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

[Theobetley]

Yes

 

 

Just to re cap

 

I have the following.

 

On board LAN connection to my Modem/Router.

 

A 2 port PCI e NIC connected to SMS200 and NAS.

 

WI-FI dongle disabled but included in the bridge.

 

So full network and internet access.

 

Easy to set up.

 

Just highlight the network devices to include in the bridge including the disabled WI-FI dongle, select create bridge.

 

Let windows do its set up thang.

 

Done.

 

 

 

 

 

Bummer. If you had been successful with no internet connection that raised images in my mind of running with no firewall / windows defender (or equivalent) or other stuff that might be a risk to sq.

[tboooe]

Does your setup really works with the Wifi dongle disabled? In my setup the Wifi-USB dongle needed to be enabled but not connected to the Wifi-modem. As soon as I disabled the Wifi dongle, stuttering started again. Although it is disconnected it still keeps on flashing it's led.

The need to have a wifi dongle is very very odd to me. In my setup running Server 2012 R2, I didnt have to do this. I am especially surprised that @Peter_T had to do this with Server 2016. I would have assumed Server 2012 and 2016 are similar.

 

I just installed a dual port NIC, created the bridge, and everything worked without any need for troubleshooting from my part. I wonder if this is related to OS or NIC hardware or network configuration?

[tboooe]

Bummer. If you had been successful with no internet connection that raised images in my mind of running with no firewall / windows defender (or equivalent) or other stuff that might be a risk to sq.

 

I imagine in that configuration access to the internet is not required. For controlling via a remote, a separate wireless router can be used and set up as a separate music only network with no connection to the internet. I thought about doing this but I need my NAS where my music is stored accessible by other computers/people in my house so my music system is connected to this network. If I dont need this functionality I could connect the NAS to a local wireless router.

[lmitche]

I imagine in that configuration access to the internet is not required. For controlling via a remote, a separate wireless router can be used and set up as a separate music only network with no connection to the internet. I thought about doing this but I need my NAS where my music is stored accessible by other computers/people in my house so my music system is connected to this network. If I dont need this functionality I could connect the NAS to a local wireless router.

Tboooe,

 

I run a separate subnet for the music network and have no problem running the iPad/android roon control software, tidal, vnc or drive mounting from my home network pointing to the music network. I just supply the ip address of the machine in the music network to connect. Works great for eliminating broadcast packets from the home network from my music system.

[tboooe]

Tboooe,

 

I run a separate subnet for the music network and have no problem running the iPad/android roon control software, tidal, vnc or drive mounting from my home network pointing to the music network. I just supply the ip address of the machine in the music network to connect. Works great for eliminating broadcast packets from the home network from my music system.

I need to look into this but I am just a network hack so my knowledge is limited. If I put the music network on a separate subnet, then how would it access my NAS which is on my "home" subnet? The NAS is wired to my wireless router upstairs. My music server communicates to my network via a wireless bridge. Similarly, how would I be able to control Roon via my mobile device? When I did this direct 2 pc setup with Jplay, the audio pc was put on a separate subnet which made it not accessible via remote desktop from any device on my home network.

 

 

Thank you for any input.

[Peter_T]

The need to have a wifi dongle is very very odd to me. In my setup running Server 2012 R2, I didnt have to do this. I am especially surprised that @Peter_T had to do this with Server 2016. I would have assumed Server 2012 and 2016 are similar. I just installed a dual port NIC, created the bridge, and everything worked without any need for troubleshooting from my part. I wonder if this is related to OS or NIC hardware or network configuration?

 

Correction : I had to make a "3-way" bridge in W10 and W2012R2 in order to prevent stuttering. I did not install W2016-GUI but W2016-core, so I do not know if a W2016-GUI bridge is possible and needs (in my setup) a Wifi-dongle to prevent stuttering.

 

I don't think it is network related because on my Lenovo Z50 notebook I only needed it's NIC and and added Ethernet-USB-dongle. But don't forget : that notebook has an on board Wifi (disabled in that test)

 

Stuttering might have resulted from a strange interaction between a music DLNA server (Jriver or Foobar) on my NUC-audioPC with the SOTM200? I say this, because if I had a NIC1-NIC2 bridge on my NUC-audio-PC and used a JRiver DLNA server on my notebook then there was no stuttering playing to the "bridged" SOTM200 (SQ was less good than when the DLNA server was playing from my audio-PC.)

[austinpop]

In adding the wifi adapter are you enabling it entirely such that it is an active network device with a separate path to a wireless router?

 

Wifi adapter is enabled, but not connected.

 

So the only active path to the router is via one Ethernet interface only.

 

W10 Enterprise.

[shoom]

‘’Stuttering might have resulted from a strange interaction between a music DLNA server (Jriver or Foobar) on my NUC-audioPC with the SOTM200? I say this, because if I had a NIC1-NIC2 bridge on my NUC-audio-PC and used a JRiver DLNA server on my notebook then there was no stuttering playing to the "bridged" SOTM200 (SQ was less good than when the DLNA server was playing from my audio-PC.)’’

 

 

I found the same thing when fiddling with the bridge on my music PC. 1x on board LAN and 1x USB to LAN adaptor on the music PC with Jriver playing from my laptop. It seemed to act as a pass through playing to the SMS200 but did not sound so good. Playing Jriver from my music PC alone with the above config just resulted in sttttutering.

 

 

The WI-FI dongle fixed things.

 

 

Don’t know why.

 

 

I added the 2 port NIC on the music PC once I had things up and running.

[Peter_T]

Hi Peter,So in the end you are using the DHCP server referenced in the prior post right? If so, have you set it to use the same subnet as your router, or a different subnet altogether? If the latter, the additional SQ improvement may be explained by the the fact that multicast traffic on your router based network will not be seen by the sotm200 anymore, lowering the level of context switching on the renderer.

 

Two separate networks : My router (main DHCP server) does not see the SOTM at all. The www.dhcpserver.de program makes a DHCP server from the NIC2 to which the SOTM is attached. I use then IP=1.0.0.1 (static) mask 255.255.255.0 for that branch and for NIC1 I use a static address provided by my router 192.168.178.80 mask 255.255.255.0

 

So I think you are right when concluding that the increase in SQ can be due to the fact that the SOTM does not have contact with the rest of the network.

 

In principle for windows servers you do not need any additional software to get NIC's to behave as DHCP server. It is built-in in W2012 and W2016 as Nouchka pointed out to me in another thread. But how to do that in core-mode? I do not know enough powershell commands to do that and the simple dhcpserver program just works fine in core-mode.

[rickca]

But before everyone gets all excited by the prospect of such a product from UpTone, know that we discussed it in relation to another significant Ethernet-related isolation project we have slated for the fall (after his move), and decided that the market for the above-described switch product is much smaller than for the other secret product. So don't expect such from us this year!

Oh good, another secret product! Gives new meaning to the term 'leaky filter'.

Seems a natural extension to your product line.

[lmitche]

I need to look into this but I am just a network hack so my knowledge is limited. If I put the music network on a separate subnet, then how would it access my NAS which is on my "home" subnet? The NAS is wired to my wireless router upstairs. My music server communicates to my network via a wireless bridge. Similarly, how would I be able to control Roon via my mobile device? When I did this direct 2 pc setup with Jplay, the audio pc was put on a separate subnet which made it not accessible via remote desktop from any device on my home network.

 

 

Thank you for any input.

Hi tboooe,

 

You have lots of questions here, but generally one can assign and use the same a static ip address across subnet boundaries. For example in the roon control software you can refer to the music server directly with the ip address such as //192.168.1.56 and the control software will find and connect to the server directly. The same is true with remote SMB drives mounted in Linux (//) and Windows(\\). The Windows remote desktop protocol will definitely work across subnet boundaries, although I prefer tightvnc.

 

I can't talk to Jplay or Windows server core modes as I have limited experience. Having said that I'd be shocked if the behaviour wasn't the same.

[rickca]

My networking skills are quite limited, but I'd like to give this a try.

 

I have a PCIE 802.11ac adapter (Asus PCE-56) in my Windows 10 machine that I use to access my router (Asus RT-AC3100). It's plenty fast for my 75 Mbps downstream internet connection and it's stable. Right now, my micro rendu is connected to a LAN port on that router.

 

I also have an unused Intel I219-V on the motherboard. I'd like to try connecting the micro rendu directly to this NIC.

 

I plan to run HQPlayer on this Windows 10 box. My music files are local to this machine.

 

So ... can I use the bridging technique discussed in this thread? If so, I'd appreciate the latest recommended method of implementing it. It seems like the approach has a few variations, and I don't understand enough about subnets and DHCP to evaluate what would work best for me. Thanks!

[tboooe]

Hi tboooe,

 

You have lots of questions here, but generally one can assign and use the same a static ip address across subnet boundaries. For example in the roon control software you can refer to the music server directly with the ip address such as //192.168.1.56 and the control software will find and connect to the server directly. The same is true with remote SMB drives mounted in Linux (//) and Windows(\\). The Windows remote desktop protocol will definitely work across subnet boundaries, although I prefer tightvnc.

 

I can't talk to Jplay or Windows server core modes as I have limited experience. Having said that I'd be shocked if the behaviour wasn't the same.

Thank you...so will this work:

NAS - 192.168.2.125 (home network IP range is 192.168.2.XXX), subnet 255.255.255.0

 

Wireless bridge downstairs - connected to home network and assigned IP 192.168.2.100, subnet 255.255.255.0

Server PC - IP 192.168.1.1, subnet 255.255.255.0

NAA PC (direct connect to server pc) - 192.168.1.2, subnet 255.255.255.0

 

In this case, I can still control Roon from my tablet connected to my home network?

[lmitche]

Thank you...so will this work:

NAS - 192.168.2.125 (home network IP range is 192.168.2.XXX), subnet 255.255.255.0

 

Wireless bridge downstairs - connected to home network and assigned IP 192.168.2.100, subnet 255.255.255.0

Server PC - IP 192.168.1.1, subnet 255.255.255.0

NAA PC (direct connect to server pc) - 192.168.1.2, subnet 255.255.255.0

 

In this case, I can still control Roon from my tablet connected to my home network?

Yes, you can point a Roon controller on subnet 2 to the music server with the IP address in subnet 1.

 

Please let me know what happens.

[lmitche]

Thank you...so will this work:

NAS - 192.168.2.125 (home network IP range is 192.168.2.XXX), subnet 255.255.255.0

 

Wireless bridge downstairs - connected to home network and assigned IP 192.168.2.100, subnet 255.255.255.0

Server PC - IP 192.168.1.1, subnet 255.255.255.0

NAA PC (direct connect to server pc) - 192.168.1.2, subnet 255.255.255.0

 

In this case, I can still control Roon from my tablet connected to my home network?

FYI and to be clear 255.255.255.0 is the subnet mask, not subnet. The subnet is the third group of digits from the left in the IP address.

[tboooe]

Yes, you can point a Roon controller on subnet 2 to the music server with the IP address in subnet 1.

 

Please let me know what happens.

 

I just tested this on a laptop. I changed the ip address to 192.168.1.1 (my home ip range is 192.168.2.xxx), subnet mask 255.255.255.0, default gateway 192.168.2.1, DNS 192.168.2.1 (I also tried 192.168.1.1 for both of these too).

 

I could not ping anything on my home network (PCs or the NAS) from this laptop. I could not connect to the internet either.

[lmitche]

Sorry, you need a second router between the networks. The second router that will create the second subnet. Plug any local port on the first router into the wan port of the second router. Once done assign the IP address of the second router to be in subnet 1. Plug in the second subnet devices and go.

[austinpop]

It's interesting how these little improvements can add up to something quite significant and very meaningful.

 

Some have suggested there's no reason that two music players that have bit-perfect output should sound any different and these filters definitely counter that theory. These AO sound signature/filters are not in the music path at all. According to AudioPhil, they merely affect CPU/memory handling and yet from 1A to 4D, you go from a more precise sound to a warmer and lusher sound and with this direct connection, in my system, there is no mistaking the difference.

 

The common strategy that AudioPhil had always suggested was to use setting 4D for the Audio PC (renderer) as it resulted in a smoother and "tube-like" presentation and to consider something like setting 1B for the control PC as this resulted in a more precise and detailed presentation. I believe these are his personal preferences for a dual PC setup. Well, we have no option to impact the sound signature of either the mR or sMS-200 but what I have found in my own comparisons is that the mR has greater body and maybe a touch more organic bloom to it while the sMS-200 has greater detail clarity and precision. Which is better is up to the user but as for my personal preferences, the sMS-200 has a slight edge since it just sounds more resolving. With my mR, I first went with 1A on my Mac Mini and detail clarity with the the mR went up considerably which I found very much to my liking. In fact, it felt as if my mR had become transformed into the sMS-200 as far as detail clarity but 1A resulted in a fairly flat and almost mechanical presentation. 1B improved soundstage depth and fluidity but 1C was my preferred sweet spot in the end. Still plenty of detail clarity but much more depth. These filters alone are worth the price of admission of AO for me in this setup.

 

My sMS-200 is still out but upon its return, I will be surprised if I prefer the same signature and filter settings.

 

I have now proven to myself through blind testing that Process Lasso adds a small but still meaningful improvement, especially when Roon is run in Bitsum Highest Performance mode. I am not yet convinced Fidelizer Pro is adding anything further.

 

Interesting comments!

 

I've been evaluating both the mR and the sMS-200 over on this thread: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f22-networking-networked-audio-and-streaming/auralic-aries-mini-vs-sonore-microrendu-vs-soul-music-sms-200-listening-impressions-31499/index2.html

 

I just installed AO on my bridged machine last night, although I am on W10 Enterprise. I have to say, I'm not finding a night and day difference with AO, but it's early days, so extended listening is needed.

 

At least initially, I found the 1-4 and A-D filter effects to be very subtle. I currently have the sMS-200 in the system, and settled on 3C as my preferred setting.

 

I've just gone back to no FMCs on the direct link, and will see how that sounds. More to come.

[austinpop]

BTW - not to digress too far on AO - but does anyone know what the typical process count should be after AO is applied?

 

In my case, on W10 Ent, with no apps running, I have about 27-29 each of background and Windows processes.

[romaz]

Interesting comments!

 

I've been evaluating both the mR and the sMS-200 over on this thread: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f22-networking-networked-audio-and-streaming/auralic-aries-mini-vs-sonore-microrendu-vs-soul-music-sms-200-listening-impressions-31499/index2.html

 

I just installed AO on my bridged machine last night, although I am on W10 Enterprise. I have to say, I'm not finding a night and day difference with AO, but it's early days, so extended listening is needed.

 

At least initially, I found the 1-4 and A-D filter effects to be very subtle. I currently have the sMS-200 in the system, and settled on 3C as my preferred setting.

 

I've just gone back to no FMCs on the direct link, and will see how that sounds. More to come.

The difference isn't night and day for me but under Minimal Server mode, the difference is quite notable and helps equalize some of the issues I have had with the mR against the sMS-200 with respect to detail clarity. My sMS-200 still isn't back and so I haven't had the chance to try the different signatures with the sMS-200.

[lmitche]

BTW - not to digress too far on AO - but does anyone know what the typical process count should be after AO is applied?

 

In my case, on W10 Ent, with no apps running, I have about 27-29 each of background and Windows processes.

That's a great start. You can whittle it down from there. I run with 23 processes with Roon/HQplayer running. The win10 optimization thread has additional scripts you can run that are very good.

[austinpop]

Which thread Larry?

 

Not at my desk, so slave to the limited search on the iPhone app!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[tboooe]

Sorry, you need a second router between the networks. The second router that will create the second subnet. Plug any local port on the first router into the wan port of the second router. Once done assign the IP address of the second router to be in subnet 1. Plug in the second subnet devices and go.

That makes total sense.

 

Now for the really dumb questions...my music server PC is downstairs so I use a wireless bridge to connect to my home network. i have a wireless router upstairs.

 

1. Is it possible to use my current wireless bridge as the second router? Its already assigned an IP in my home subnet.

2. How does this setup work in the context of the bridging we have all been talking about? My server PC has a dual nic. Would I just proceed as normal? The port connected to the 2nd router would get an IP in the same subnet as my home. I would assign an IP address to the second port on a different subnet?

[lmitche]

What's the make and model of your bridge device?

[lmitche]

Which thread Larry?

 

Not at my desk, so slave to the limited search on the iPhone app!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

Google this: "computer audiophile windows optimization"