Switch or No Switch?

I can't find the exact details, but it appears the device has two switched ports on it which could be configured using spanning tree for failover, combined for aggregation, or left alone as two switch ports. Thetefore assuming this is right, then you can use the NAS device as a two port switch.

however I think your dealer was getting confused.. at a network level there will be no advantage to using a stand alone switch.. a switch by its definition only deals with the specific data required on a port, unless the data is broadcast and then the switch has to flood every device (or with multicast groups of devices) on the network.

A healthy network (single subnet) with many devices on it will have a lot of broadcast data (some of this is to allow your network devices to regularly rediscover where and how to reach the other devices on the LAN).. This NAS should not prevent this.. and indeed if it did your LAN would stop working.

Simon

Your streamer still needs an internet connection. Will the 'switch' capabilities of your NAS really provide this by allowing the second port to connect direct to your router? Even if it will, you have then run out of ports for connecting any other devices, such as the PC you're going to need for ripping/editing files etc. Therefore you're going to need a separate switch. (Unless spare ports on your router can provide this?)

or switch ports on your (quality)  internet router - even simpler.

Multiple switch ports on that NAS device appear specifically for aggregation which helps when you are wanting to shift a lot of data around at once, and spanning tree for resilience - but unless you know about these two features keep well clear - they can still be appropriate for small simple consumer networks but only for specific applications and  you need a bit of know how to reliably set up. 

If Mike says the manufacturer doesn't support the two ports acting as a switch plane I'd be inclined to treat the device with caution anyway - and just use one of the ports and leave it that...

S

Mike-B posted:

The question was raised on the Synology forum - Can one use a Synology NAS such as the DS214+ as network switch?  -  The simple answer is Synology doesn't yet offer official support for it

 

Dual port NAS units are designed for more complex & multiple network applications,   its not required with simple home office, audio, & AV.

The bottom line is you need a switch - K.I.S.

 

Thanks for checking the Synology forum re: this question as well as all of you who responded to my question. Switch it is, no more switch questions (for awhile .

Have a great holiday!

Actually its a mid range NAS great for home use. No harm what so ever in having a speedy gigabit connection and quick access, so much better for copying files and the difference between a few hours to back up to or 24 hours.

The speeds it suggest on the website are bull anyhow, in pretty much any environment 225MB/s read speed are very very unlikely, I think you can half that comfortably. But thats still great for a gigabit environment.

Any yes, I would plug it into a switch, which itself is plugged into a router. Simple and effective. I used to have a QNAP nas with twin ethernet and could never get both ports working together at all without destroying the network.

a bit off topic (and definitely towards a controversial one)  but some issues I recently faced made me pause and think about it: many people use "after market" Ethernet cables (AQ Cinammon being a popular choice) which allegedly offer SQ advantages (based on shielding and noise protection - no advantage in terms of data being transmitted accurately per se "bits being bits"- arguments). Wouldn't in such a set up ( NAS --(AQ) cable--> switch --(AQ) cable--> streamer) the switch become the 'weakest link' -especially as it is the one connected to a SMPS-? wouldn't the alleged advantages of the after market ethernet cable be squandered unless the switch is of "on par quality"? 

DrPo, you are on the right track as far as I am concerned, and also optimising the network 'chatter' on the network can equally have a SQ through affecting the processing and therefore noise the streamer undertakes. Additionally ensuring the transfer from the media player is optimum under the covers, and the edge switch to the audio device Is a quality device with respect to electrical noise helps with SQ. I am afraid some of these options require a bit of know on how to optimise and or analyse...

in the mean time anyone can buy cables, they look pretty, especially the expensive ones, and many cables can be very effective at tuning or impeding RFI.

Now when you combine these, you really are starting to get the best from your streamer in my opinion of course...

i think those that are starting to play with the Melco device are starting to hear these types of benefits, but like with cables these benefits and advancements don't require much if any money if you know what you are doing..but if you don't these devices can be a good idea.

Simon

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

i think those that are starting to play with the Melco device are starting to hear these types of benefits, but like with cables these benefits and advancements don't require much if any money if you know what you are doing..but if you don't these devices can be a good idea.

Simon

 

Thanks Simon, I read about the Melco sometime ago but could not (at that time) figure out why on earth would someone like to add one more component in the chain, perhaps I should re-read as admittedly I am not sure  "I know what I am doing" :-) 

Mike-B posted:

...

They say boutique ethernet does not perform any better than their preferred Cat-6

Expensive switches do not perform better than the usual consumer priced unmanaged types popular around this forum. They have NetGear switches as the preferred make & they list them in order of preference.

They do note the variable levels of noise in PSU's but also note variable levels of SQ across the same make & model of switches.   But with the SMPS noise its noted but does not seem to be that much of a show stopper.

With my own system I have done some swapping of SMPS units – but my system is a little different from the norm in that the SMPS power strip & the DC wire(s) are heavily loaded with ferrite, plus the SMPS power strip is powered from the UPS & its isolation transformer. I have tried two “medical grade” & borrowed an “audiophile” unit that is supposed to be ultra low noise & I really cannot hear any difference.

I have also swapped switches; an old FS105 & its 7v SMPS was clearly not very good, SQ had a subdued haze about it, then a small Cisco with its own wall wart (not sure model but 100 or 200) & that was no different from my GS105.

Anyhow, I will be watching this thread with interest.

 

very interesting Mike, many thanks, looks like a rather open ended field... i wouldn't be surprised to see an "audiophile switch" sprouting out soon 

DrPo posted: 

very interesting Mike, many thanks, looks like a rather open ended field... i wouldn't be surprised to see an "audiophile switch" sprouting out soon 

 I recall one "audiophile" switch mentioned on this forum, can't remember make or search/find it,,  but if I remember right it was £250 for an unmanaged 5 port unit. 

I don't believe we will see many (if any) switches under this heading,  there's not much difference in the switching chip, especially the unmanaged types & different switch makers all use the same/similar bought in units.   Maybe their is scope for optimising the application but I don't imagine too many rushing out to grab this very small niche market;  I would guess (unlike cables) there is a bit too much investment in design & hardware involved for such a small market - its only us audio freaks.  Then add to that,  outside audio & to a lesser extent AV, the rest of the world think ethernet cable does not have a sound signature, then add the slap on the wrist that Chord Cables got over misleading advertising,  maybe the audio market is far too small & risky for the switch manufacturers.

I can see an application like the Melco encompassing a combined switch,  maybe a wireless router hub aimed at the audio & AV markets.   We have various linear & "ultra" low SMPS aimed at the audiophile,  hinting at the old SMPS noise reputation & maybe thats about as far as will go.

Mike, EMI measurement is a very established and formalised discipline, and indeed there is much product regulation defined by the subject.

here is a link which could be a good intro http://www.thomasnet.com/artic...ective-emi-shielding

If you look on a well known online auction site there are some consumer EMI meter devices that are relatively affordable which can be used to indicate a cable or device with troublesome EMI... Many Laptops and MacBook Pro's are quite shocking....

My self, I wind a little receiving coil and attach to a digital oscilloscope and this can show quite nicely the relative hash or noise from different devices, Ethernet leads, SMPS dc leads and even the ADSL phone line. The tool can't really differentiate freuqncy elements, I would need a spectrum analyzer for that, but is quite effective at showing relative hash/noise levels.

As far as audible effects, which typically are intermoduclation artefacts in audio and digital clock circuitry, the best tool to measure is a sensitive Spectrum Analyzer... but if I had the money for one of those I'd probably buy a new 552 instead. So in the absence of that I just use my ears....

Simon

Yes, the Melco seems to address this niche point with its two Ethernet ports, I realized there are some similar threads on this forum earlier this year.

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Mike, EMI measurement is a very established and formalised discipline, and indeed there is much regulation on the subject.

Mike, got you, try looking up the Trifield EMF meter.. aimed more for the consumer/enthusiast/curious so it appears..

DrPo, indeed, however from what I can see the Melco won't stop network broadcast chatter, unless you have it running in stanalone mode, but they make a big issue about its noise reduction.. perhaps allowing the consumer to use lower quality network equipment...

Simon