I still use the 6th generation Apple Airport Extreme as my router and
wireless generator connected to my VM Hub5 in modem mode. I have the
350 Mbps package and sat near the Hub on my MBAir I always get that full
download speed on the 5GHz frequency - and the full upload at ~35 Mbps.
When testing on the 2.4 band I get the expected ~80/35 Mbps.

Obviously this falls away as you move away from the Extreme. Upstairs I
have an Airport Express to help spread the signal. This is connected in
bridge mode over wifi (tricky to run ethernet cable up there) and I am
getting ~ 40down/30up Mbps when testing up there.

I am wondering... because the Express's only have 10/100 ethernet ports
is that factor attenuating the speeds to below 100? This is with a
thought of replacing that Express with a second Extreme from eBay (with
its GB ports) but connected in the same way on wifi in bridge mode.

Do you think that would push up the connection speeds further - or does
it really need to be on a cable to improve this?

If it wont help significantly I may need to "retire" the equipment and
get a more modern "Mesh" system to boost coverage upstairs where some 4K
streaming may start taking place soon.

Thanks for any input - JohnB

On 7 Jan 2024, jbrennand wrote
(in article <une79b$130eo$1@dont-email.me>):

> If it wont help significantly I may need to "retire" the equipment and
> get a more modern "Mesh" system to boost coverage upstairs where some 4K
> streaming may start taking place soon.

Main comment is to warn you that "Mesh" is a generic term, and different
router manufacturers use different Mesh technology. You need to make sure the
extender and the router are compatible, which probably means they have to be
the same make.

Some manufacturers stretch the truth a little, and say things like "Mesh
technology – this will extend the range of any make of router" This
probably means: "It will set up a Mesh if you use it with one of *our*
routers, but it will extend any manufacturer's router but not setting up a
Mesh."

I fell foul of this, and had to send a lot of kit back.

MST

On 07/01/2024 15:00, Martin S Taylor wrote:
> On 7 Jan 2024, jbrennand wrote
> (in article <une79b$130eo$1@dont-email.me>):
>
>> If it wont help significantly I may need to "retire" the equipment and
>> get a more modern "Mesh" system to boost coverage upstairs where some 4K
>> streaming may start taking place soon.
>
> Main comment is to warn you that "Mesh" is a generic term, and different
> router manufacturers use different Mesh technology. You need to make sure the
> extender and the router are compatible, which probably means they have to be
> the same make.
>
> Some manufacturers stretch the truth a little, and say things like "Mesh
> technology – this will extend the range of any make of router" This
> probably means: "It will set up a Mesh if you use it with one of *our*
> routers, but it will extend any manufacturer's router but not setting up a
> Mesh."
>
> I fell foul of this, and had to send a lot of kit back.
>
> MST
>
Thanks Martin.

Yeah I know all about what a "real" Mesh is and how it differs from the
advertising versions of what they call "Mesh systems". I am being lazy
in saying Mesh when what I really mean is a better way of extending the
routers wifi capability without using ethernet connections.

If I have to use ethernet - it will be via a couple of Ubiquity WAP's.

All I really want to know is... is it worth trying an Extreme rather
than an Express?

Cheers John

jbrennand wrote:
> I still use the 6th generation Apple Airport Extreme as my router and
> wireless generator connected to my VM Hub5 in modem mode.   I have the
> 350 Mbps package and sat near the Hub on my MBAir I always get that full
> download speed on the 5GHz frequency - and the full upload at ~35 Mbps.
> When testing on the 2.4 band I get the expected ~80/35 Mbps.
>
> Obviously this falls away as you move away from the Extreme.  Upstairs I
> have an Airport Express to help spread the signal.  This is connected in
> bridge mode over wifi (tricky to run ethernet cable up there) and I am
> getting ~ 40down/30up Mbps when testing up there.
>
> I am wondering... because the Express's only have 10/100 ethernet ports
> is that factor attenuating the speeds to below 100?  This is with a
> thought of replacing that Express with a second Extreme from eBay (with
> its GB ports) but connected in the same way on wifi in bridge mode.
>
> Do you think that would push up the connection speeds further - or does
> it really need to be on a cable to improve this?
>
> If it wont help significantly I may need to "retire" the equipment and
> get a more modern "Mesh" system to boost coverage upstairs where some 4K
> streaming may start taking place soon.
>
> Thanks for any input - JohnB

Probably the limitation is that the same wireless channel is used
between the access points (the backhaul) as from an access point to a
client device. You get better performance if the backhaul is an
Ethernet cable, or a separate - dedicated - wireless channel.

Some mesh products offer this - read the specs very carefully!

--
Graham J

On 07/01/2024 16:09, jbrennand wrote:
> Thanks Martin.
>
> Yeah I know all about what a "real" Mesh is and how it differs from the
> advertising versions of what they call "Mesh systems".  I am being lazy
> in saying Mesh when what I really mean is a better way of extending the
> routers wifi capability without using ethernet connections.
>
> If I have to use ethernet - it will be via a couple of Ubiquity WAP's.
>
> All I really want to know is... is it worth trying an Extreme rather
> than an Express?

No, I doubt it will make any difference.

It's because they pre-date "proper" mesh WiFi and thus the signal
between the Air and the Express is being carried on the same WiFi radio
frequencies as the signal between the Express and the Extreme.
Consequently you end up interfering with yourself (ooh matron!).

Mesh's use separate frequencies for clients and mesh nodes so it all
works more smoothly.

--
Bruce Horrocks
Surrey, England

On 7 Jan 2024 at 16:09:01 GMT, "jbrennand" <brennand@ntlworld.com>
wrote:

> If I have to use ethernet - it will be via a couple of Ubiquity WAP's.

Note the modern UAPs can do wireless backhaul if they're not wired, too.
Though I've not tried it.

The Express won't directly be being limited by its ethernet socket since
you're not using it - but it'll doubtless have played into the design
criteria, no point supporting speeds higher than 100mbps ethernet after
all. And they are awfully old now. Sigh.

Cheers - Jaimie
--
"The polar opposite of cinnamon is frogs."
-- Mandy, in "Mandy the Merciless"

On 8 Jan 2024 at 2:28:14 pm GMT, "Jaimie Vandenbergh"
<jaimie@usually.sessile.org> wrote:

> On 7 Jan 2024 at 16:09:01 GMT, "jbrennand" <brennand@ntlworld.com>
> wrote:
>
>> If I have to use ethernet - it will be via a couple of Ubiquity WAP's.
>
> Note the modern UAPs can do wireless backhaul if they're not wired, too.
> Though I've not tried it.
>
> The Express won't directly be being limited by its ethernet socket since
> you're not using it - but it'll doubtless have played into the design
> criteria, no point supporting speeds higher than 100mbps ethernet after
> all. And they are awfully old now. Sigh.

Slight thread hijack: what are people using now to stream to older audio
equipment? We have an Express connected to the living room hifi, which is fine
right now, but the probability of its demise must be creeping towards 1.

--
TimH
pull tooth to reply by email

On 07/01/2024 13:00, jbrennand wrote:
> I still use the 6th generation Apple Airport Extreme as my router and
> wireless generator connected to my VM Hub5 in modem mode.   I have the
> 350 Mbps package and sat near the Hub on my MBAir I always get that full
> download speed on the 5GHz frequency - and the full upload at ~35 Mbps.
> When testing on the 2.4 band I get the expected ~80/35 Mbps.
>
> Obviously this falls away as you move away from the Extreme.  Upstairs I
> have an Airport Express to help spread the signal.  This is connected in
> bridge mode over wifi (tricky to run ethernet cable up there) and I am
> getting ~ 40down/30up Mbps when testing up there.
>
> I am wondering... because the Express's only have 10/100 ethernet ports
> is that factor attenuating the speeds to below 100?  This is with a
> thought of replacing that Express with a second Extreme from eBay (with
> its GB ports) but connected in the same way on wifi in bridge mode.
>
> Do you think that would push up the connection speeds further - or does
> it really need to be on a cable to improve this?
>
> If it wont help significantly I may need to "retire" the equipment and
> get a more modern "Mesh" system to boost coverage upstairs where some 4K
> streaming may start taking place soon.
>
> Thanks for any input - JohnB

What speed to you get by the Express if you switch the Express off -
i.e. what's the maximum that the Express can fan out?

On 08/01/2024 15:03, David Sankey wrote:
> On 07/01/2024 13:00, jbrennand wrote:
>> I still use the 6th generation Apple Airport Extreme as my router and
>> wireless generator connected to my VM Hub5 in modem mode.   I have the
>> 350 Mbps package and sat near the Hub on my MBAir I always get that
>> full download speed on the 5GHz frequency - and the full upload at ~35
>> Mbps. When testing on the 2.4 band I get the expected ~80/35 Mbps.
>>
>> Obviously this falls away as you move away from the Extreme.  Upstairs
>> I have an Airport Express to help spread the signal.  This is
>> connected in bridge mode over wifi (tricky to run ethernet cable up
>> there) and I am getting ~ 40down/30up Mbps when testing up there.
>>
>> I am wondering... because the Express's only have 10/100 ethernet
>> ports is that factor attenuating the speeds to below 100?  This is
>> with a thought of replacing that Express with a second Extreme from
>> eBay (with its GB ports) but connected in the same way on wifi in
>> bridge mode.
>>
>> Do you think that would push up the connection speeds further - or
>> does it really need to be on a cable to improve this?
>>
>> If it wont help significantly I may need to "retire" the equipment and
>> get a more modern "Mesh" system to boost coverage upstairs where some
>> 4K streaming may start taking place soon.
>>
>> Thanks for any input - JohnB
>
> What speed to you get by the Express if you switch the Express off -
> i.e. what's the maximum that the Express can fan out?

Good point... if I switch that Express off... it doesnt actually change
that much !

TimH <thnews@poboxmolar.com.invalid> wrote:

[...]

> Slight thread hijack: what are people using now to stream to older audio
> equipment? We have an Express connected to the living room hifi, which is
> fine right now, but the probability of its demise must be creeping towards
> 1.

I use one of these for USB <-> Audio; IMO it does a pretty good job:

Behringer U-PHONE UFO202
<https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B002GHBYZ0/>

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator

My pet rock Gordon just is.

On 08/01/2024 14:43, TimH wrote:
> On 8 Jan 2024 at 2:28:14 pm GMT, "Jaimie Vandenbergh"
> <jaimie@usually.sessile.org> wrote:
>
>> On 7 Jan 2024 at 16:09:01 GMT, "jbrennand" <brennand@ntlworld.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> If I have to use ethernet - it will be via a couple of Ubiquity WAP's.
>>
>> Note the modern UAPs can do wireless backhaul if they're not wired, too.
>> Though I've not tried it.
>>
>> The Express won't directly be being limited by its ethernet socket since
>> you're not using it - but it'll doubtless have played into the design
>> criteria, no point supporting speeds higher than 100mbps ethernet after
>> all. And they are awfully old now. Sigh.
>
> Slight thread hijack: what are people using now to stream to older audio
> equipment? We have an Express connected to the living room hifi, which is fine
> right now, but the probability of its demise must be creeping towards 1.

Sonos is very good, and they do have a box which you can plug your old
gear into. eg. https://www.sonos.com/en-gb/shop/port

Sonos's Airplay 2 implementation is supposed to be better than the
HomePods'.

--
Chris

On 08/01/2024 17:04, jbrennand wrote:
> On 08/01/2024 15:03, David Sankey wrote:
>> On 07/01/2024 13:00, jbrennand wrote:
>>> I still use the 6th generation Apple Airport Extreme as my router and
>>> wireless generator connected to my VM Hub5 in modem mode.   I have
>>> the 350 Mbps package and sat near the Hub on my MBAir I always get
>>> that full download speed on the 5GHz frequency - and the full upload
>>> at ~35 Mbps. When testing on the 2.4 band I get the expected ~80/35
>>> Mbps.
>>>
>>> Obviously this falls away as you move away from the Extreme.
>>> Upstairs I have an Airport Express to help spread the signal.  This
>>> is connected in bridge mode over wifi (tricky to run ethernet cable
>>> up there) and I am getting ~ 40down/30up Mbps when testing up there.
>>>
>>> I am wondering... because the Express's only have 10/100 ethernet
>>> ports is that factor attenuating the speeds to below 100?  This is
>>> with a thought of replacing that Express with a second Extreme from
>>> eBay (with its GB ports) but connected in the same way on wifi in
>>> bridge mode.
>>>
>>> Do you think that would push up the connection speeds further - or
>>> does it really need to be on a cable to improve this?
>>>
>>> If it wont help significantly I may need to "retire" the equipment
>>> and get a more modern "Mesh" system to boost coverage upstairs where
>>> some 4K streaming may start taking place soon.
>>>
>>> Thanks for any input - JohnB
>>
>> What speed to you get by the Express if you switch the Express off -
>> i.e. what's the maximum that the Express can fan out?
>
> Good point... if I switch that Express off... it doesnt actually change
> that much !

So this suggests move the Express closer to the Extreme...

On 8 Jan 2024 at 7:03:18 pm GMT, "Sn!pe" <Sn!pe> wrote:

> TimH <thnews@poboxmolar.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> Slight thread hijack: what are people using now to stream to older audio
>> equipment? We have an Express connected to the living room hifi, which is
>> fine right now, but the probability of its demise must be creeping towards
>> 1.
>
> I use one of these for USB <-> Audio; IMO it does a pretty good job:
>
> Behringer U-PHONE UFO202
> <https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B002GHBYZ0/>

I think I'm looking for something with wifi!
--
TimH
pull tooth to reply by email

On 8 Jan 2024 at 8:11:30 pm GMT, "Chris Ridd" <chrisridd@mac.com> wrote:

> On 08/01/2024 14:43, TimH wrote:
>> On 8 Jan 2024 at 2:28:14 pm GMT, "Jaimie Vandenbergh"
>> <jaimie@usually.sessile.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 7 Jan 2024 at 16:09:01 GMT, "jbrennand" <brennand@ntlworld.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> If I have to use ethernet - it will be via a couple of Ubiquity WAP's.
>>>
>>> Note the modern UAPs can do wireless backhaul if they're not wired, too.
>>> Though I've not tried it.
>>>
>>> The Express won't directly be being limited by its ethernet socket since
>>> you're not using it - but it'll doubtless have played into the design
>>> criteria, no point supporting speeds higher than 100mbps ethernet after
>>> all. And they are awfully old now. Sigh.
>>
>> Slight thread hijack: what are people using now to stream to older audio
>> equipment? We have an Express connected to the living room hifi, which is fine
>> right now, but the probability of its demise must be creeping towards 1.
>
> Sonos is very good, and they do have a box which you can plug your old
> gear into. eg. https://www.sonos.com/en-gb/shop/port

I'm sure Sonos is very good (it had better be, at those prices) but what does
that box do that justifies the £400 price tag??

--
TimH
pull tooth to reply by email

On 8 Jan 2024, Sn!pe wrote
(in article<1qn135e.11rptj31azdljsN%snipeco.2@gmail.com>):

> I use one of these for USB <-> Audio; IMO it does a pretty good job:
>
> Behringer U-PHONE UFO202
> <https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B002GHBYZ0/>

+1 (although not terribly relevant in context).

MST

On 9 Jan 2024 at 2:18:37 pm GMT, "Martin S Taylor"
<correspondence@mRaErMtOiVnEsTtHaIySlor.com> wrote:

> On 8 Jan 2024, Sn!pe wrote
> (in article<1qn135e.11rptj31azdljsN%snipeco.2@gmail.com>):
>
>> I use one of these for USB <-> Audio; IMO it does a pretty good job:
>>
>> Behringer U-PHONE UFO202
>> <https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B002GHBYZ0/>
>
> +1 (although not terribly relevant in context).

I think I have something similar - maybe a UCA222, something like that - and
it is indeed good. But not what's needed here, as you say. Surely people
aren't all buying Sonos just to keep their elderly but perfectly fine hi-fi in
business?
--
TimH
pull tooth to reply by email

On 09/01/2024 15:12, TimH wrote:
> On 9 Jan 2024 at 2:18:37 pm GMT, "Martin S Taylor"
> <correspondence@mRaErMtOiVnEsTtHaIySlor.com> wrote:
>
>> On 8 Jan 2024, Sn!pe wrote
>> (in article<1qn135e.11rptj31azdljsN%snipeco.2@gmail.com>):
>>
>>> I use one of these for USB <-> Audio; IMO it does a pretty good job:
>>>
>>> Behringer U-PHONE UFO202
>>> <https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B002GHBYZ0/>
>>
>> +1 (although not terribly relevant in context).
>
> I think I have something similar - maybe a UCA222, something like that - and
> it is indeed good. But not what's needed here, as you say. Surely people
> aren't all buying Sonos just to keep their elderly but perfectly fine hi-fi in
> business?

Another one here too.

I have this setup:

Technics SL1800 TT
Behringer UFO202
Lightning Hub (to provide Power to phone and Link to UFO202)
Plug in my iPhone with Airchord 2 (or try Quanta) - the UFO202 needs to
be plugged into a device, it doesn't work just plugged into the Hub or a
PSU.
Apple TV 4K
Airpod Minis as a stereo pair.

I run Airchord on the iPhone, then airplay to the Homepods.

It's possible to use the UFO202 to output analogue too. Which I've done
to feed a small cheap headphone amp (one of those with the two valves
that seem popular right now), and can still use my old Grado cans.

This could perhaps also be used to feed a cheap Bluetooth RX/TX device
too (I have one to also feed the ATV to the headphone amp - I use an RCA
switch box on it)).

It's a bit messy perhaps, but I wanted to maintain an Apple ecosystem as
much as possible, as well as tidy the living room a bit (i.e. clear out
the old 1980's HiFi kit a bit).

If you're prepared to fiddle a bit, and cobble stuff together, it does
actually end up being a fairly flexible system, with options for both
wired and wireless setups, and not for too much outlay.

--
Andy H

On 09/01/2024 10:12, TimH wrote:
> On 8 Jan 2024 at 8:11:30 pm GMT, "Chris Ridd" <chrisridd@mac.com> wrote:
>> Sonos is very good, and they do have a box which you can plug your old
>> gear into. eg. https://www.sonos.com/en-gb/shop/port
>
> I'm sure Sonos is very good (it had better be, at those prices) but what does
> that box do that justifies the £400 price tag??

Yes, it is expensive. Did you read the page though? It lets you turn
your existing kit into a Sonos controllable system, which includes
Airplay 2 support.

--
Chris

On 9 Jan 2024 at 5:26:46 pm GMT, "Chris Ridd" <chrisridd@mac.com> wrote:

> On 09/01/2024 10:12, TimH wrote:
>> On 8 Jan 2024 at 8:11:30 pm GMT, "Chris Ridd" <chrisridd@mac.com> wrote:
>>> Sonos is very good, and they do have a box which you can plug your old
>>> gear into. eg. https://www.sonos.com/en-gb/shop/port
>>
>> I'm sure Sonos is very good (it had better be, at those prices) but what does
>> that box do that justifies the £400 price tag??
>
> Yes, it is expensive. Did you read the page though? It lets you turn
> your existing kit into a Sonos controllable system, which includes
> Airplay 2 support.

Is there any particular advantage to a Sonos controllable system if you don't
want to use more Sonos gear?

I'm aware that I'm sounding like a grouchy old git here, but compared to the
£60-odd I paid for the Express, the opportunity to spend £400 in order to be
able to buy even more expensive Sonos bits and pieces doesn't seem that
compelling :)

<font color="#d6d6d6">(I'm tempted to drop into CeX and pick up a couple more
£25 Expresses while I can...)</font>
--
TimH
pull tooth to reply by email

On 09/01/2024 19:11, TimH wrote:
> On 9 Jan 2024 at 5:26:46 pm GMT, "Chris Ridd" <chrisridd@mac.com> wrote:
>
>> On 09/01/2024 10:12, TimH wrote:
>>> On 8 Jan 2024 at 8:11:30 pm GMT, "Chris Ridd" <chrisridd@mac.com> wrote:
>>>> Sonos is very good, and they do have a box which you can plug your old
>>>> gear into. eg. https://www.sonos.com/en-gb/shop/port
>>>
>>> I'm sure Sonos is very good (it had better be, at those prices) but what does
>>> that box do that justifies the £400 price tag??
>>
>> Yes, it is expensive. Did you read the page though? It lets you turn
>> your existing kit into a Sonos controllable system, which includes
>> Airplay 2 support.
>
> Is there any particular advantage to a Sonos controllable system if you don't
> want to use more Sonos gear?
>
> I'm aware that I'm sounding like a grouchy old git here

Only a bit ;-)

> <font color="#d6d6d6">(I'm tempted to drop into CeX and pick up a couple more
> £25 Expresses while I can...)</font>

That's probably a good plan.

--
Chris

On 9 Jan 2024 at 7:55:00 pm GMT, "Chris Ridd" <chrisridd@mac.com> wrote:

>
>> <font color="#d6d6d6">(I'm tempted to drop into CeX and pick up a couple more
>> £25 Expresses while I can...)</font>

No idea where that rogue HTML came from?!
--
TimH
pull tooth to reply by email

On 9 Jan 2024 at 4:13:32 pm GMT, "Andy Hewitt" <thewildrover@icloud.com>
wrote:

> On 09/01/2024 15:12, TimH wrote:
>> On 9 Jan 2024 at 2:18:37 pm GMT, "Martin S Taylor"
>> <correspondence@mRaErMtOiVnEsTtHaIySlor.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 8 Jan 2024, Sn!pe wrote
>>> (in article<1qn135e.11rptj31azdljsN%snipeco.2@gmail.com>):
>>>
>>>> I use one of these for USB <-> Audio; IMO it does a pretty good job:
>>>>
>>>> Behringer U-PHONE UFO202
>>>> <https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B002GHBYZ0/>
>>>
>>> +1 (although not terribly relevant in context).
>>
>> I think I have something similar - maybe a UCA222, something like that - and
>> it is indeed good. But not what's needed here, as you say. Surely people
>> aren't all buying Sonos just to keep their elderly but perfectly fine hi-fi in
>> business?
>
>
> Another one here too.
>
> I have this setup:
>
> Technics SL1800 TT
> Behringer UFO202
> Lightning Hub (to provide Power to phone and Link to UFO202)
> Plug in my iPhone with Airchord 2 (or try Quanta) - the UFO202 needs to
> be plugged into a device, it doesn't work just plugged into the Hub or a
> PSU.
> Apple TV 4K
> Airpod Minis as a stereo pair.
>
> I run Airchord on the iPhone, then airplay to the Homepods.
>
> It's possible to use the UFO202 to output analogue too. Which I've done
> to feed a small cheap headphone amp (one of those with the two valves
> that seem popular right now), and can still use my old Grado cans.
>
> This could perhaps also be used to feed a cheap Bluetooth RX/TX device
> too (I have one to also feed the ATV to the headphone amp - I use an RCA
> switch box on it)).
>
> It's a bit messy perhaps, but I wanted to maintain an Apple ecosystem as
> much as possible, as well as tidy the living room a bit (i.e. clear out
> the old 1980's HiFi kit a bit).
>
> If you're prepared to fiddle a bit, and cobble stuff together, it does
> actually end up being a fairly flexible system, with options for both
> wired and wireless setups, and not for too much outlay.

My setup is much simpler: living room has an Express outputting audio to the
hi-fi amplifier, and use whatever device is handy (usually Apple) to stream
either from an online source or from our music server (Asset, running on a Mac
mini). Client is usually either Foobar 2000 or Apple Music. The other main
room has a relatively modern Yamaha receiver that does Airplay.
--
TimH
pull tooth to reply by email

On 8 Jan 2024 at 8:11:30 pm GMT, "Chris Ridd" <chrisridd@mac.com> wrote:

> On 08/01/2024 14:43, TimH wrote:
>> On 8 Jan 2024 at 2:28:14 pm GMT, "Jaimie Vandenbergh"
>> <jaimie@usually.sessile.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 7 Jan 2024 at 16:09:01 GMT, "jbrennand" <brennand@ntlworld.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> If I have to use ethernet - it will be via a couple of Ubiquity WAP's.
>>>
>>> Note the modern UAPs can do wireless backhaul if they're not wired, too.
>>> Though I've not tried it.
>>>
>>> The Express won't directly be being limited by its ethernet socket since
>>> you're not using it - but it'll doubtless have played into the design
>>> criteria, no point supporting speeds higher than 100mbps ethernet after
>>> all. And they are awfully old now. Sigh.
>>
>> Slight thread hijack: what are people using now to stream to older audio
>> equipment? We have an Express connected to the living room hifi, which is fine
>> right now, but the probability of its demise must be creeping towards 1.
>
> Sonos is very good, and they do have a box which you can plug your old
> gear into. eg. https://www.sonos.com/en-gb/shop/port
>
> Sonos's Airplay 2 implementation is supposed to be better than the
> HomePods'.

--
TimH
pull tooth to reply by email

On 09/01/2024 09:45, David Sankey wrote:
> On 08/01/2024 17:04, jbrennand wrote:
>> On 08/01/2024 15:03, David Sankey wrote:

>>> What speed to you get by the Express if you switch the Express off -
>>> i.e. what's the maximum that the Express can fan out?
>>
>> Good point... if I switch that Express off... it doesnt actually
>> change that much !
>
> So this suggests move the Express closer to the Extreme...

It probably won't help for the reason I gave in my earlier post.

When you switch the Express off there is no contention but the distance
is further so signal strength reduced and so throughput reduced. When
you have the Express on the signal strength goes back up but the
contention is re-introduced.

The fact that the two have more or less the same net effect is coincidence.

--
Bruce Horrocks
Surrey, England

TimH <thnews@poboxmolar.com.invalid> wrote:

> "Andy Hewitt" <thewildrover@icloud.com> wrote:
[...]
> > I have this setup:
> >
> > Technics SL1800 TT
> > Behringer UFO202
> > Lightning Hub (to provide Power to phone and Link to UFO202)
> > Plug in my iPhone with Airchord 2 (or try Quanta) - the UFO202 needs to
> > be plugged into a device, it doesn't work just plugged into the Hub or a
> > PSU.
> > Apple TV 4K
> > Airpod Minis as a stereo pair.
> >
> > I run Airchord on the iPhone, then airplay to the Homepods.
> >
> > It's possible to use the UFO202 to output analogue too. Which I've done
> > to feed a small cheap headphone amp (one of those with the two valves
> > that seem popular right now), and can still use my old Grado cans.
> >
> > This could perhaps also be used to feed a cheap Bluetooth RX/TX device
> > too (I have one to also feed the ATV to the headphone amp - I use an RCA
> > switch box on it)).
> >
> > It's a bit messy perhaps, but I wanted to maintain an Apple ecosystem as
> > much as possible, as well as tidy the living room a bit (i.e. clear out
> > the old 1980's HiFi kit a bit).
> >
> > If you're prepared to fiddle a bit, and cobble stuff together, it does
> > actually end up being a fairly flexible system, with options for both
> > wired and wireless setups, and not for too much outlay.
>
> My setup is much simpler: living room has an Express outputting audio to the
> hi-fi amplifier, and use whatever device is handy (usually Apple) to stream
> either from an online source or from our music server (Asset, running on a Mac
> mini). Client is usually either Foobar 2000 or Apple Music. The other main
> room has a relatively modern Yamaha receiver that does Airplay.
>
As well as handling audio output to the amplifier, the big benefit of
the Behringer is it can handle my analog turntable (Technics SL-7).
It sends back that audio to the 'puter via USB for recording digitally
and returns it for monitoring via the amp. It also has an audio
monitoring jack of its own if preferred.

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator

My pet rock Gordon just is.