Use local ethernet switch for AV system or run many cables?

[klettermann]

My current system consists of a NAS media server with various other stuff (TV's, streaming devices, etc) hardwired to a single 1Gb switch (let's call that the "hub"). I'm now wiring a new media room that will have at least 4 hardwired, networked components - TV, AVR, 2 or more streaming boxes, and probably more in the future. The temptation to daisychain another switch in the media room to the hub is probably obvious. Most IT folks would object to this however, and say to bite the bullet and just run all the cables directly to the hub. But I'm lazy, and so not wild about making 10 or more terminations, dealing with all the cables etc, if I can just run 1 cable.

Related to this is the network topology. The new room will have are both video and audio streamers. The former are playing content mostly from the NAS. The latter are pulling content directly from the internet, So, if I daisychained a switch for the media room, would it be better to connect the NAS to that? Suggestions for the network topology would be welcome. So many possibilities..... Comments welcome. Thanks and cheers,

 

[JeffS7444]

Depends. It's always possible to get one's self into a situation where all solutions are costly and difficult. But assuming that you are an end-user and not a content producer, the cheaper/easier route is probably more than good enough. You may have multiple streaming devices in each room, but how many are going to be in simultaneous use? I'm guessing the answer is "not many". Services like Spotify and Netflix won't tax your network much.

Competitive gamer: Network latency may be a concern, and this might justify it's own circuit.

Content producer: May be dealing with large files, and here too, latency can't be overlooked.

 

[klettermann]

Depends. It's always possible to get one's self into a situation where all solutions are costly and difficult. But assuming that you are an end-user and not a content producer, the cheaper/easier route is probably more than good enough. You may have multiple streaming devices in each room, but how many are going to be in simultaneous use? I'm guessing the answer is "not many". Services like Spotify and Netflix won't tax your network much.

Competitive gamer: Network latency may be a concern, and this might justify it's own circuit.

Content producer: May be dealing with large files, and here too, latency can't be overlooked.

Thanks, I was hoping for something like this. I'm most definitely an end user (music, video), never a gamer and no production. In my previous setup I did have a switch off a hub and I seemed ok. But I got more stuff now. But you're right, there wouldn't be much else going concurrently. Maybe NAS streaming to media room and Netflix upstairs. Maybe also Sonos running someplace but that's all by WiFi, not wired.

Any thoughts on feeding NAS to the hub vs to switch in AV room? Thanks and cheers,

 

[tw99]

At 1Gb/s in a domestic environment it doesn't matter that much. My home network actually has 3 layers of switches at one point (master switch in wiring closet, switch for AV stuff in the room, dedicated switch for D&D speakers). It all works fine ..

 

[voodooless]

Most IT folks would object to this however, and say to bite the bullet and just run all the cables directly to the hub

You probably don’t have a hub. Those things are out of fashion for at least 2 decades Nowadays everything is a switch.

Just add a little switch, it should not be an issue unless you think the network bandwidth (probably 1 Gbps) is insufficient for all the sources. Given that they are one AV system, you’ll probably only have one large consumer at a time anyway.

 

[JeffS7444]

I forgot to ask if any of these wires will be approaching or exceeding 50 meters in length, because that's approaching the limits for a single span of ethernet cable. If "yes", then there are some additional factors involved.

If this is a new installation, I'd definitely want to run an extra cable or two through the walls, because the incremental cost is minimal, and sometimes a circuit will be a dud because who knows - cable got damaged during installation due to kinking or being too vigorously pulled.

 

[phofman]

The temptation to daisychain another switch in the media room to the hub is probably obvious. Most IT folks would object to this however, and say to bite the bullet and just run all the cables directly to the hub.

I would use a single quality CAT6 cable (to be future-proof for faster speeds). Audio streaming takes no bandwidth, plus there are countless other switches and routers between your device and the streaming server (just run traceroute to see the routers). They all have zero effect on the sound quality.

 

[klettermann]

Sounds good, thanks all. I just routed cables around basement ceiling with spares to my server (NAS) and the new room. Nothing is more than about 30 ft and it's CAT6. It totaled 5 cables - 2 to room, 2 to server, 1 to an eero extension or whatever they call it. It would have been ~15 without the media room switch so that saves me a lot of annoying terminations. As for "hub," yeah, true enough. I think of as that cause everything else in the house goes to it. This includes a MoCA system cause house was wired for cable instead of internet just 5 years ago by previous owner.

 

[antcollinet]

My current system consists of a NAS media server with various other stuff (TV's, streaming devices, etc) hardwired to a single 1Gb switch (let's call that the "hub"). I'm now wiring a new media room that will have at least 4 hardwired, networked components - TV, AVR, 2 or more streaming boxes, and probably more in the future. The temptation to daisychain another switch in the media room to the hub is probably obvious. Most IT folks would object to this however, and say to bite the bullet and just run all the cables directly to the hub. But I'm lazy, and so not wild about making 10 or more terminations, dealing with all the cables etc, if I can just run 1 cable.

Related to this is the network topology. The new room will have are both video and audio streamers. The former are playing content mostly from the NAS. The latter are pulling content directly from the internet, So, if I daisychained a switch for the media room, would it be better to connect the NAS to that? Suggestions for the network topology would be welcome. So many possibilities..... Comments welcome. Thanks and cheers,

Absolutely nothing wrong with daisy chaining switches. Presumably the "hub" is connected back to the router? Well the ethernet port on the output of the router is also a switch.

I'd just run a single wire between the hub and a switch in the media room. Or if the router has a spare port, perhaps direct to that, to avoid sharing the hub to router wire with all the other gear. But only if the wiring doesn't become too onerous.

By the way - I have hub to switch in office.

Office switch is also wired to a switch in the living room and TV/Stereo. Another connection goes from the office switch to another switch on the landing where the NAS is.

I also have a mesh wifi network.

I dont' have any networking issues at all.

 

[Berwhale]

Don't worry about 'daisy chaining' switches. I currently have 6 forming my network (not including the switches in the wireless access points)....

I don't know who the 'most IT folk' are that you've spoken to, but they don't know what they are talking about if they are telling you to run everything back to a single 'hub'.

 

[Timcognito]

FWIW I have four switches in four locations including one mega-switch running the other three without a single issue.

 

[klettermann]

Thanks very much for all the responses. A few points of clarification: when referring to "hub," I meant the primary switch on the router that feeds any daisy-chained switches. So yeah, "hub" is wrong nomenclature. As for IT people disapproving of daisy-chaining, all I can say is that I've heard it again and again. Obviously it's not an absolute, inviolable rule. Rather it's best practice to run cables where possible to avoid further switches. Or so I'm told. But no matter, we're running home networks here.

Anyway, in 2 other houses I did exactly as suggested here - run cables from a central switch to respective areas (living room, bedroom, media room etc) and then switches in those places feeding the stuff there, exactly as Berwhale. Like you guys, I never had problems. Since then, however, 4K has become a much bigger thing, my internet load has grown substantially and I've got a lot more networked stuff running. And with my new room I wanted to adopt best practices to the extent possible. Now the course looks clear! Thanks and cheers,

 

[MaxwellsEq]

Most IT folks would object to this however, and say to bite the bullet and just run all the cables directly to the hub.

Having designed, operated and debugged some very large media IP/Ethernet networks, I can categorically confirm that no IT/network expert would object to daisy-chaining switches

Large networks inevitably have switches/bridges in series. As others have said hubs (Ethernet repeaters) have not been used for decades.

 

[phofman]

Rather it's best practice to run cables where possible to avoid further switches

If running a reasonably-long cable avoids an extra switch, then yes, I would run the cable. But not for some bandwidth limit or even an audability issue (nonsense), but simply to avoid the extra consumption and potentially failing wallwart PSU (being the least-reliable component in the network plumbing) the unneccessary SOHO switch requires.

 

[klettermann]

If running a reasonably-long cable avoids an extra switch, then yes, I would run the cable. But not for some bandwidth limit or even an audability issue (nonsense), but simply to avoid the extra consumption and potentially failing wallmart PSU (being the least-reliable component in the network plumbing) the unneccessary SOHO switch requires.

Having designed, operated and debugged some very large media IP/Ethernet networks, I can categorically confirm that no IT/network expert would object to daisy-chaining switches

Large networks inevitably have switches/bridges in series. As others have said hubs (Ethernet repeaters) have not been used for decades.

OK, I've learned something. The only networks I've been involved were relatively small (single-site health clubs with a several POS desks and maybe 15 workstations + printers etc) or tiny (my house). In these cases the context was longer/more cable runs = fewer switches per phoman's remarks. So I've been biased towards more cables, which is often more work. Now I'm free! Cheers,

 

[audio_tony]

I forgot to ask if any of these wires will be approaching or exceeding 50 meters in length, because that's approaching the limits for a single span of ethernet cable.

50m are you sure?

Category 5e Cable Length Recommendations

The recommended Cat5e cable length is similar to the standards for other twisted-pair cables. Cable distance guidelines for Cat5e are associated with TIA/EIA-568-5-A documentation. The maximum for a Cat5e cable segment is 100m. Category 5 Enhanced cable supports up to 1000Mbps Gigabit Ethernet speeds as four wire pairs are utilized.

Maximum Cable Segment Distances for Cat6 or Cat6a Cable

In 10/100/1000BASE-T applications, the maximum cable distance of a Cat 6 cable is 100 metres. However, Category 6 cable segment distance drops to a maximum run length of 55 metres when used for 10GBASE-T. This cable length may be further reduced in hostile alien crosstalk environments. These limits are not an issue with Cat6a cable. Augmented Category 6 cable’s maximum cable distance specifications are the same as Cat5 and 5e. This means 10GBASE-T can be supported at a 100-metre cable run distance.

 

[Petrushka]

I just have a eero wifi with three nodes, two TVs, three streaming devices, a home office, and about a dozen devices.

 

[AudioSceptic]

You probably don’t have a hub. Those things are out of fashion for at least 2 decades Nowadays everything is a switch.

Just add a little switch, it should not be an issue unless you think the network bandwidth (probably 1 Gbps) is insufficient for all the sources. Given that they are one AV system, you’ll probably only have one large consumer at a time anyway.

The OP used the word "hub" for convenience, perhaps not knowing that it is a precise term in networking.

(A hub is "dumb": it sends all data to all outputs; a switch sends data only to the required IP address(es) ).

 

[Berwhale]

(A hub is "dumb": it sends all data to all outputs; a switch sends data only to the required IP address(es) ).

A layer 2 switch, which is what most people would be using at home, sends data to a port associated with a MAC address (using it's MAC address table). A switch with layer 3 capabilities can route packets between multiple networks based on IP address (using it's ARP table). Layer 3 switches are much more expensive and are more likely to be found in enterprise environments where multiple networks are required.

 

[Smitty2k1]

I really should draw out my network someday. I'm repurposing cat5e that was run for telephone, each room is daisy chained to the next so there are switches everywhere. I've managed to hardwire all my mesh wifi APs this way, also using some MoCA adapters to throw coax in the loop.

Let's not even get started on the previous owner who ran component video (instead of HDMI) in 2010! I've repurposed a few of the component video cables in the walls for subwoofers and OTA TV from a roof mounted antena. It's quite a mess but it works just fine!