Mesh Wi-Fi - AVR is the fly in the ointment

mickevh

There's no such thing: Wi-Fi transmit power is limited by law; most kit is, and always has been, at or very close to the permitted max. What differences there are, aren't worth worrying about, (certainly not worth parting with money for.) It's also "Big Wi-Fi Myth Number 3" that ISP's all supply "inferior" routers when it comes to radio transmit power - they don't, it's all much of a muchness.

Whilst a salesman in a (Hi-Fi) shop is no doubt as well meaning as many if those on the Internet that opine on such things with little or no understanding of radio, let alone Wi-Fi, if he actually had any expertise in the field of Wi-Fi, it's unlikely he'd be working in a shop. I suggest you regard such advise with extreme caution.

On electricians doing UTP - one of the "problems" with them so doing is that in order to actually prove (certify) the work is up to standards, as well as observing all the sort of things Chester mentions regarding installation stipulations such as bend radius etc. etc. it required that each cable lobe needs to be tested with some rather expensive (thousands of pounds) test equipment to certify each lobe actually is "cat" whatever, so you're average "mains electrical" sparkie (sorry lads, I'm not trying to be disparaging to you, I'm just trying to characterise those in your profession for your average lay person) just wouldn't want to bother with the expense for the "odd bit" of data cabling work they might score alongside all the "twin and earth." You can certainly find plenty of helpful sparks that will pull, and sometimes even terminate, the cable for you "untested," (and sometimes not) but "in the business" we usually rely on specialist data networking cabling companies that have all the relevant expertise and test gear. As you might imagine, it's reflected in the cost!

Chester

Just to extend on what Mick said there, the biggest problem, especially with CAT5(e), is that you can 'throw' it in and when it comes to passing say Fast Ethernet (100Mb), it works just fine.  Even gigabit, can work well in this situation over CAT5e.  I haven't certified any of my cabling at home because I don't have the kit.  But, what do you do if problems start to become visible.  A quick continuity test works fine, connect kit over patch leads, no issues there, and then put it back and it seems OK, so where's the problem?  I'm lucky that my kit was good enough to find a fault and fix it, but it might not have.

As Mick says, certification equipment and the knowledge and experience to install to specification comes at a cost.  What I've tried to convey over my posts is it really is worth it!  Or, if you can't find anyone that will perform a certified install, ask them if they have 'qualification' equipment at least.  

When we're talking AV at home, the last thing we want is to be chasing problems.  I know businesses may have critical applications to support, but we also have expectations at home to be able to relax and be entertained.  That's what we spend our hard-earned cash on right?  To have a good AV experience, however we've chosen to achieve this.  It's great when it works; but I for one absolutely detest coming home after a long day of being brain fried to systems that equally want to fry my brain in troubleshooting and remedial work.  No thanks!

Cabling guys are out there, and they're not hard to find.  When the time comes, throw up a thread on here, maybe someone can help.

Briefly on the Nighthawk thing, and counter to what Mick has said slightly (although I don't want to tread on your toes dude!), I have, at customer request, swapped out a WiFi router and got better results.  Now that might be because it's got better antennae.  It might be because I've taken the environment into account (not a site survey) and positioned it differently, or configured the router differently to the one it replaced.  Honestly there are so many things to factor in, but yes, it could be the router was just 'better'.  By all industry standards and measurements, the service and coverage ought to be roughly the same because of the unlicensed and transmission strength capped radio spectrum.  As Mick says, all the manufacturers must adhere to this; like speed limits on a road, that's what they aim for.  Now, how they go about this is a totally different thing.  Some WiFi routers support some really high-end features these days that BT have not implemented in their routers.  Is it worth the change?  Up to you.  You see, we'd both recommend external WiFi Access Points in situations where an all-in-one WiFi router cannot be sited at the centre of required coverage (taking into account barriers and interference), and definitely where extended coverage is required, like most of the time!  Of course they have to be cabled too, and you said that the mess and disruption is out of the question.

Given an open plan environment in a 'green' site (no neighbours providing interference, and no locally interfering radio products), WiFi is easy to implement and that's what executives latch on to.  Back in the real world, whilst technically not complex to set up, it can be horrendously complicated to get the correct coverage and performance.

Good luck in the Spring, and glad that the thread has been useful for you so far.

RayP

@mickevh and @Chester , thank you both for your knowledge and advice. I certainly won’t bother swapping my Home Hub 5 for another router.

What I will try is tweaking my existing setup for the 3 components connected via homeplug - Sky Q, Oppo UHD player and Yamaha AVR.

Currently they are all plugged into a powered Netgear Ethernet hub and that is connected into a single homeplug. Previously I had them plugged into separate homeplugs but had problems with the Oppo UHD player losing its IP address. I was told there can be problems with multiple homeplug close to each other.

Since routing them into the Netgear that problem has gone away. But I was genuinely shocked at how poor the download speed was when I tested on Saturday.

With only one Ethernet cable connected I tested the download speed and it did improve to around 18Mbps but still far less than my TV plugged into a homeplug on the other side of the chimney breast which gave me up to 30Mbps. Having multiple devices connected into a homeplug seems to reduce efficiency.

For now I’m going to have to live with it. Providing I download UHD films overnight it’s something I can live with.

Thank you both once again. Happy 2018 to you both.

RayP

I’m pleased to report a significant improvement in my Wi-fi reception in the lounge. I had a good look at my router cabling and found I could move it a couple of feet further into the room. Doing this has opened a clear route to the kit in my lounge.

I’ve switched my Loewe TV to wireless mode and reception is 80%. Watching YouTube 4K videos the connection speed is as high as 40Kbps with a buffer health of 20 secs and zero dropped frames.

Watching videos stored on my NAS box via the Oppo 203 is clean with no pauses. Viewing JPGs 3840*2160 is good with no obvious delays.

The Sky Q signal is 4/5 and downloads are much quicker.

I shall keep the Yamaha AVR connected via Ethernet But Sky, Oppo and my TV are now using their Wi-fi option and I’m delighted how moving the router just a couple of feet has transformed the Wi-fi signal.

Chester

Glad the nudge got you to check this out.  The impact of positioning seems to have been quite extreme in your circumstances, but it perfectly illustrates just how important it is.

RayP

I suppose once the signal doesn't need to travel through the width of a chimney breast (5ft) it will make a huge difference. Probably the equivalent of 2-3 walls.

fraggle

Just scan read this thread but I can't see why the Yamaha AVR needs to be connected to the network?

You say it doesn't need any firmware updates, and you use no streaming services from it.

So don't bother connecting it to the network?

Regarding WiFi routers, there are various protocols, 802.11 (b, g, n, ac, etc, see IEEE 802.11 - Wikipedia ), the main difference being the speed they are (theoretically) capable of. Of course the client must support the same protocol to be able to use it.

They get this speed via using wider bandwidths (i.e. rather than having 32 channels available, a higher speed protocol will use twice the bandwidth reducing the number of channels to 16), and multiple channels - (you'll see mentions of 2x2 or 3x3 support and similar), also features like beam forming where rather than just transmit the legally max power all around, they still transmit the max power but form it into a beam that's directed at your client device(s). Same power in a directional beam = more distance (think torch vs bedside light with the same bulb light power, one can see further). Of course if you have 20 devices, it's having to manage 20 "beams" at once, so the advantage reduces.

I have definitely found it's a cr*p shoot though, the bleeding edge manufacturers often implement the latest protocols, BUT they can have lots of compatibility problems, causing your devices to drop back to lower speeds.

Buying an established, but not bleeding edge manufacturer can pay big dividends.

(just replaced my house WiFi router and speeds increased from a lowly 20Mbps to 170Mbps on one device, and from 5Mbps to 40Mbps on another laptop (only supports 802.11n, not 802.11ac, and only has 2x2 channels). The phone got 170Mbps on both.)

RayP

@fraggle , how strange you would reply to such an old topic. For your info I want the Yamaha to be on my network so I can control it via a smartphone app.

I changed my HH5 for a Netgear Archer R2800 which provides a far more robust 5Ghz signal than the HH5 did.

psychopomp1

I presume you meant TP Link Archer VR2800? If so, its a great choice

RayP

I did. Went out walking yesterday so was knackered when I posted that. Although expensive it is significantly better than the admittedly free BT one.