High Powered Wireless Network for Audio

Almarg,

I'll add to your comments by adding once you get into the 192.xxx.xxx.xxx domain you are only checking your internal (LAN) network and not the (WAN) network you are connecting to. I was project manager with installing AT&T data circuits and it is the signal from your cable provider to your router that I'm talking about. DSL does not give you as much capabilities in monitoring the incoming signal as cable does. Although you have to depend on the provider for this. Just make sure that when they install the cable modem that it exceeds the minimum for the cable company. I would actually try for above level performance.

Hope this helps.

Boss302

Thanks, Boss302. But, yes, I was referring to the strength of the signal that is received by the cable modem from the outside cable. I have had several cable modem models, of at least two different makes, and in each case I was easily able to determine how to interrogate the modem via a web browser, and obtain an indication of the incoming signal strength on the WAN side of the modem. And also an indication of the signal strength being transmitted to the outside by the modem.

DSL may very well be different in those respects, as you indicate.

Best regards,
-- Al

Here are links to info about acceptable/desirable signal strengths for cable signals:

http://www.speedguide.net/faq_in_q.php?qid=78

http://www.dslreports.com/faq/3412

And this page provides links to info about many cable modem models, including their default ip address (at which, in many or most cases, status information including signal strengths can be viewed), and user name + password if required:

http://www.speedguide.net/broadband-list.php?cat=70

Best regards,
-- Al

This is all very helpful and thanks everyone.

Last night I was able to test the new cable modem using speedguide.net while hard wired to my computer via the ethernet cable.

It confirmed I was achieving the upload and download speeds as promised by their salesperson, who assured me that my new service would be blazingly fast compared to my Verizon DSL service.

The bad news is that - at least using my Lenovo netbook - Pandora and Youtube videos still stumble and pause from time to time, leaving no apparent improvement in my service, despite the "upgrade".

Therefore, maybe my problem was not my wireless network and only 1 bar of wireless signal strength, but rather, the wimpy processor and only 1 GB of memory in my netbook?

Every time I inquire about high powered PCs with extra memory primarily for general internet use, someone always chimes in and tells me that streaming audio and video is kid's stuff, no big deal and I am wasting my time and money on a big computer.

Perhaps other things running in the background are draining memory including my Kaspersky anti virus software?

Thanks again.

I have a netbook and it's very slow compared to any other current vintage computer. I like it for what it is, but wouldn't suggest using it for an audio application. The only computer that I use that is slower is my govermnet provided unit at work. I think it's the governments way of enforcing minimal production to create more jobs.