Prolonged delay before Zenith connects to the network
- Thread starter musician
- Start date
I scanned my network IP addresses and found that of the 11 active devices, the identity of the vendor was known in 3 cases and unknown in 8. Could the prolonged delay before network connection be due to interrogation of each "unknown" IP address until the relevant one is connected?
It’s an issue I had until I figured out what was going on.
Sky router upstairs broadcasting wi-fi. Can’t connect my Zenith to that because complicated route, 30m of ethernet needed and much dismantling of office furniture and raising of carpets. So, wireless bridge installed in living room with a short run of Chord C-Stream to the Zenith. Same room also has a Sky Q bid which acts as a hotspot even though I don’t want it to. Wrongly set up the bridge as a hot spot all of a sudden devices like the Innuos have to decide which of the three they’re connecting to. Thus the delay.
mikehughescq: "...devices like the Innuos have to decide which of the three they’re connecting to. Thus the delay."
I thought mikehughescq's hypothesis was an attractive one, so I disconnected the TP-Link extender, rebooted my Zen MK, and waited for it to connect to the network. Connection time was not noticeably shorter than when the extender was running.
While there were 3 available ports in mikehughescq's case, there are potentially 8 available ports in mine. Is it plausible that connection time is prolonged subsequent to almost triple the number of available ports (8 vs 3)?
I thought mikehughescq's hypothesis was an attractive one, so I disconnected the TP-Link extender, rebooted my Zen MK, and waited for it to connect to the network. Connection time was not noticeably shorter than when the extender was running.
While there were 3 available ports in mikehughescq's case, there are potentially 8 available ports in mine. Is it plausible that connection time is prolonged subsequent to almost triple the number of available ports (8 vs 3)?
Can someone (especially from Innuos) comment on the wisdom of deleting unused ports as follows:
- Unused network ports can negatively impact network performance and latency by creating ingress and egress paths, poor electrical terminations, and hardware issues. Deleting these ports can improve overall system efficiency by removing these potential sources of interference and ensuring secure electrical connections.
- Unused network ports can negatively impact network performance and latency by creating ingress and egress paths, poor electrical terminations, and hardware issues. Deleting these ports can improve overall system efficiency by removing these potential sources of interference and ensuring secure electrical connections.
The simpler the network, the better, but reducing the number of ports from 8 to 3 or 4 is not, i think, going to give any meaningful results. This could be as much an issue related to your router or other network devices as it is with Roon - a quick Google search suggests that it is not uncommon that Roon is not always instant in updating its monitored folders.
The fact there is a separate Roon Core and two separate ZENith that alternate in availability strikes me as a slightly precarious setup, so i think a simplification here is the way to go. However, we'll need you to provide a lot more information about your system setup and usage to get a better of idea of how best to recommend making some potential setup improvements.
As outlined earlier, realistically we need more information first about your overall system and usage - it's not clear what the current setup is that we are meant to be improving from. We ideally need clarifcation on;
- The reasoning behind there being two separate ZENiths
- Why they are never online at the same time
- The reasoning for a separate Roon Core (when either ZENith can do this).
Thanks
- The reasoning behind there being two separate ZENiths
Prior to the launch of ARC, I had one ZENith at my primary residence and another ZEnith at a weekend retreat so I could listen to my music collection at either location. ARC has made this superfluous.
- Why they are never online at the same time
Prior to harmonization of the login process for use of two devices but only 1 license, I was informed by a Roon technician that I had to log out and then log in again..
- The reasoning for a separate Roon Core (when either ZENith can do this).
I thought Roon Core needed a (laptop / tablet) keyboard to navigate within the program. Please clarify if this is incorrect.
Prior to the launch of ARC, I had one ZENith at my primary residence and another ZEnith at a weekend retreat so I could listen to my music collection at either location. ARC has made this superfluous.
- Why they are never online at the same time
Prior to harmonization of the login process for use of two devices but only 1 license, I was informed by a Roon technician that I had to log out and then log in again..
- The reasoning for a separate Roon Core (when either ZENith can do this).
I thought Roon Core needed a (laptop / tablet) keyboard to navigate within the program. Please clarify if this is incorrect.
Last edited:
Thank you for the extra information, that's a useful explanation.
Firstly, Roon Core does need it's control app to navigate of course and yes, this can be a laptop or a tablet or a phone. But the Roon Core itself can be run on numerous different devices, including the ZENith, and this has zero impact on your 'control' device. Point being, the ZENith Mk3 can run Roon Core, and your laptop or tablet can still control it.
Therefore, it seems to me your system can be massively simplified. Simply take one of the ZENith Mk3s (whichever one has the most up to date music library on it), put it into Roon Core mode, and connect that straight to the DAC.
You will not need the Nucleus, and by the sounds of it you do not need the other ZENith either. The only possibility i can see for your spare ZENith is if you fill up the storage capacity of your primary ZENith and find you need more storage space to keep an 'overflow' of music files. In which case yes, you could use the spare ZENith as a 'NAS' which can still be monitored as a second library folder through Roon.
"Simply take one of the ZENith Mk3s (whichever one has the most up to date music library on it), put it into Roon Core mode, and connect that straight to the DAC."
When I select the Zen II as my Roon Core, it says "Update needed", but it doesn't show where the Update link is located.
When I select the Zen II as my Roon Core, it says "Update needed", but it doesn't show where the Update link is located.
Is the server fully updated to 3.0.3?
Also, is it a ZENith Mk3 or a ZEN MkII? As you'll definitely want to run it on the ZENith Mk3.
The Roon update should be fairly automatic and able to be prompted via the Roon app. Perhaps give the system a restart.
I just checked my system. The server and Roon software are both using the latest available updates.
I have temporarily retired my Zenith and am using only my Zen Mk.3 until this issue is resolved.
I have rebooted the entire system several times without effect.
I have temporarily retired my Zenith and am using only my Zen Mk.3 until this issue is resolved.
I have rebooted the entire system several times without effect.
I don't use Innuos Sense to play my music files, but I just now noticed for the first time that the volume level in Innuos Sense was set to zero. When I increased it to 100 and clicked on a music file, audio was loud and clear.
I immediately switched over to Roon and selected a music file, hoping I had found the source of the problem. Unfortunately, the No Audio problem was still present suggesting to this non-audio technician that it's a Roon software issue.
I immediately switched over to Roon and selected a music file, hoping I had found the source of the problem. Unfortunately, the No Audio problem was still present suggesting to this non-audio technician that it's a Roon software issue.