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

[udis]

Yes, still bridged. I removed a 10 meter fiber optic isolated run of ethernet, consisting of:

 

Bridged Mac Mini ethernet port > copper jumper > FMC > fiber optic > FMC > copper jumper > microRendu

 

and replaced it with:

 

Bridged Mac Mini ethernet port > copper ethernet cable > microRendu

 

The latter configuration sounded much better.

 

The entire "audio network" configuration is:

 

NAS and a copper ethernet cable from downstairs carrying internet > copper jumpers > Apple AirPort Extreme > copper jumper > Mac Mini bridged Thunderbolt-to-Ethernet adapter, Mac Mini onboard bridged ethernet port > copper ethernet > microRendu.

 

Running Roon and HQPlayer on the Mac Mini

 

Hope this is more clear.

 

Steve Z

 

It does. Thank you

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[kennyb123]

Bringing this back to the topic at hand - I would challenge your assertion that the Aries Mini is a weak link. There are probably others, but at least @Cornan and myself have optimized the snot out of systems around our Minis and it has scaled incredibly well.

 

I am still very curious to see if devices like the mR and the SMS-200 can take me another step further, but for now, I am content. I suspect Uptone, Sonore, and others have impending products that I want to wait for before pulling the trigger on a new purchase.

 

Of course, if anyone wants to lend me an SMS-200 or mR for a couple of weeks in the interest of science, I would love to compare how it does!

 

Simply swapping the full Aries for the microRendu may be one of the more significant steps I've taken in reducing noise and harshness. I didn't really do much to optimize the Aries other than add a REGEN and a Jitterbug, and also isolate it from my network using optical fiber.

 

At one point I allowed a friend to borrow the microRendu so I returned to the Aries. I found that going back to the Aries was a painful experience. So when I see comments above suggesting the Aries Mini is a weak link, generally speaking I'd have to agree.

 

I've seen reports of folks preferring the Aries to the microRendu, but none cite a difference in noise floor, so I've suspected that the noise floor of their systems might not be a low enough to be able to fully appreciate what the microRendu brings to the table.

 

It certain seemed liked there was plenty of room to further optimize the Aries. And of course there have been firmware upgrades reported to improve the sound. Even so, I can't imagine my former unoptimized Aries coming anywhere close to microRendu plus LPS-1 connected directly as Romaz recommends.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

[jelt2359]

For those who have removed the FMC devices:

 

Are your source computers optimised for audio? Mine is decidedly not, is just a former gaming laptop that I repurposed for this use. I bet it generates a tonne of noise...

[lateboomer]

I feel weird for quoting myself...

 

Anyway, that USB to Ethernet Adapter works really well (to make up one of the NICs in the bridge).

 

Network Adapter, Anker USB 3.0 to RJ45 Gigabit

 

$16 from Amazon.

So do you enable forcecompatmode mode for this adapter? Is it connected to a router like my case and get dhcp from there? Do you have to enable forcecompatmode mode for direct Lan between Hqplayer and mRendu? Thank you.

 

I also have got one usb 3.0 usb to ethernet adapter, but it only recognized on usb 2.0 port, if I plug it to usb3.0 port, it said hardware unrecognized. Does it matter whether to connect it to usb2.0 or usb3.0 port? I really got lots of questions.

[clipper]

So do you enable forcecompatmode mode for this adapter? Is it connected to a router like my case and get dhcp from there? Do you have to enable forcecompatmode mode for direct Lan between Hqplayer and mRendu? Thank you.

 

I also have got one usb 3.0 usb to ethernet adapter, but it only recognized on usb 2.0 port, if I plug it to usb3.0 port, it said hardware unrecognized.

 

 

 

I didn't have to force anything with this one. I just plugged it into a USB port and it worked.

 

It worked in both positions (either as the NIC connected to a microRendu or the NIC connected to my switch which is connected to my router in a different room).

 

Once the network bridge was set up with it and another NIC, HQPlayer could detect the microRendu running NAA. This was with HQPlayer running on the same computer as the network bridge and 2 NICs. But I ran HQPlayer on another computer (a mac connected to the same network as the NIC in the bridged machine connected to my switch/router) and it detected the microRendu running NAA that was directly connected to one of the NICs in the machine with the network bridge.

 

I have this USB to Ethernet adapter plugged into a USB 3 port. One of the listed product features is: USB 3.0 enables SuperSpeed data transfer, backward compatible with USB 2.0 / 1.1 standards.

 

Highly recommended if you can't throw Ethernet cards inside your machine!

 

[austinpop]

Simply swapping the full Aries for the microRendu may be one of the more significant steps I've taken in reducing noise and harshness. I didn't really do much to optimize the Aries other than add a REGEN and a Jitterbug, and also isolate it from my network using optical fiber.

 

At one point I allowed a friend to borrow the microRendu so I returned to the Aries. I found that going back to the Aries was a painful experience. So when I see comments above suggesting the Aries Mini is a weak link, generally speaking I'd have to agree.

 

I've seen reports of folks preferring the Aries to the microRendu, but none cite a difference in noise floor, so I've suspected that the noise floor of their systems might not be a low enough to be able to fully appreciate what the microRendu brings to the table.

 

It certain seemed liked there was plenty of room to further optimize the Aries. And of course there have been firmware upgrades reported to improve the sound. Even so, I can't imagine my former unoptimized Aries coming anywhere close to microRendu plus LPS-1 connected directly as Romaz recommends.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

 

Thanks for your perspective.

 

But you may want to look at the equipment in our sigs before implying that our systems aren't resolving enough.

 

Also, the comparisons that scan did are very rigorous:

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f22-networking-networked-audio-and-streaming/auralic-aries-and-sonore-microrendu-listening-impressions-29351/

[kennyb123]

Thanks for your perspective.

 

But you may want to look at the equipment in our sigs before implying that our systems aren't resolving enough.

 

I apologize because my words did not come out right. What I meant to say was that with such resolving systems like yours that there's even a better chance the microRendu comes out sounding much better than the unoptimized Aries. Where it didn't seem to prevail relative to the Aries were the systems where noise hadn't been addressed.

 

You have an incredible system that my own experience suggests might be even better served by a microRendu over the Aries Mini. That's all I was trying to say.

 

Also, the comparisons that scan did are very rigorous:

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f22-networking-networked-audio-and-streaming/auralic-aries-and-sonore-microrendu-listening-impressions-29351/

 

Rigorous yes, but I have my doubts about the Benchmark cabling. Cheap cable would be exactly the thing that would mask the benefits the microRendu brings to the table relative to the Aries. If you scroll down in that thread you'll see I previously mentioned that. I could be wrong about that Benchmark cabling though as I haven't heard it.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[austinpop]

I apologize because my words did not come out right. What I meant to say was that with such resolving systems like yours that there's even a better chance the microRendu comes out sounding much better than the unoptimized Aries. Where it didn't seem to prevail relative to the Aries were the systems where noise hadn't been addressed.

 

You have an incredible system that my own experience suggests might be even better served by a microRendu over the Aries Mini. That's all I was trying to say.

 

Thank you so much for your gracious words. I admit my response was churlish, and on reflection, I clearly misunderstood what you were trying to say.

 

The only reason I've held off on just getting an mR is a) because there are more and more reports that the sms-200 is even better, and b) I'm hoping there is an mR v2 or follow on product on the horizon!

 

Rajiv

[Peter_T]

Tried all combinations of on-board port, usb-ethernet adpater, and 2nd ethernet card on Win8 Audio PC that has upnp server and files. Still stuttering in 3 seconds. Promiscuous mode didn't help either. Can anyone educate me how devices communicate? Bridge is 192.168.1.6 and sms-200 is 192.168.1.3. How can sound data go directly to sms-200 without help of router? Have to upgrade to Win10?

 

Sorry to hear that even a 2nd ethernet card didn't work. Makes my hesitation to buy one even stronger. But you could try to include Wifi in a 3-way bridge like I did : see my post #382.

 

If you have another computer in your network : use that one for the upnp fileserver, not the one on your bridged audio computer. I tried that and that worked without stuttering.

[marksas3]

Ok hate to ask this, but is anyone up to the task of creating a simple and clear step by step tutorial for both Mac and Windows machines for us laymens out here? It would be much appreciated. I followed this thread initially but it quickly turned to Greek lol.

[spacexpert]

Ok hate to ask this, but is anyone up to the task of creating a simple and clear step by step tutorial for both Mac and Windows machines for us laymens out here? It would be much appreciated. I followed this thread initially but it quickly turned to Greek lol.

Just wait for the microRendu 2 Super Edition with Femto Clocks and Direct Connect Hyper Drive Technology. ...In black.

[tboooe]

Just wait for the microRendu 2 Super Edition with Femto Clocks and Direct Connect Hyper Drive Technology. ...In black.

In all seriousness is a new version of the microrendu in the works? I doubt Sonore will confirm or deny at this point but I have read some references on the web alluding to this.

[phusis]

[...]

 

It might be dynamic with strong bass, but I perceived a slight, rosy veil to the sound. Like I heard earlier when I connected my USB-Wifi adapter directly to the SOTM200.

 

[...]

 

Compared to my earlier, wired LAN-connection (with the iSO-CAT6 between router and sMS-200), I hear no "rosa-tinted" veiling through the WiFi-connection. On the contrary I found there to be a slight un-veiling even, and no tonal alteration to speak of. But we do agree on the dynamics and strong bass (without there being a bassy prevalence as such).

 

Am I one of the only ones thinking the WiFi-route holds great sonic potential? Perhaps, as has been mentioned before, it's too simple a connection-approach (instead more commenly referred to as "convenience") to gain significant following - prior to sonic evaluation, that is..

 

Have yet to try out bridged LAN-connection, I must add.

[tboooe]

Am I one of the only ones thinking the WiFi-route holds great sonic potential? Perhaps, as has been mentioned before, it's too simple a connection-approach (instead more commenly referred to as "convenience") to gain significant following - prior to sonic evaluation, that is..

 

Have yet to try out bridged LAN-connection, I must add.

 

So to be clear you are referring to using wifi for the connection from your PC to the rest of your network? If so, there has been some discussion on this and as all things in this hobby there is no clear consensus on if wifi or wired is better. I personally tried to have the best of both worlds by having a wireless bridge in my music that is wired to my PC running HQP and Roon.

 

Back on topic and regarding wifi, perhaps try connecting the SMS200 or microrendu to a wireless bridge? I guess that would defeat the purpose of a direct connection but maybe having the PC communicate with the SMS200 or microrendu via wifi even if its through a bridge may be better than a direct ethernet connection?

[austinpop]

If you have another computer in your network : use that one for the upnp fileserver, not the one on your bridged audio computer. I tried that and that worked without stuttering.

 

I'm going to steal your quote there, Peter_T, and ask a more general question to the knowledgeable folks here who have reaped the benefits of bridged connections in their systems.

 

When @romaz posted his original tweak, it was in the context of the music server, i.e. Roon/HQPlayer running on the same system as the bridge. But people - in your collective experiments, did you find whether the benefit came from the bridging (i.e. switch avoidance), running the music server on the bridge, or both?

 

I know in my experiments with MinimServer that I reported a couple days ago, when I heard the improvements with bridging, it was immaterial whether the minim instance was on a remote machine (my NAS), or local to the bridge. Is it the same with Roon Core and/or HQPlayer?

 

Also, has anyone got Windows bridging to work cleanly, where the bridge machine itself has full connectivity, both externally to the internet, and internally to the internal network? And - I know this one is harder to "prove" - do Windows bridges correctly pass UPNP and multicast frames?

[Evo1668]

I'm going to steal your quote there, Peter_T, and ask a more general question to the knowledgeable folks here who have reaped the benefits of bridged connections in their systems.

 

When @romaz posted his original tweak, it was in the context of the music server, i.e. Roon/HQPlayer running on the same system as the bridge. But people - in your collective experiments, did you find whether the benefit came from the bridging (i.e. switch avoidance), running the music server on the bridge, or both?

 

I know in my experiments with MinimServer that I reported a couple days ago, when I heard the improvements with bridging, it was immaterial whether the minim instance was on a remote machine (my NAS), or local to the bridge. Is it the same with Roon Core and/or HQPlayer?

 

Also, has anyone got Windows bridging to work cleanly, where the bridge machine itself has full connectivity, both externally to the internet, and internally to the internal network? And - I know this one is harder to "prove" - do Windows bridges correctly pass UPNP and multicast frames?

I run RoonServer on my NAS and have HQPlayer running on my Win10 machine bridged/connected directly to the mRendu. The bridge machine connects both externally to the internet and internally to my network fine.

[baconbrain]

I'm going to steal your quote there, Peter_T, and ask a more general question to the knowledgeable folks here who have reaped the benefits of bridged connections in their systems.

 

When @romaz posted his original tweak, it was in the context of the music server, i.e. Roon/HQPlayer running on the same system as the bridge. But people - in your collective experiments, did you find whether the benefit came from the bridging (i.e. switch avoidance), running the music server on the bridge, or both?

 

I know in my experiments with MinimServer that I reported a couple days ago, when I heard the improvements with bridging, it was immaterial whether the minim instance was on a remote machine (my NAS), or local to the bridge. Is it the same with Roon Core and/or HQPlayer?

 

Also, has anyone got Windows bridging to work cleanly, where the bridge machine itself has full connectivity, both externally to the internet, and internally to the internal network? And - I know this one is harder to "prove" - do Windows bridges correctly pass UPNP and multicast frames?

 

Here my feedback:

 

Question 1 & 2: Benefit clearly comes from bridging. My Roon Server and HQPlayer were runnning on the same PC prior to bridging. Only after the bridge was in place, was there noticeable improvement in the SQ.

 

Question 3: My bridged PC runs completely stable with no evident impact on performance. Regardless if I am upsampling or resolution of file being streamed.

 

Question 4: Haven't tried it yet, but I believe the NAA protocol for the mR has some multicast dependicies.

[udis]

I'm going to steal your quote there, Peter_T, and ask a more general question to the knowledgeable folks here who have reaped the benefits of bridged connections in their systems.

 

When @romaz posted his original tweak, it was in the context of the music server, i.e. Roon/HQPlayer running on the same system as the bridge. But people - in your collective experiments, did you find whether the benefit came from the bridging (i.e. switch avoidance), running the music server on the bridge, or both?

 

I know in my experiments with MinimServer that I reported a couple days ago, when I heard the improvements with bridging, it was immaterial whether the minim instance was on a remote machine (my NAS), or local to the bridge. Is it the same with Roon Core and/or HQPlayer?

 

Also, has anyone got Windows bridging to work cleanly, where the bridge machine itself has full connectivity, both externally to the internet, and internally to the internal network? And - I know this one is harder to "prove" - do Windows bridges correctly pass UPNP and multicast frames?

 

I currently have mac mini running Roon core, HQPlayer, and SSD music bridged to mR. I plan on experimenting with running Roon core on SonicTransport i5, although I am not entirely sure if that opens me up to network/switching issues I am looking to avoid with the bridged approach.

[Lionelh2]

I didn't have to force anything with this one. I just plugged it into a USB port and it worked.

 

It worked in both positions (either as the NIC connected to a microRendu or the NIC connected to my switch which is connected to my router in a different room).

 

Once the network bridge was set up with it and another NIC, HQPlayer could detect the microRendu running NAA. This was with HQPlayer running on the same computer as the network bridge and 2 NICs. But I ran HQPlayer on another computer (a mac connected to the same network as the NIC in the bridged machine connected to my switch/router) and it detected the microRendu running NAA that was directly connected to one of the NICs in the machine with the network bridge.

 

I have this USB to Ethernet adapter plugged into a USB 3 port. One of the listed product features is: USB 3.0 enables SuperSpeed data transfer, backward compatible with USB 2.0 / 1.1 standards.

 

Highly recommended if you can't throw Ethernet cards inside your machine!

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]32553[/ATTACH]

 

Thanks for the advice, ordered. Hope I can finally get this to work!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[clipper]

I run RoonServer on my NAS and have HQPlayer running on my Win10 machine bridged/connected directly to the mRendu. The bridge machine connects both externally to the internet and internally to my network fine.

 

Same here.

 

The bridge Windows 10 machine connects perfectly to Internet and LAN. Things like SMB still work as expected. Ping times (for both private and public (Internet) addresses) are similar to what they were before the bridge. Upstream and downstream speeds are similar to what they were before the bridge.

 

In my case RoonServer (along with HQPlayer) is running on the Windows 10 machine. But I am accessing the music on a NAS.

[clipper]

Thanks for the advice, ordered. Hope I can finally get this to work!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

 

Cool!

 

Definitely let us know how it goes (please)!

[austinpop]

I'm going to steal your quote there, Peter_T, and ask a more general question to the knowledgeable folks here who have reaped the benefits of bridged connections in their systems.

 

When @romaz posted his original tweak, it was in the context of the music server, i.e. Roon/HQPlayer running on the same system as the bridge. But people - in your collective experiments, did you find whether the benefit came from the bridging (i.e. switch avoidance), running the music server on the bridge, or both?

 

I know in my experiments with MinimServer that I reported a couple days ago, when I heard the improvements with bridging, it was immaterial whether the minim instance was on a remote machine (my NAS), or local to the bridge. Is it the same with Roon Core and/or HQPlayer?

 

Also, has anyone got Windows bridging to work cleanly, where the bridge machine itself has full connectivity, both externally to the internet, and internally to the internal network? And - I know this one is harder to "prove" - do Windows bridges correctly pass UPNP and multicast frames?

 

I run RoonServer on my NAS and have HQPlayer running on my Win10 machine bridged/connected directly to the mRendu. The bridge machine connects both externally to the internet and internally to my network fine.

 

Here my feedback:

 

Question 1 & 2: Benefit clearly comes from bridging. My Roon Server and HQPlayer were runnning on the same PC prior to bridging. Only after the bridge was in place, was there noticeable improvement in the SQ.

 

Question 3: My bridged PC runs completely stable with no evident impact on performance. Regardless if I am upsampling or resolution of file being streamed.

 

Question 4: Haven't tried it yet, but I believe the NAA protocol for the mR has some multicast dependicies.

 

I currently have mac mini running Roon core, HQPlayer, and SSD music bridged to mR. I plan on experimenting with running Roon core on SonicTransport i5, although I am not entirely sure if that opens me up to network/switching issues I am looking to avoid with the bridged approach.

 

Same here.

 

The bridge Windows 10 machine connects perfectly to Internet and LAN. Things like SMB still work as expected. Ping times (for both private and public (Internet) addresses) are similar to what they were before the bridge. Upstream and downstream speeds are similar to what they were before the bridge.

 

In my case RoonServer (along with HQPlayer) is running on the Windows 10 machine. But I am accessing the music on a NAS.

 

Thanks, folks!

 

An "audiophile and a gentleman" here has offered to lend me an mRendu/LPS-1 combo to try, so I definitely need to get my bridge working properly.

 

I plan to delete my existing bridge and adapter, rescan hardware, and start over. Let me enumerate my intended steps on W10 Enterprise, and you guys correct me if you did something different, OK?

 

1. Connect wifi adapter to my home network, so it grabs a DHCP address in my subnet (192.168.0.x).
   
2. Connect USB Ethernet adapter to my router, and have it also grab a DHCP address on the same subnet.
   
3. Connect the built-in ethernet adapter to my endpoint (Aries Mini, or soon, mR).
   
4. Is it important to make the physical connections before the next step? Or did you do the steps first, and then attach the endpoint?
   
5. Go to Settings > Network & Internet > Change Adapter options. Select all 3 of the above adapters
   
6. Right click and select "Bridge connections"
   
7. No need to set forceenabled (promiscuous mode)?
   
8. Restart endpoint. On restart, it should be able to grab a DHCP adapter from the router, through the bridge.
   

Are we done at this point? Did you leave all 3 adapters in the bridge?

 

Thanks for any clarity you can provide.

[clipper]

Thanks, folks!

 

An "audiophile and a gentleman" here has offered to lend me an mRendu/LPS-1 combo to try, so I definitely need to get my bridge working properly.

 

I plan to delete my existing bridge and adapter, rescan hardware, and start over. Let me enumerate my intended steps on W10 Enterprise, and you guys correct me if you did something different, OK?

 

1. Connect wifi adapter to my home network, so it grabs a DHCP address in my subnet (192.168.0.x).
   
2. Connect USB Ethernet adapter to my router, and have it also grab a DHCP address on the same subnet.
   
3. Connect the built-in ethernet adapter to my endpoint (Aries Mini, or soon, mR).
   
4. Is it important to make the physical connections before the next step? Or did you do the steps first, and then attach the endpoint?
   
5. Go to Settings > Network & Internet > Change Adapter options. Select all 3 of the above adapters
   
6. Right click and select "Bridge connections"
   
7. No need to set forceenabled (promiscuous mode)?
   
8. Restart endpoint. On restart, it should be able to grab a DHCP adapter from the router, through the bridge.
   

Are we done at this point? Did you leave all 3 adapters in the bridge?

 

Thanks for any clarity you can provide.

 

I would leave wifi out of it. Meaning, make the bridge using your USB Ethernet adapter (one that is known to work) and your computer's built-in Ethernet.

 

If you use a USB Ethernet adapter that is known to work, you will not have to force promiscuous mode (unless your built-in Ethernet doesn't support promiscuous mode, which I think would be rare).

 

It should be as simple as establishing a connection to your router with either your USB Ethernet adapter or built-in Ethernet. Then highlight the 2 adapters (like you said, Settings, Network and Internet, Change Adapter Options is one way to get there), right click on one of them and choose Bridge Connections. The network player (Aries or microRendu) will be then be assigned an IP address on your LAN by virtue of it being connected to one of the NICs that make up your bridge. I actually don't know anything about the Aries, so I don't know if it's DHCP only (which is what you'd want here) or if you can manually assign an IP address to it.

 

Once the bridge is created, you can do one more optional step. You can right click on the bridge, click on Properties, go into the IPv4 settings and manually assign addresses (for IP address, Subnet Mask, Gateway, and DNS Server) so that you'll always know where to find the bridge. I do that because my audio computer is headless (so it's helpful to know where Microsoft Remote Desktop can always find it, rather than having to run an IP address scanner all the time as the private IP address changes). So my setup looks like this:

 

Don't pay any attention to Ethernet 2. That's an Intel NIC card with nothing plugged into it currently. I disconnected the Ethernet cable that had been connected to it so I could test out that USB to Ethernet adapter that works (which is what you see as Ethernet 4).

[austinpop]

I would leave wifi out of it. Meaning, make the bridge using your USB Ethernet adapter (one that is known to work) and your computer's built-in Ethernet.

 

If you use a USB Ethernet adapter that is known to work, you will not have to force promiscuous mode (unless your built-in Ethernet doesn't support promiscuous mode, which I think would be rare).

 

It should be as simple as establishing a connection to your router with either your USB Ethernet adapter or built-in Ethernet. Then highlight the 2 adapters (like you said, Settings, Network and Internet, Change Adapter Options is one way to get there), right click on one of them and choose Bridge Connections. The network player (Aries or microRendu) will be then be assigned an IP address on your LAN by virtue of it being connected to one of the NICs that make up your bridge. I actually don't know anything about the Aries, so I don't know if it's DHCP only (which is what you'd want here) or if you can manually assign an IP address to it.

 

Once the bridge is created, you can do one more optional step. You can right click on the bridge, click on Properties, go into the IPv4 settings and manually assign addresses (for IP address, Subnet Mask, Gateway, and DNS Server) so that you'll always know where to find the bridge. I do that because my audio computer is headless (so it's helpful to know where Microsoft Remote Desktop can always find it, rather than having to run an IP address scanner all the time as the private IP address changes). So my setup looks like this:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]32600[/ATTACH]

 

Don't pay any attention to Ethernet 2. That's an Intel NIC card with nothing plugged into it currently. I disconnected the Ethernet cable that had been connected to it so I could test out that USB to Ethernet adapter that works (which is what you see as Ethernet 4).

 

Yeah, sorry, I forgot to mention the static IP assignment to the bridge. I actually did that on my first attempt.

 

Well, your steps make perfect sense, and are exactly what I had tried when I did this the first time. But for some reason, the resulting bridge did not really work. It was only when I went back and introduced the wifi adapter into the mix, did I get a functioning bridge. Several others seem to have had this issue too.

 

What I had done the last time to get a functioning bridge was:

1. create a bridge with Wifi and ethernet adapter A (say)
   
2. Add ethernet adapter B to the bridge
   
3. Remove wifi adapter from the bridge
   

 

This resulted in a sort-of functional bridge, but the bridge machine itself was unable to connect to anything on the local subnet.

 

But yeah, I'll start over and see if it works after a full cleanup.

[clipper]

Yeah, sorry, I forgot to mention the static IP assignment to the bridge. I actually did that on my first attempt.

 

Well, your steps make perfect sense, and are exactly what I had tried when I did this the first time. But for some reason, the resulting bridge did not really work. It was only when I went back and introduced the wifi adapter into the mix, did I get a functioning bridge. Several others seem to have had this issue too.

 

What I had done the last time to get a functioning bridge was:

1. create a bridge with Wifi and ethernet adapter A (say)
   
2. Add ethernet adapter B to the bridge
   
3. Remove wifi adapter from the bridge
   

 

This resulted in a sort-of functional bridge, but the bridge machine itself was unable to connect to anything on the local subnet.

 

But yeah, I'll start over and see if it works after a full cleanup.

 

My guess is that your USB Ethernet adapter is the problem. What is it (make/model)?

 

My advice is to get one of these for $16: Network Adapter, Anker USB 3.0 to RJ45 Gigabit Ethernet Adapter.

 

Even though I can add PCI-E cards to my computer (and did so to add another NIC to create a bridge), I got this USB adapter so I could test it and report back (because I don't think most USB Ethernet adapters work in a bridge scenario, and I think this is likely the problem for people who have tried this unsuccessfully). I ordered this one specifically because I read someone's report that it supported promiscuous mode.

 

I can confirm that this USB Ethernet adapter works perfectly as part of a bridge.