

"br0 8000.00113262e5d1 no eth0"

" eth1"

 

EDIT: Gah, I can't get CA to respect the blanks. Anyway you see it created a bridge names br0.

 

I wonder a couple of other things:

1. Try running this in the background
   
2. Since I lose connectivity at the eth0 line, can I move that last.
   

 

I'll try both. Worst case, 2 more reboots.

Yeh, the gateway syntax here looks strange too. I think it should be "br0" not "dev br0".

[lmitche]

Be careful! Do you have a backup of the disk in the NAS?

[lmitche]

That does look good. Now post the output of "netstat -anr"

[lmitche]

Romaz,

 

Thanks for the response. I just tried bridging the wifi and ethernet adapters on my Win7 laptop... easy-peasee. So if needed, that can be done on the Win7 Zotac LMS Srvr.

 

Also thanks for the reminder about possibly needing a crossover cable. I'll need to hunt for them, but I vaguely remember having serveral from my early high-ish speed internet DSL modem days. But I bet Zotac LMS Srvr <-> FMC <-> FMC <-> R-Pi will wor ok with regular cables.

 

I'm currently doing some DIY projects, will report back when I get the chance to try this.

 

And it could be interesting... ALL of my networking gear including my switch is powered by good DIY linear supplies (though not as good as your SR7, Paul's stuff is GREAT!). So I'm really interested in seeing if direct-connect with better my somewhat tweaked HW.

 

Greg in Mississippi

You shouldn't need a cross over cable. Most NICs do this automatically with a feature called Auto MDIX, including motherboard NICs.

[lmitche]

Check that your route to the NAS is defined properly. I had a situation where the playerPC was routing to the NAS via the bridge in the NAS, out to the router, and then back to the NAS. Not good for SQ. You can use traceroute to check the routing tables on most OSes.

[lmitche]

Wow, interesting indeed. A wife that aids with blind testing. This is the first time I have heard this is possible! I am astonished.

[lmitche]

Ok, I swapped out my Paul Pang switch with TCXO clock from the "direct" connection and swapped in my TP-Link 100Mbit FMCs with the receiving FMC powered by my LPS-1. My Mac Mini is now directly connected to my internet modem/router and the Paul Pang switch is completely out of the picture.

 

Here is what my chain looks like: Modem/router > CAT6 cable > Mac Mini > 50 cm SOtM LAN cable > FMC (powered by generic 9V battery supply) > short optical cable > FMC (powered by LPS-1) > 30 cm SOtM LAN cable > sMS-200

 

The impact of having the FMCs in the "direct" connection is about the same as the SOtM iSO-CAT6 LAN isolator meaning there is an improvement with regards to a perceived slighter blacker background and maybe slightly better dynamic contrasts compared to just having the LAN cable in the direct connection but this difference is small. It is small enough that when I had my wife blind test me, I couldn't tell the difference. Out of 4 tries, I guessed right 1/4 times.

 

The difference with the having the Paul Pang switch in the direct path is noticeably better with crisper clearer details and a bigger soundstage. It is as if another thin veil has been removed. With blind testing, on 4/4 tries, it was easy to know when the switch was in the chain and so the switch stays.

 

This is an interesting and somewhat surprising finding for me. At least in my system, this leakage current/ground loop issue just isn't that big of a deal.

Romaz, do you have a passive isolation transformer to test in place of the switch?