Bridge, NAS and 24/192 files


#1

My digital setup is a PWD MkII with Bridge and a Synology 212j NAS with gigabit ethernet. When I play files up to 24/96 there are no problem and the sound is incredibile fine! When I play 24/176,4 or 24/196 files it takes a lot of time to start sounding and when starts the reproduction appears “broken”, if as the files are corrupted. In this case I stopped the reproduction, started it again and all semms go ok. It is strange, do you think? Could anyone help me?

Thank you very much and sorry for my “basic” english, I am italian…


#2

Your English is good and I love Italian food… :slight_smile:



My first thought was that you may have network issues causing problems with higher data rates. The fact that stopping and restarting reduces the problem may suggest somethign else. Several questions to try to narrow down the issue:



Have you assigned static IP addresses to your Bridge, NAS and controller, or are you using automatic (DHCP) addresses? Many of us have found that assigning static IP addresses reduces many problems. There are instructions on how to do so for your Bridge here http://www.psaudio.com/vanilla/discussion/4124/how-to-assign-a-static-ip-address-to-your-pwdbridge/p1



What file format are you using for your music? Flac, wav, alac??



What network equipment do you have and what is the data path from the NAS to the Bridge?



I am sure that more questions will come as we try to figure this out. I would start by assgning static IP addresses to your equipment if that is not already done.



J.P.


#3

@zoicoster - to confirm - you connect everything? No wifi transmission of audio data?


#4

zoicoster,



I run a Synology DS213, which is an upgrade from a 212j. I would definitely begin by setting static IP addresses and avoiding wifi. You didn’t mention what server software and file format(s) you are using, but it’s possible that you are running up against the limits of your NAS. The “j” series is Synology’s low-end line of products. It’s been a while since I upgraded my NAS, but as I recall the 212j would play 24/192 files OK. But then I experimented with having MinimServer convert FLAC files to WAV before sending them to the PDW, and the NAS did not have enough horsepower to do this without dropouts. If you are asking your server to upsample or convert formats, this could be the problem, or part of it.



Even with my upgraded Synology, large files can take 5-10 seconds to begin playing. Some servers are faster than others, so experiment (MinimServer, if you haven’t tried it, is free and definitely worth a look).



Let us know how you make out and if you have other questions.


#5

Thank you for yours prompt answer. I use Synology as a server (tne name is DS Audio) and the files are flac. In this moment I use automatic addresses (DHCP). I try to assigning static addresses.

I give you my feedback as soon as possible.


#6

I have assigned static address to the PWD, and now goes better, no perfect but really better! At the moment I am looking to assigne a static address to the NAS, but I have some problems…



thank you again



#7

Good to hear that it has improved. Let’s keep working on it to make it even better. :slight_smile:



J.P.


#8

In my experience, 176/24 and 192/24 files always seem to take a fair amount of time (around 12 seconds in my case) before starting to play, regardless of the server. (When playing gapless using foobar2000, subsequent tracks start right away, provided the sequential tracks are the same resolution, but if you go from another resolution to 192 or 176, there is the gap again.) I don’t really know but it may be that for high-res files the server software and hardware take longer to buffer the data before starting to send it to the Bridge.


#9

I confirm that 176/24 and 192/24 files take a lot of time before starting play. But in this moment I have assigned static address also to the NAS and the music flows incredible good. When the addresses were DHPC in some moments I had some troubles, like the files were broken.


#10

I still have no idea why it should work any different with static vs. dynamic IP assignment, but somehow it does and most who report here do indicate that static IP works much better. The mysteries of Ethernet and PS Audio… :-/



J.P.


#11
wingsounds13 said: any different with static vs. dynamic IP assignment,


I suspect that there is always some kind of lease renewing and pinging going on and the Static addresses make the renewals faster and more secure.