N-stream trouble

Its best to always have the compatibility mode OFF

Is there an issue ???  seems there is,  but OFF is the fix

A new nStream is due to release in Sept to work Muso per the rumour mill.  I hear its completely different in looks & function.  

Hi Mike

To be sure  here is the screenshot of my settings...

UPNP compatibility mode is OFF  = the problem can occurs

(actually on my picture)

(all the nstream features are available )

UPNP compatibility mode is ON = the problem is solved

(Nstream features are limited)

hmm ???? Not sure about this

Your set-up is the same as mine although your screen looks different

My volume control is different - mine is "Show Volume Control"   with a simple ON/OFF position button.

What App version is it - mine is 3.6.7479.  Might be worth a try to delete your copy & reinstall the latest version.

However starting from the top I have mine set as follows

Auto connection ON

Stay connected OFF

UPnP compatibility mode OFF 

Use HiFi language ON

Show volume control ON

I also clear the UPnP & Image Cache about once per month, or more frequently if it gets slow.  That might be worth trying as a fix if you don't do it regularly.

hmm??!

my version is also 3.6.7479 !!

auto connection is on an another page here

idem for stay connected

I do not understand what is "show volume control ON

Here the option is used to limit the volume in Nstream

to be continued...

Can you post a screenshot ? ( on/off + face buuton on an Iphone +online storage)

I don't understand what you mean by +online storage

Hi Mike

(online storage : nothing to do with naim just the image on this forum must be stored on a online service)

As I can see on your screenshot nstream seems to be different on an Ipad.

I've a friend who run nstream on an I pad, next time I'll go in his home I will look at this

For this moment yous can see on the following images all the nstream menu on my Iphone

As you can see the version is 3.6.7479

There are more settings compared to your image from your Ipad

All settings is on your image?

It's possibly related to the streamer (NDX in your case and Uniti here...)

On your image the UPNP compatibilty mode is OFF exactly as on my Nstream screenshot

We have the same setting on this point.

Can you confirm that  nstream bug occurs in this mode (OFF) or if UPNP compatibility is ON?

I really do not have a bug   It works with both ON & OFF but is much better/faster/easier with OFF

UPnP compatibility mode helps nStream work with some non-Naim UPnp servers,  but I don't seem to find any problems with my Synology DS214/Media Server 

All the settings are shown,  the remaining lines show App & Stream versions, BC SW number & Licences 

I think you will make better progress on this issue by looking at your friends nStream & iPad

----------

I see in another post thread you have .........

PS

no wifi switch here

uniti is hard connected

only nstream (on an Iphone) use the wifi network

This might be the problem, its relying on wifi to make the connection to the Uniti & Synology

Do you have a wifi dongle attached to the Synology ?? 

I do not understand why you have not used a switch, or what a direct connection will do or not do.

A simple unmanaged switch from Netgear or Cisco is about €30-40 

But my simple wired NDX-Switch-NAS  with wire cable branch from Switch-Router(Hub) works perfectly.  

Thank Mike

If I undertsand you do not lost the server...

Just curious what do you name by "Non-Naim UPNP servers"?

In your system where is the UPNP server (software) in the NAS (synology media server)? in a naim server (unitiserve) or in another location?

Streamer version 3.16? Maybe JLD updating to the latest firmware will sort out the problem?

Re non-Naim UPnP - I had in mind something like QNAP Twonky

My UPnP is with the Synology Media Server package

Question - what synology packages do you have activated ???

I have

Media Server - you must activate this

Audio Station

Download Station

Glacier Backup

Hi Mike

I only use Media server

I do not control my uniti over another control point than n'stream (just for volume control)

So i do not use Audio station

I do not use Download Station...

and Glacier Backup no thanks no

Jean-Luc

hafler3o

yes it can be usefull to update de firmware..

On the first version of the uniti the process is a little boring (RS232 connection...)

But i can do this...

Jean-Luc

I think you have a wifi issue,  not sure what in correct technical language,  but I think its too much undefined or unpackaged  traffic  

I would go all hard wired with a switch as I previously described - wired IMO is the only correct way & the data need to be managed in packets by the switch  

or 

Investigate another wifi option such as Airport Express

Also as a possible but worth to try it - per another post - shorten the Media Server SSDP advertisement interval - default is 920 seconds - you might experiment with 60 - but if that does nothing, revert back to 920

Hi,

The UPnP compatibility mode toggle is used thus:

With Compatibility Mode *ON* the n-Stream app communicates directly with the ND / Uniti product and all UPnP browsing is done via the streamer itself with the n-Stream app effectively acting as a remote control and display for the streamer.

With Compatibility Mode *OFF* the n-Stream app behaves as a UPnP control point and handles all the UPnP browsing to the UPnP server with the app then sending play commands to the streamer.

Setting compatibility mode to *ON* can be useful if the UPnP server doesn't handle the n-Stream app being the control point but the streamer being the renderer (typically resulting in you choose something to play and the streamer comes up with "Can't Play" but the same track can be played if you select it via the streamers remote and front panel display) however some routers / wireless access points / bridges / Ethernet Over Mains devices have been found to drop UPnP traffic after a while and in this case setting UPnP compatibility mode to *ON* can also resolve that.

I suspect that this may be what is happening here...

Phil

I am still confused with the benefit of a switch over a direct ethernet connection to the router.

In simple terms, is Uniti and NAS to the switch then switch to the router (all hard wired) better option than Uniti and NAS direct to the router w/o the switch on the way?

If former, does it mean that the physical data goes from NAS to switch then to back Uniti w/o going to the router?

I have seen similar comments before but have never seen a precise conclusion...

Thanks

Me neither - or at least not at expert enough level to hold a discussion - I just know what works perfectly OK for me. 

I know a switch manages data packets,  I'm not sure what goes on without a switch and/or if switchless means packet management is not organised. 

I tried NDS to Hub to NAS & that did not work well - & hub is supposed to be a combined router & switch,  but truth be told few are a true switch & they get overloaded with data bouncing around to & from each &,every devise on the net requiring each item to sort out what it needs.  Some are better than others I am led to believe. 

I installed a switch between NDX & NAS with a single branch to the Hub - totally fixed all problems including some I was not even aware of. 

Maybe others with the knowhow can enlighten us on direct ethernet connection vs via a switch  -  in words of one syllable if possible.      

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_switch :

"... A switch is a multi-port network bridge that processes and forwards data at the data link layer (layer 2) of the OSI model. Some switches have additional features, including the ability to route packets. These switches are commonly known as layer-3 or multilayer switches."

Not that it matters but I  believe the quoted statement " A switch is a multi-port network bridge" to be incorrect.

A bridge joins two layer 2 networks together on a one to one basis .

A switch allows the processing of frames from its different ports on a many to many basis.

Additionally these switch ports may well not be layer 2 linked  such as with VLANs

The special case however is that a two port switch in the same layer 2 network could be considered a bridge.

Switches have largely replaced switches in most applications so as to provide increased throughput efficiency. Bridges with Ethernet are now largely used to connect wifi to wired switch ports or with software bridging in computer stacks where networks and virtual networks are joined together.

The reason (IMO) some home router switch ports don't work as effectively as dedicated switches is that some of these home router devices use software/firmware  to switch the data and the implementation is not as rigorous seemingly as the hardware implementations often provided in dedicated consumer switches.

Simon

Well according to Cisco:

Logically, a switch acts just like a transparent bridge would, but it can handle frames much faster than a transparent bridge could (because of special hardware and architecture).

So I suppose the Wiki statement is correct.

http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/s...12006-chapter22.html

Yes but as I said  only in the special and extreme case of a two port switch with each port in the same layer 2 network, and also the bridge has to be a transparent bridge (keeps track of mac addresses) .  

http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/s...idging/10676-37.html

it is important to understand this differentiation, but perhaps only if you need to understand data networks... You know me I couldn't resist challenging an over simplified dumbed down explanation.

Take it up with Cisco!  A switch may have 4 or more ports but what is to stop someone just using two to setup a bridge?  They are saying that it can be used as a bridge which backs up the page on Wiki.  That's all I'm saying.

Then I agree with you! But extreme exaggerated cases don't help the layman with a general understanding which is where I came in, unless you know the specifics. Cisco have checked my understanding between the operational differences of bridges and switches in exams In the past.. so quite happy about that.

Simon

So still not a sign of a simple answer to my dilemma ... :

Does the data flow between the NAS and the Uniti via a switch bypassing (not even reaching) the router or not?  If it does, does this imply faster data transfer rates then if data has to pass through the router as well?

I answered a few posts back, if it's a home broadband router it's possible the switching is implemented in software or firmware, rather than dedicated hardware. It could be the software implementation doesn't work well in certain instances.

in other words

NAS -> Broadband router switchports  ->  Unitiserve

is more likely to have issues with certain data frame and packet types compared to

NAS -> switch --> Unitiserve 

so I recommend

Broadband router switch port -> switch -> Unitiserve 

                                                               --> NAS

                                                               --> (optional airport express)

Simon