And that’s with your network player already connected to the isolated network output on your Melco server, so this switch is the ‘network’ side for the Roon Core (which I believe is on your NAS) & the control communications from Roon Remotes.
So is the Melco server connected to the 100M ports or the 1000M ones?
I went the other route, with an EtherRegen with the isolated 100M port connected to the NDS, and the rest on the 1000M ports (SonoreUPnP bridge device, feed up to the Roon Core (ROCK server)/NAS backend & control communications coming through the WiFi AP).
There are certainly gains to network isolation and lower ‘noise’ in the streaming path.
I understand the confusion. But they are completely different qualities, like naim ps, incremental upgrades between them all. It’s worth checking his website.
Hi Simon,
From what I could pick up on the quick setup guide on the Melco site, I connected the N10 to a 1000M port. I also connected the Qnap nas which is hosting the Roon Core vía a an attached USB SSD to a 1000M. Finally, I connected the BT Wholehome Device vía 1000M also, so I have nothing connected to the S100 100M ports. Does this look to be correct to you?
David
Well you could try the Melco N10 server on a 100M port to provide some further separation from the noisy elements on the main network, however this might slow down the search and indexing undertaken by the Roon Core, which is on the 1000M side, of the files stored on the Melco N10, but shouldn’t affect track access or playback as 100M Ethernet is good enough for streaming music, including HiRes (unless you have found a major library of DSD512 recordings ).
Also depends on how often you are adding to the library on the Melco, and writing to the disks in that server, as this will be slower.
However it is one port connection to swap over, from the 1000M side to the 100M.
I would be inclined to leave the NAS & Roon Core on the 1000M, as not to limit the operation of the Roon Remotes, in terms of accessing the Roon Core, its database and access to the internet for the Tidal/Qobuz searches (assuming you have better than 100Mbit/s package)
Be interested to see if the network separation in the Melco N10, is as they say.
Then if so, why sell a switch to an existing Melco server customer, with 1000M and 100M sides, when the 100M side isn’t to be used!! . They could offer 50% of the Product at 50% of the price!
So all general WiFi internet traffic doesn’t go near the switch for the Roon Core or NAS.
And the ports for HiFi ‘frontend’ are separate and then the special isolated 100M for the NDS.
There is another document on the Melco site which suggests using 100M connection to N10 if the onward connection to the Player is via usb, but 1000M if using Ethernet out of N10 to the player.
As you suggest, it is a simple experiment, so I’ll try it after getting stuck in to listening to music for a while.
But just remember a switched segment is always separate from another switched segment, but the segments are not isolated from each other in the network…
Yes in the old days of hubs and half duplex communication, then your network could become one large collision remain so there was no separation of segments… switches have put an end to that.
The consideration that many forget is that broadcast data and ARP /NDP and local group data will travel out to all segments and to all connected devices in a subnet… you can’t generally isolate that within a network /subnet, and sniffing a typical home network with thirty or so devices on it will show a fairly constant stream of broadcast data.
To isolate a network from this you need to move up from layer 2 to layer 3 and have separate routable subnets. However protocols such UPnP are designed to work in a subnet, so if you do route UPnP for isolation purposes you will need to set up SSDP and possibly other helpers on your router.
Yes, I did consider introducing VLANs for the music streams, given that my NAS units have dual Ethernet connections, so one could be used for the Music VLAN and one for general upload, backups between NAS each, but the WiFi control from each the Roon Remote or the Naim App, would mean swapping to a separate SSID on the Music VLAN or having the WiFi traffic on the Music VLAN, which defeats the objective. Plus the Roon Core makes internet access for its metadata, Songkick dates, Tidal/Qobuz searches.
So I have bonded the dual Ethernets on the NAS units, and used Port-based QoS settings instead on the Managed Switch, for the connections directly involved in the playback stream. Seems to work.
And the introduction of the EtherREGEN was a significant step up from the general purpose Cisco switch that was used previously.
Simon, sure it should all work…it was the isolation aspects you were discussing that I was perusing.
I did create a seperate routable subnet for audio, and it had its own audio SSID… yes I used vlan trunks (802.1Q tags) to keep the vlans separate on trunked segments… I got it all working with multicast routing using PIM etc, so the Naim app worked and could navigate the UPnP media server etc, but I ran into a few issues on the Naim streamer on extended play out that I didn’t have the patience to get to the bottom of. (My UPnP media server and NAS was on a different subnet to my streamer) so reverted back.
Thanks Simon,
I’ve sent an email to Melco support asking them to clarify their thinking on this. Meanwhile I’m experiencing the usual impatience to hear everything again ASAP. It really is a major upgrade, despite the naysayers in other parts of the forest who argue that what we are hearing is impossible, therefore imagined.
David
Oh, I know, I went through that on the Roon forum, from people who haven’t listen to any device, or cable etc. and we’re giving their opinion as if it was gospel.
But equally true, is the fact that just because Person A has tried it in his system and enjoyed it, doesn’t provide any reliable evidence that
Person B will find it improves his enjoyment in his system.
Spent yesterday afternoon pulling up carpet, drilling holes and rooting around the crawl space under my floorboards to install my Catsnake 6a. This what I ended up with.
Orange coloured stuff is all new in my system, whereas grey is my old setup. The ZyXEL stuff is cheap and old.
I did some tests, using Roon (with no DSP) for the orange route to my 272, vs the Naim app for the grey route. I tried a range of music from Jake Bugg, Dire Straits, Richard Spaven (hi-res) and others all locally stored. I just swapped the Ethernet cable at the back of my 272.
I started with the orange route and thought, wow this sound good. Switching to the grey route I thought wow this sounds good too. Perhaps if I listened analytically the individual instruments were more clearly defined and “present” in the orange route, but I think I would have had difficulty in picking between the set-ups in a blind audition.
Maybe my experiment was flawed cos I didn’t unplug the Cisco from the network and so the grey route might have been influenced by the Cisco, but even if so the route to the streamer was through bog standard cables and cheap final switch (which has TV, set-top box also plugged into it).
So I conclude:
Experiment was flawed (I’ll retry again when I get chance, removing the Cisco completely)
My system isn’t revealing enough to identity the difference
My ears aren’t revealing enough to hear the difference
There is no extraneous “stuff” going on within my network, so substantial improvement is not possible
There is no difference
I’m not disappointed with the outcome and will leave the Cisco and Catsnake in situ; it means for me that this is a rabbit hole I don’t think I need to go down and can be happy with what I have and just enjoy the music.
Having said that I’m still planning to take a peek into room correction!