HD media player - wireless HD streaming/playback problem

[Stealth3si]

Currently for testing purposes, my HD media player (WDTV Live) is in the same room with a Netgear WNDR3300 router and is only 2-3 horizontally feet away from the router that is behind a wooden bookcase whose side wall is about 1 inch think. Vertically they are the same. The wireless connection is via a Netgear N wifi adapter.

WDTV Live <-----2-3 ft------> | 1" thick wood wall | router

As for the HD content, I have made personal encoded backups of HD videos I legally own. These files need to reside in this room for storage purposes and my goal is to wirelessly play these files from it to the downstairs living room which does not have HD access.

By 'wireless streaming/playback' I mean watching a video wirelessly with no transcoding, a simple 'press' and play.

Anyway, I was wondering if someone could help me resolve an issue I have and point me to a problem that is the source of the symptom. I would really appreciate it and have included as much diagnostic information as I can.

A symptom I'm having is when wirelessly playing 1080p HD compressed MKV files. Though, playing them over direct wired connection from PC to router to WDTV Live is OK and wirelessly playing 720p plays fine too. However, at certain parts or scenes of the movie (maybe 3-5 random scenes in total) the video would begin playing really slow (2-3x play speed) and the audio cuts out for several seconds or sometimes for the entire duration of the "frame-a-thon" until I hit the rew/ff button. I don't know if it's the HD media player (WDTV Live,) the wireless adapter, the wireless router or the wireless connection.

Here are the facts:

-WDTV Live
-Netgear WNDA3100-NAR100 wifi adapter on WDTV Live
-Netgear WNDR3300-NAR100 wireless router w/ latest stock firmware (wireless mode: Up to 270mpbs @ 2.4Ghz; security: WPA2-PSK [AES]; AP mode on, 11n SSID enabled, 11g SSID disabled; QoS disabled, everything else is default)

In my entire house:
-There are no other devices connected to the router besides the directly wired computer hosting the video file and the wireless WDTV Live.
-There is only this one router, the one WNDA3100 wireless adapter, one wireless client (WDTV Live)
-There are no other wireless clients or devices that are in operation, not even microwaves or phones.


My thoughts:

·Is the N-Speed somehow "limited" or "crippled?"
---If so, how can I maximize the speed throughput?

·Is it wireless interference?
---If so, what can I do to decrease wireless traffic? I've also tried using ONLY the 5ghz band but the symptom remains. I decided to stay on the 2.4GHz band on one radio and disable the other radio because I could not play them w/ two radios operating simultaneously.

·Are the router's settings not optimal?
---If so, what settings do I change to solve the issue (or maximize speed throughput)?

·Is the router's AC power adapter defective or is it not good enough?
---If so, how would I know this?
---If so, will replacing the factory Netgear AC power adapter (12v 1.5A) to a better AC power adapter (12v 2.0A) solve the issue?

·Is the router itself defective?
·Is something wrong with the firmware that's causing this?
---If so, how would I know either of this?

What could be the cause of this symptom?

I would be grateful if these questions can be answered in descending order, if possible.

And if this matter can't be resolved, my alternative would be to replace the current router with another one. I'm thinking of the ASUS RT-N12 since it is cheap, has external antennas, and great reviews that I've read. I don't know if this would solve the problem I'm currently experiencing however.

Otherwise, my last option would be to settle for watching the videos from an externally wired USB drive attached directly to the USB port of the WDTV Live, since in the future, I plan to move it to the downstairs living room and unfortunately, a wired Ethernet cable/connection/network would be not be an option for me personally. However, as previously mentioned, I had no problems with the Ethernet wired connection. But before I resign I'd like to get the most out of the "wireless" method of watching videos, if I can.

[yetanotherid]

Can you use the USB adaptor to connect a PC to the router instead of the WD thingy?
It's just that using a PC to PC connection makes testing the wireless speed easier.

I assume the WD thingy is connected to the router wirelessly while the PC is connected to it via cable? If they're both wireless I'm pretty sure that'll reduce the bandwidth to each device as they have to share the air time.

Anyway, assuming you could substitute the WD thingy for a second PC or laptop, I'd install AIDA32 (http://majorgeeks.com/download181.html) on each. It has a function for measuring network speed (I think it's in the plugins menu). One PC would be master and the other slave and you'd monitor speed in each direction looking for sudden drops etc. Assuming you can do that, here's some wireless speed thoughts.

Wireless USB adaptors can be somewhat CPU intensive so it might pay to make sure the one you're using is on the WD approved list.

270mpbs (or 300mbps depending on the equipment) can be very unreliable. It can actually be much slower than 150mbps. 270mbps is the connection rate between the devices, not the transfer speed. Actual transfer speed is dependant on a lot of factors. In order to achieve 270mbps wireless N uses MIMO techniques which can often be counter productive rather than increase throughput. The speed can often drop dramatically, then increase then drop again. A 150mbps connection is often far more stable and can give you more consistent and better throughput. I have a Netgear router (older than yours) which I was running with a USB adaptor and in the end I set the router to only ever run in 150mbps mode (half N mode, neighbour friendly mode, whatever they call it). Using Aida32 it was easy to confirm the 150mbps connection was more reliable and much faster. It really depends on the equipment, how well they play together and the environment they're working in.

The other major speed bump could be the wireless security. Try disabling it completely to see if the problem goes away (or use AIDA32 to monitor any reduction in throughput caused by the wireless security. If it's a big hit, leave security disabled and set up a MAC access list to only allow devices with approved MAC addresses to connect to the router (Not as secure, but don't worry. It's not too likely anyone's going to want to spend the time breaking in to your private network anyway)

Obviously when steaming HD video the wireless connection speed is the most likely bottleneck so the above is how I'd go about checking it before looking elsewhere. If you can't use two PCs you could transfer some large files back and forth, timing how long the operation takes each time as you make changes. Not as accurate but it'd give you an idea, although when you use PC "A" to copy a file from PC "B" it's usually faster than using PC "A" to copy a file to PC "B". (puulling a file vs pushing, I guess). I don't know why, but the same thing happens when using a wired connection too, although to a lesser degree. Copying a file from a second PC is always faster than copying a file to a second PC. Maybe the same type of thing also applies to streaming.

And if there's a version which will run on your router, dump the Netgear firmware and install the DD-WRT (http://www.dd-wrt.com/site/index) firmware instead. It won't necessarily make it faster, but it'll give it a lot more options.... and you'll feel superior to everyone else you know who owns a router. ;-)

[yetanotherid]

PS The DD-WRT firmware I mentioned gives the router it's own bandwidth monitor, so you can use it to watch for speed drops if the streaming produces stuttering video. It'll also display info regarding connection strength and signal to noise ratio etc.

If the router has any sort of firewall function, turn it off. you don't need it. It only has a potential to slow things down in your situation. A router is it's own hardware firewall, and any extra firewall functionality is just that.... extra..... and not really necessary.

It won't be the power supply (or not very likely) I think the Netgear routers will keep running on a much lower voltage than their rated 12v. A PSU capable of more current probably won't make a difference. As long as it's the correct voltage and current rating it'll be fine. If the router requires 1.5amps and the power supply can't deliver it, the power supply would probably get unusually hot and go up in smoke eventually.... or quite quickly.

[yetanotherid]

One other thought, if you do buy another router you can probably connect your current router to the new one using your current router as an access point. It would then connect via ethernet cable to the WD thingy. The DD-WRT firmware gives the router better access point functionality than the Netgear firmware does (although it'll still do it). By connection the router to the WD thingy as an access point via cable (and then to the main router) rather than using a USB dongle, you'd be reducing the amount of work the WD's CPU will have to do to run the connection. A wired connection is much less CPU intensive than a connection via a USB dongle. The two routers will also be likely to give you more throughput than a router and dongle setup.

Having external antennas on a router isn't necessarily better. The Netgear's internal antennas should work fine. The main advantage of external antennas is it gives you the option to replace them, but there's usually no need.
Bluetooth and other wireless G devices such as mice and keyboards etc can interfere with a wireless network but it's not very likely as they tend to be designed to keep out of each others way. Have you tried changing the channel on the router? If it's currently running on the default channel or in auto mode, try a couple of different ones. The USB adaptor should just follow it.

[Stealth3si]

Can you use the USB adaptor to connect a PC to the router instead of the WD thingy?
It's just that using a PC to PC connection makes testing the wireless speed easier.
Yes.

I assume the WD thingy is connected to the router wirelessly while the PC is connected to it via cable?
Right.

Anyway, assuming you could substitute the WD thingy for a second PC or laptop, I'd install AIDA32 (http://majorgeeks.com/download181.html) on each. It has a function for measuring network speed (I think it's in the plugins menu). One PC would be master and the other slave and you'd monitor speed in each direction looking for sudden drops etc. Assuming you can do that, here's some wireless speed thoughts.

Wireless USB adaptors can be somewhat CPU intensive so it might pay to make sure the one you're using is on the WD approved list.

270mpbs (or 300mbps depending on the equipment) can be very unreliable. It can actually be much slower than 150mbps. 270mbps is the connection rate between the devices, not the transfer speed. Actual transfer speed is dependant on a lot of factors. In order to achieve 270mbps wireless N uses MIMO techniques which can often be counter productive rather than increase throughput. The speed can often drop dramatically, then increase then drop again. A 150mbps connection is often far more stable and can give you more consistent and better throughput. I have a Netgear router (older than yours) which I was running with a USB adaptor and in the end I set the router to only ever run in 150mbps mode (half N mode, neighbour friendly mode, whatever they call it). Using Aida32 it was easy to confirm the 150mbps connection was more reliable and much faster. It really depends on the equipment, how well they play together and the environment they're working in.

OK. So this is what I did: To know whether the transfer speed is the problem, in lieu of monitoring the network speed via AIDA32 by substituting the WD thingy for a second PC or laptop (of which is unpractical for me anyway,) I followed your advice to change the connection rate from 270 to 130 (the only option there is) and there was no see-able difference.

At this point, I'm not sure if I should be concerned about the transfer speed in light of this but I'm going to stay at the 130 Mbps setting for more reliability sake. I will change it back to 270 Mbps if it ever solves another possible issue I may have in the future.

As for the wireless USB adaptor, it's not on the WD approved list but I heard from someone else that with this particular adapter they had no problems streaming 1080p content.

The other major speed bump could be the wireless security. Try disabling it completely to see if the problem goes away (or use AIDA32 to monitor any reduction in throughput caused by the wireless security. If it's a big hit, leave security disabled and set up a MAC access list to only allow devices with approved MAC addresses to connect to the router (Not as secure, but don't worry. It's not too likely anyone's going to want to spend the time breaking in to your private network anyway)

Tried it and "stutter" is still there. By this observation, I think I can also reasonably deduce the wireless security is causing no (significant/noticeable) reduction in throughput.

Obviously when steaming HD video the wireless connection speed is the most likely bottleneck so the above is how I'd go about checking it before looking elsewhere. If you can't use two PCs you could transfer some large files back and forth, timing how long the operation takes each time as you make changes. Not as accurate but it'd give you an idea, although when you use PC "A" to copy a file from PC "B" it's usually faster than using PC "A" to copy a file to PC "B". (puulling a file vs pushing, I guess). I don't know why, but the same thing happens when using a wired connection too, although to a lesser degree. Copying a file from a second PC is always faster than copying a file to a second PC. Maybe the same type of thing also applies to streaming.

Apparently, after a bit of research, I learned that the problem of my issue is most likely the movie's variable bitrate spiking coupled with presumably small buffers on the WDTV Live.

Allow me to explain if I can.

Upon my discovery, due to a shared protocol problem among common WDTV Live (newbie) users and Window's and Linux's SMB protocols (file sharing) having a lot of overhead (UDP has a lot less overhead than TCP,) it is typical of samba shares with 1080P content, when the bit rate peaks, that the samba protocol often does not have enough through put to support 1080P, largely because of protocol overhead.

This is typically solved by sharing out one's files using DLNA/NSF servers, which is exactly what I did and my issue is solved.

And if there's a version which will run on your router, dump the Netgear firmware and install the DD-WRT (http://www.dd-wrt.com/site/index) firmware instead. It won't necessarily make it faster, but it'll give it a lot more options.... and you'll feel superior to everyone else you know who owns a router. ;-)
Sure. Thanks!

PS The DD-WRT firmware I mentioned gives the router it's own bandwidth monitor, so you can use it to watch for speed drops if the streaming produces stuttering video. It'll also display info regarding connection strength and signal to noise ratio etc.

Thanks, this was useful in my observations.

If the router has any sort of firewall function, turn it off. you don't need it. It only has a potential to slow things down in your situation. A router is it's own hardware firewall, and any extra firewall functionality is just that.... extra..... and not really necessary.
FW turned off.

It won't be the power supply (or not very likely) I think the Netgear routers will keep running on a much lower voltage than their rated 12v. A PSU capable of more current probably won't make a difference. As long as it's the correct voltage and current rating it'll be fine. If the router requires 1.5amps and the power supply can't deliver it, the power supply would probably get unusually hot and go up in smoke eventually.... or quite quickly.Having external antennas on a router isn't necessarily better. The Netgear's internal antennas should work fine. The main advantage of external antennas is it gives you the option to replace them, but there's usually no need.
Bluetooth and other wireless G devices such as mice and keyboards etc can interfere with a wireless network but it's not very likely as they tend to be designed to keep out of each others way.Great. These eliminate potential problems.

One other thought, if you do buy another router you can probably connect your current router to the new one using your current router as an access point. It would then connect via ethernet cable to the WD thingy. The DD-WRT firmware gives the router better access point functionality than the Netgear firmware does (although it'll still do it). By connection the router to the WD thingy as an access point via cable (and then to the main router) rather than using a USB dongle, you'd be reducing the amount of work the WD's CPU will have to do to run the connection. A wired connection is much less CPU intensive than a connection via a USB dongle. The two routers will also be likely to give you more throughput than a router and dongle setup.

Yea I heard another WDTV user tried this setup was a very good thing. I'll take this route for sure if I end up getting another one.

Have you tried changing the channel on the router? If it's currently running on the default channel or in auto mode, try a couple of different ones. The USB adaptor should just follow it.It noticeably improved but didn't solve my issue.

Thanks for all your help bro!

[yetanotherid]

Apparently, after a bit of research, I learned that the problem of my issue is most likely the movie's variable bitrate spiking coupled with presumably small buffers on the WDTV Live.

Allow me to explain if I can.

Upon my discovery, due to a shared protocol problem among common WDTV Live (newbie) users and Window's and Linux's SMB protocols (file sharing) having a lot of overhead (UDP has a lot less overhead than TCP,) it is typical of samba shares with 1080P content, when the bit rate peaks, that the samba protocol often does not have enough through put to support 1080P, largely because of protocol overhead.

This is typically solved by sharing out one's files using DLNA/NSF servers, which is exactly what I did and my issue is solved.

I'm glad you got it solved, and thanks for the info as to how. It might be handy in the future.

[2Bdecided]

This is typically solved by sharing out one's files using DLNA/NSF servers, which is exactly what I did and my issue is solved.NSF? I asked Google, but it didn't help me. (I know DLNA!).

Cheers,
David.

[Stealth3si]

NSF? I asked Google, but it didn't help me. (I know DLNA!).

Cheers,
David.

Sorry.

Typo.

Correction: NFS.

[Stealth3si]

I know it's quite awhile since I last posted in this thread so to mods/admins I apologize if resurrecting this thread is against the rules.

One other thought, if you do buy another router you can probably connect your current router to the new one using your current router as an access point. It would then connect via ethernet cable to the WD thingy. The DD-WRT firmware gives the router better access point functionality than the Netgear firmware does (although it'll still do it). By connection the router to the WD thingy as an access point via cable (and then to the main router) rather than using a USB dongle, you'd be reducing the amount of work the WD's CPU will have to do to run the connection. A wired connection is much less CPU intensive than a connection via a USB dongle. The two routers will also be likely to give you more throughput than a router and dongle setup.
Yea I heard another WDTV user tried this setup was a very good thing. I'll take this route for sure if I end up getting another one.

I want to buy an additional router for my WDTV Live.

As readers may already know, I have a Netgear WNDR3300 as my main router and a Netgear WNDA3100 Wi-Fi adapter plugged into the WDTV Live unit. Since there seems to be network interference from surrounding neighbors affecting playback, I'm thinking that buying an additional router to replace the WiFi adapter would give a stronger dedicated "connection" between the WDTV Live and the main router, thus strengthening the signal or extending the range (?) which I assume would probably improve 1080p playback experience significantly.

Basically, I'm considering replacing the WNDA3100 Wi-Fi adapter with 'a wireless bridge' by getting another WNDR3300 to plug into the WDTV Live (as a wireless bridge/access point) to further improve 1080p playback.

I've decided to go this route because I've heard positive experiences from people online who were able to flawlessly stream 1080p using (at least) two routers, where one router (Router A) is directly wired to the WDTV Live's Ethernet port and is configured as a wireless bridge/AP and the other router (Router B) acts as the main router, which is wirelessly connected to Router A.

I intend to improve my wireless playback for 1080p with this setup. Please let me know if this isn't a good idea or worth trying.

If someone here has had experience with this type of setup, could you please recommend me a good router to add to my 'WDTV Live network' or tell me whether the following routers (that I found from research) are good choices?

They are:

1.) Netgear WNDR3300
2.) Linksys E1000
3.) Asus RT-N12

Thanks and appreciate all your help!