Hello everyone. I have a three bedroom apartment that is approx. 1,500 square feet. The only [active] coaxial hookup is in one corner of the apartment. It's not an ideal spot, but it's what I have to work with. I am planning on getting the RBK50 (router + one satellite). I wanted to use the satellite to hard-wire my entertainment system (TV, Bose system, PS4, etc.). I am worried that if I do that, the rest of my place won't have ample coverage.
My wife and I are expecting our first child in a few weeks and we purchased an Arlo Baby. I am especially concerned that there won't be ample coverage for the video/audio streaming that the Arlo Baby will require.
I've attached a floor plan of my place. The star is where the routerhasto go. S1 is where I'd like the satellite to go. S2 is where I would put a second satellite (if necessary). The baby's room is the 10' 12'4" room in the bottom right corner.
My questions for you all are:
1. Do I need a second satellite?
2. If I do, is my proposed layout ok?
3.Could adding a second satellite hurt my performance at all?
Thanks, in advance, for your help!
Model: RBK50| Orbi AC3000 High-Performance Tri-Band WiFi System
1. Do I need a second satellite? No, the router alone can cover around 30 feet. Since you have the router at one end and need a satellite at the opposite end, this will work fine. I have a similar placement.
2. If I do, is my proposed layout ok? No need for S1. Put base at Start and a satellite at S2. 30 feet is recommended in between them to begin with depending upon building materials.
3.Could adding a second satellite hurt my performance at all? Yes. You can't have too many over lapping wifi sources to close together.
I would stick with the Router where it has to be and use pass-through (those with a power socket built in e.g. Devolo dLAN 1200) Powerline Adpaters to hard wire your TV, PS4 etc - via a simple unmanaged switch (e.g. THIS) if necessary. Then place S2 where it gives you the best overall coverage.
Hello everyone. I have a three bedroom apartment that is approx. 1,500 square feet. The only [active] coaxial hookup is in one corner of the apartment. It's not an ideal spot, but it's what I have to work with. I am planning on getting the RBK50 (router + one satellite). I wanted to use the satellite to hard-wire my entertainment system (TV, Bose system, PS4, etc.). I am worried that if I do that, the rest of my place won't have ample coverage.
My wife and I are expecting our first child in a few weeks and we purchased an Arlo Baby. I am especially concerned that there won't be ample coverage for the video/audio streaming that the Arlo Baby will require.
I've attached a floor plan of my place. The star is where the routerhasto go. S1 is where I'd like the satellite to go. S2 is where I would put a second satellite (if necessary). The baby's room is the 10' 12'4" room in the bottom right corner.
My questions for you all are:
1. Do I need a second satellite?
2. If I do, is my proposed layout ok?
3.Could adding a second satellite hurt my performance at all?
1. Do I need a second satellite? No, the router alone can cover around 30 feet. Since you have the router at one end and need a satellite at the opposite end, this will work fine. I have a similar placement.
I think you're confusing the minimum recommended distance between router and satellite with WiFi range. The WiFi range of both Router and satellite is far greater than 30ft. Of course the range in the apartment setting of the OP will depend on many factors, the main one being wall construction.
1. Do I need a second satellite? No, the router alone can cover around 30 feet. Since you have the router at one end and need a satellite at the opposite end, this will work fine. I have a similar placement.
I think you're confusing the minimum recommended distance between router and satellite with WiFi range. The WiFi range of both Router and satellite is far greater than 30ft. Of course the range in the apartment setting of the OP will depend on many factors, the main one being wall construction.
The powerline adapters idea is a good one. I have NETGEAR PowerLINE 1200 Mbps, 1 Gigabit Port (PL1200-100PAS). I would simply connect that to to my router and a switch, and then wire the components to the switch, right?
The powerline adapters idea is a good one. I have NETGEAR PowerLINE 1200 Mbps, 1 Gigabit Port (PL1200-100PAS). I would simply connect that to to my router and a switch, and then wire the components to the switch, right?
I would connect the Router to a Powerline Adapter with another Powerline Adapter for you TV, PS4 etc. This is where you want to add an Ethernet Switch and plug your TV, PS4 etc. into the switch. If the Powerline Adpaters are stable then great. I had Internet drops with my older ones (both Netgear and Devolo) i.e. non pass-through. I swapped them for the pass-through type as they're better at filtering mains noise - not a single issue since.
If I decided to purchase an additional satellite and positions the router and satellites in a "triangle" at least 30 feet apart, would that be ok? With the proposed solutions and building materials in my house, I worry about the baby room (the bottom right in the attached screenshot) getting appropriate coverage.
Before deciding to get the RBK50, I had a Linksys wireless extended very close to the baby room (the router was in the same place). The wireless coverage in the baby room was awful. As a result, the Arlo Baby monitor delivered very poor performance.
Thanks! This may be a silly question, but how can I determine whether a second satellite is necessary or not? In other words, we are speaking in hypotheticals based on experience, expected performance, etc. The only way to know for sure would be to run speed tests before and after the satellite, right?
Yes, and when you do, pick several test points around the house, both near and close to the sourse wifi signals. Then you'll get a good idea of where you have good spots and dead spots where wifi needs to improve. Setting up just 1 satellite then test. If you still have some dead spots then maybe the 2nd satellite would be needed.
One more question - in conducting my tests, would it make sense comparing the RBS50, RBS40, and RBW30? In other words, if the concern of adding an additional satellite is interference, would using an RBS40 or RBW30 over a RBS50 be better to reduce the chances of inteference?
I did testing with my Orib system and just my iphone. I disabled and re-enabled my wireless on the iphone before and after taking speed tests. This allowed the phone to connect to the best source signal depending on where I was located, near the base router or satellite.
No. Same issue will be present on any other models used.
I was wrong about where the router has to go. I got the RBK50 and installed the router in the living room where the only live coaxial hookup is (S1 in the attached diagram). I set up the satellite on the other side of the property in the master bedroom (S2 in the attached diagram). The Arlo Baby monitor in the baby's room (bottom right room) is connecting to S1, but only at 2/3 bars. The performance on the baby monitor is quite bad.
Two questions:
1. Based on the fact that it's not connecting at 3/3 bars, would an add-on Orbi wall plug (RBW30) in the baby's room make sense?
2. The Arlo Baby monitor's manual says to connect it to the 2.4 GHz signal. However, it is connecting to the 5 GHz signal. Is there a way for me to "force" this device, and this device only, to connect to the 2.4 GHz signal?
What is the distance between the babys room and the main router? The camera looks like the distance is well with in range.
You can lower the power output of the main router on the 5Ghz radio from 100% to 25% save settings then try a reboot on the camera to see if it connects to the 2.4ghz radio.
Possible that your camera could be not working well?
What are your Download/Upload speeds for your Internet connection? I would start looking at the Arlo Baby Monitor. With your system set up as descibed go into the baby's room with a phone, laptop etc and measure the speed you get in a similar position to the Baby monitor using something like Speedtest.net.
