A point on routers and switches (please)

In simplistic terms, if you have a network player (NDx?) and a NAS drive with your music files, you need to connect them together: a switch makes a DIRECT connection between the two, like joining them with one bit of wire.

A router will also do this, but a router does a bunch of other stuff too.  The quality of the router determines how well it copes with doing all this other stuff at the same time as joining your streamer and NAS together.  A lower quality one may break the connection quite often, interrupting your music.

Since a switch has only one thing to do, it JFDIs it (just flippin does it) and you don't get interruptions.

Now, since your streamer and your NAS also have to talk to the router from time to time, you also plug your router into the switch as well as your streamer and your NAS, so the switch then 'switches' connections between the devices as its needed...  but the switch still has only the one function – switching… which gives us a clue to why it's called a switch.

And finally… switches often work at gigabit speeds and routers usually work at megabit speeds (1 gig = 1000 meg), and people like me believe that gives them more time to do their switching ! (others will disagree).

There… simple, isn’t it.

(Now I'll wait for the experts to tell me this is an over simplification... but I don't care… my world is a simple and musical one)

Max

Wired is always more stable and often faster than wireless.

Netgear make decent switches if you need the extra ports / capability.

If you are streaming from the internet (Spotify or internet radio for example), the speed of your broadband line may be more of a limiting factor than your router.

You don't need Gigabit to stream music. It may improve your home network for compatible devices but as Ian says will be very unlikely to improve sound quality.

If the device connected to the switch does not have a Gigabit port you will not approach the higher speeds anyway.

HTH a bit.

Aren't most multi-port routers also switches?  We have Verizon FiOS here, and the "router" is a combination cable modem, wifi router, and given that it has 4 ethernet ports, also a switch I'm rather sure.

If I'm right, I would not expect any performance enhancement using a switch between my nas or uServe and that "router."

Bart

Which is why I think you are wrong i.e. as Ian Gs story shows - a dedicated switch has the potential to improve the speed and stability of the connection between two pieces of hardware on a network.

Ray

used a switch from the start, the nds5  and the zone ripper are cnnected with 0.74M short quality audquest cat cables,then the router/pc are well out of the way ,have no issues at all

Hi Bart,

You are correct. I'm using a "dumbed down" Cisco/Linksys router as a switch with wireless capability.

I achieved this by taking out (via configuration) the routing and IP assigning side of the router and now

have only the ethernet ports and wifi side of the router working; works well.

All the best

Stefano

Hi Max.. Good question. Let me try and answer.

Very simply.

A) a router connects networks together; ie your home LAN to the Internet.

B) a switch connects devices together on a single network and allows them to talk to each other such as devices on your LAN.

Most consumer Internet routers also contain switch ports. Ie a switch is bolted onto the LAN side of the router. Additionally many consumer Internet routers include a wifi access point (WAP)!, as well as basic firewall providing PAT, single DMZ and port forwarding. This is often controlled by a small cheap processor using quite basic software. There is often not much in the way of hardware acceleration. Therefore these consumer devices can become performance bottlenecks, and because they are designed and built  cheaply  may also have limitations and compromises on what TCP/IP features they support (such as IGMP and routing protocols, DSCP, wifi implementation and DHCP feature set). The bundled switch ports are also often constrained by this performance and feature bottleneck. So best not to ask them to do too much.

A switch can be quite complicated, but in the consumer space are usually simple devices with hardware acceleration. They are fast. The role is to buffer, process and switch frames around your network to their correct ports using the MAC address. They handle broadcast and will typically rebroadcast muticast if IGMPsnooping is not supported. They check that frames are not corrupted, and if they are they are thrown away.  All Switches also manage the MAC address table and entry management as well link port negotiation determining link speed and duplexity for each segment (lead to your switch). 

For performance and network interoperability reasons it's best to use a little switch connecting your LAN devices together and have a LAN segment going from  your switch to the consumer Internet router. That way uour Internet router is only seeing data from your LAN it  needs to ( such as internet data or broadcast or DHCP data) and not everything and therefore filtering or slowing down your overall LAN  thereby causing issues.

FYI you might hear these terms... Network packets are processed by the router. Network frames are processed by the switch.

Streaming needs to support multicast on your wired and wifi parts of your LAN therefore Streaming needs the support of UDP reliably. . Also streaming hidef requires a relatively modest but consistent  data throughput, again for some software controlled consumer router switchports even this might be too much. 

Your Thompson routershould be fine as a router, but I would recommend a seperately attached switch for the reasons I state above.

I thought that's what I said. 

Simon thank you, that was very helpful.  About the "little switch" between the router and the LAN devices; does it do all of those network management functions right out of the box once all is hooked up, or is there a setup that needs to be done?  You've certainly talked me into the benefit of a "little switch!"

I use a NETGEAR ProSafe GS108 8-port Gigabit Desktop Switch. You just plug stuff in (connect 1 port to your router and use the others for the rest of your kit) and it does the magic.

Hi all,

thanks for all the interesting replies. I will read everything carefully.

The reason why I ask (apart from the pleasure of getting tips on better gear) is that I finally plan to experiment a bit with a network music system (to use side by side with my CDX2), consisting of:

- A simple (G4 PPC, 40G HD, 1,25 clock) MacMini that I was given for free, and that I have stripped down to the essentials. It supports 10.6 iTunes with 1.8.11 Playback (BTW, those guys are wonderful, supportive people) and 7.7.2 Logitech Server. It is more or less configured like a UnitiServe. In it, I have calculated that I can fit about 30/35 WAV albums, so good for borrowing interesting things from friends if not for transferring my entire collection..

- A player, which could likely be a Squeezebox Touch, into my SN's DAC.

The MacMini in wired to my Thomson router in one room, and I have had an Ethernet socket installed exactly on the other side of the wall, in the living room, to wire the SBT. So I am not sure that I need a switch now.

(As I had imagined months ago, I'm beginning to see ads for >special< cat cables, but I don't want to welcome this new paranoia into my repertoire, yet...)

Best,

Max

This is probably my case too.

M.

Max,

don't forget to tweak your SBT (disable screen, wifi module and so on), if you haven't done it already.

Then just let us know how do you like the streaming experience, and if you find the sound too disappointing compared to your CDX2.

Ciao

Hi Bart,yes in my description above all those network 'management' functions as you put it are core to every switch. They do it automatically, or they wouldn't be switching. So there is no setup needed for it. I use a little Netgear in my listening room, and it's plug and play.

matpip,

actually, I don't have a SBT yet: I'm looking for a nice 2nd hand unit or, as an alternative, to enjoy a special offer from Logitech (they appear now and then) especially now that Logitech seems to have completely abandoned not only the Touch but the whole Squeezebox line and name; but thanks for the tip.

BTW, Logitech is still doing a number of gadgets for iPhones, iPods & all the family; and considering that Apple has mentioned being interested in hi-res downloads, am I the only one suspecting that the Squeezebox things and technology could come up under the Apple name?

Max