Apple Airport Express for wifi extende?

I have an Airport Extreme attached to my ISP router, and two Airport Express to give WiFi coverage through the house. One of these is attached to my streamer, and it works fine for iRadio, Tidal etc. Originally, I had my Unitiserve attached to the Extreme, so I was streaming UPnP over WiFi. I could just about stream 24/192 files over WiFi, but moving the Unitiserve close to the streamer and wiring them via a switch gives better sound quality and stability. 

So for web streaming, WiFi works fine for me. For UPnP, I'd recommend avoiding WiFi if at all possible.

I had mixed results with an AE (previous version) in a comparable setup. Most of the time it worked well, even with 24/192. But often (once a week) the streamer was unresponsive and then I had to reboot the AE.

I then switched to a WiFi repeater from AVM, as my router is from AVM too, and the stability has much improved.

I have my ISP modem connected to an Airport Extreme. A Power-line connects ethernet to a switch where my system is, like you, I cannot run ethernet to my system.
My system is connected to the switch, as is my NAS.
In addition, I have an Airport Express connected to the switch to give me wifi in the same area of my home.

It all works flawlessly (so far).

I read on the forum, might have been Phil Harris, that extending wifi networks might cause issues. At the time I had a Homehub 5 doing wireless (lounge) and then connecting from that to an Airport Extreme also doing wireless (lower hallway) with an Express working to extend the network (upstairs hallway). Our house is an Edwardian thing with a 40ft corridor upstairs with rooms off. 

Since reading the piece that was written, I ditched the HH5 wireless network and only use the extremes with the express joining the network so I can have internet radio on my system. I did move the extreme to be more central in the house and it all works a treat.

In doing this the wifi is more stable in the house and devices are quicker, plus I'm burning less electricity. I think the message was keep things simple and that seems to work.

Qute 2 is connected to AE via wireless to wired(Ethernet) bridge and is working great so far. Now I need to decide what speakers I want to replace the XEO 3. 

Ive got an Airport time capsule thing which extends the network to my Uniti and it works fine (ish). Upnp works a treat except for some 24/192. It streams, but it sometimes cuts out. I dowloaded Jamie XX In Colour recently from Technics tracks at 24/44 and it sounds sublime and streams effortlessly. Coldplay Head Full Of Dreams at 24/192 streams perfectly but Antonio Forcione at 24/192 stutters and eventually gives up. 

Best solution is hard wiring am Airport Express to the ethernet input of UQ2. UPNP works up to 96khz, with 192khz I have drop outs with some songs (Forcione, Beethoven).

Why Naim is not able to implement a decent WIFI in their devices? For the given price segment we are in we should be able to plug and play without additional hardware. We will not buy any Naim gear anymore without a usable WIFI connection implemented.

Nooner

Do you most people would prefer more stable WiFi with a reduction in sound quality, or the best sound quality achievable but with a weaker WiFi signal as at present?

Huge

Most people will prefer a more stable WIFI. Imagine sitting with friends enjoying a good glass of Bordeaux listening to some 24/192 files with drop outs. I believe 16/44 without drop outs is much more fun not only with wine also with dinner. And even more in serious listening.

The technology is there otherwise we would not have work arounds with Airport Express.

Best achievable sound quality with a reliable WIFI is not rocket science. It just has to be done.

ATB Nooner

The designer of a Naim streamer has to pay very careful attention to ensure that the radio signal from the WiFi doesn't get into the digital or analogue audio circuitry.  The designer of the airport express doesn't have to bother about that.

So not the same.  If you increase the strength of the WiFi signal in the streamer, the audio quality goes down.

The answer?

1   Use a wired connection.
2   Use an external adapter (e.g. an Airport Express, and don't put it too close to the audio system!) and maybe put ferrites on the cable.

No it's not rocket science, but making a streamer have as good a WiFi signal as a dedicated adapter without degrading the audio quality is hard...  very hard, and expensive to do.

Personally I'm pleased that Naim concentrate on sound quality rather than the WiFi connection.

Huge

when you buy a product to function in a certain way and it does not, would you buy another product from this manufacturer?

For example you buy a Muso for your first Naim gear, the WIFI is not working properly, would you buy a Superuniti after this experience? May be not.

Of course wiring is the best option still and not always possible.

Specially the new entry products like the Muso and Muso QB are  key to Naims future in my opinion and should be plug and play, otherwise the competition will overcome.

Soundquality is without any doubt priority, right after costumer retention.

Best streaming is done via a wired connection.

Carying so much data (to stream 192 kHz / 24 bit) via WiFi is not really that healthy either.  TO design a streamer or any device capable of accepting so much data, quickly over the 'air' would mean they would need to have a satelite dish for an antena.

ChrisSU posted:

I have an Airport Extreme attached to my ISP router, and two Airport Express to give WiFi coverage through the house. One of these is attached to my streamer, and it works fine for iRadio, Tidal etc. Originally, I had my Unitiserve attached to the Extreme, so I was streaming UPnP over WiFi. I could just about stream 24/192 files over WiFi, but moving the Unitiserve close to the streamer and wiring them via a switch gives better sound quality and stability. 

So for web streaming, WiFi works fine for me. For UPnP, I'd recommend avoiding WiFi if at all possible.

Same here, more or less. I had my UQ2 and my QNAP NAS on a switch, which in turn was attached to an AE unit that was extended via wifi from my BT router. It generally worked ok, but often the AE needed rebooting. There'd be varying degrees of issues - e.g., sometimes Spotify (via its app) would work fine and stream to the UQ2, but the Naim app wouldn't find the UQ2 etc. 

I've since removed the AE unit, and have run flat cat5 under my carpets from my router to the switch. As you'd expect, no issues since. 

Nooner posted:

when you buy a product to function in a certain way and it does not, would you buy another product from this manufacturer?

For example you buy a Muso for your first Naim gear, the WIFI is not working properly, would you buy a Superuniti after this experience? May be not.

Of course wiring is the best option still and not always possible.

Specially the new entry products like the Muso and Muso QB are  key to Naims future in my opinion and should be plug and play, otherwise the competition will overcome.

Soundquality is without any doubt priority, right after costumer retention.

+1 to the above.

Adam Zielinski posted:

Best streaming is done via a wired connection.

Carying so much data (to stream 192 kHz / 24 bit) via WiFi is not really that healthy either.  TO design a streamer or any device capable of accepting so much data, quickly over the 'air' would mean they would need to have a satelite dish for an antena.

192kHz / 24bit shouldn't be much problem for modern wireless - it equates to around 4Mbps.  n wireless supports upto 600Mbps (iirc).  This is a significant step above the 54Mbps of b/g wireless supported by the Mu-so and in addition n supports much greater distances especially in 5GHz format. If you think 192/24 is a lot of data, how do you think video is ever going to be possible over WiFi and people are doing that to their TV regularly.

Naim really should make an effort with the Muso to get good compatibility with wireless as (commented above) when people see the alternative is Sonos and how easy that is to setup they will only go with Naim if the setup is as easy.  The people buying Muso (in the main) are not HiFi and computer geeks.  They do not have the backup of dealers and forums.  If it doesn't work out of the box... it will go back!

Eloise posted:

Naim really should make an effort with the Muso to get good compatibility with wireless as (commented above) when people see the alternative is Sonos and how easy that is to setup they will only go with Naim if the setup is as easy.  The people buying Muso (in the main) are not HiFi and computer geeks.  They do not have the backup of dealers and forums.  If it doesn't work out of the box... it will go back!

Yep - that's the nub of it. I can understand the arguments for wired. It is the most reliable in our increasingly crowded Wi-Fi environments. I'd agree though for most people in the market for this type of product is they just want to plonk it down, plug it in to the mains and it just works. 

Eloise posted:

 

Adam Zielinski posted:

Best streaming is done via a wired connection.

Carying so much data (to stream 192 kHz / 24 bit) via WiFi is not really that healthy either. TO design a streamer or any device capable of accepting so much data, quickly over the 'air' would mean they would need to have a satelite dish for an antena.

192kHz / 24bit shouldn't be much problem for modern wireless - it equates to around 4Mbps.  n wireless supports upto 600Mbps (iirc).  This is a significant step above the 54Mbps of b/g wireless supported by the Mu-so and in addition n supports much greater distances especially in 5GHz format. If you think 192/24 is a lot of data, how do you think video is ever going to be possible over WiFi and people are doing that to their TV regularly.

Mu-so manual says "all formats only up to 48kHz over wireless", so for MU-so it would seem wifi is a non-starter for any higher res files, which could limit its appeal for people with higher res collections not having wired network to where they would want it.

Eloise posted:

192kHz / 24bit shouldn't be much problem for modern wireless - it equates to around 4Mbps.  n wireless supports upto 600Mbps (iirc).  This is a significant step above the 54Mbps of b/g wireless supported by the Mu-so and in addition n supports much greater distances especially in 5GHz format. If you think 192/24 is a lot of data, how do you think video is ever going to be possible over WiFi and people are doing that to their TV regularly.

The actual bit rate will depend on compression, with uncompressed 192/24 being 9.2 Mbps, and given that the 54 rate of b/g wireless is a maximum under perfect transmission it is easy to see how it could be challenging. And in fact standard HD streaming online is less demanding than 192/24 audio, apparently being 2.4 Mbps, only 'ultra HD' 4K being higher, when they become available.

Guys, we need to be careful to separate wifi payload data from wifi bandwidth. At an example I have been looking at Wifi protocols not utilising frame aggregation (802.11b/g) may only a have an effective throughput of around 12% of the physical throughput speed due to overheads and how the wifi protocols work in a shared environment.

Therefore a 9.2Mbps payload on 802.11b or g may require effectively almost 100Mbps of wifi physical bandwidth to operate.

802.11n and ac introduced frame aggregation and so the 12% example above would increase to approx. 49% or about 18 Mbps of wifi bandwidth

Simon

Hope this is not too late for you.

I had exactly the same issue as you with large files not playing, break ups etc.  While I accept that wired is the best answer for some of us it is not practical for various reasons.  Taking the excellent advice one always receives here, I went for an Apple Express and it did the trick (but wait on).  I set it up on the 5 GHz band as a bridge and everything was fine.....until last week when it packed up.  I trogged back to PC World - who were good - but as they didn't have one in stock I took the money to but another one elsewhere.  As it happens Maplin is  next door.  Went in and after some advice bought a TP Link  RE200, which cost £35 as compared with £80 (No wonder why Apple is so rich!).  I works perfectly, was easy to set up and unlike many of these things offers both 2.4 and 5Ghz bands so gets no interference from the oven, door bell or whatever.  As I type one of my two 24/192 files is playing through my Qute2 beautifully

So I'd recommend you try it.  Maplin take back things which are  unsuitable so you've nothing to lose.

HTH

As per JSH's experience - I also have the TP link RE200 as a booster for my ISP supplied Netgear router.  Worked straight away & facilitates very reliable wireless streaming from PC to the SU.  Also boosted the wifi signal hugely through the rest of the house including upstairs.

PS Forgot to say.  The RE 200 has only one Ethernet connection which I have wired straight into the Qute, and plugs straight into the wall like the first generation Apple Express.  Except that it runs both 2.4 and 5Ghz which I don't think they do.

Wired sounds much better to me than wireless.  Fuller sound

Hmm.. Haven't tried the Ethernet wired connection from the   RE200 to the SU.  I just assumed that as I have a significant (10m or so from the kitchen and along the hall) wireless "leg" from the router to the RE200 that it wouldn't make any difference to SQ.  Must give it a go ....

To the original question, I use WiFi only to control the streamer via iDevice. I do extend the WiFi combining two AEs (one as WiFi router the 2nd as repeater) but stream "locally" having a switch connected to the second AE (the "repeater"). Problems so far: 3-4 times in two years there was a hiccup which I corrected via the AIrPort Utility app also running on my IDevice. very happy overall. 

Have you thought about a PowerLine connection? You plug one end into a mains socket near your router and link them with a standard RJ 45 Cable.  The receiver end is plugged in near where you want your UQ and connected together by another RJ 45 Cable.

I use this very successfully and get much better performance over the mains thank using wifi

Depending on whether you also want WiFi, you can get these off Amozon for £20-30 (wifi adds a tenner on)

DRPO

I understand from the advice I received here a few months ago that you should not set an AE as a Repeater but as a bridge as a repeater halves internet speed by, er, repeating everything.  Logic d suggest that if you happen to have heavy traffic some times being repeated then you may get drop outs.  So I suggest you try this