what happened to sonos?

[jmstpierre]

good morning MLO,

As the title suggest, what happened to sonos? a few years back they were the market leader for streaming, but now they seem to have taken a step back. they seem more concerned about their speakers and sub than moving forwward into streaming. their device does not stream anything higher than 16/48 i beleive, whereas most of the opposition and everybody in the hifi industry is coming out with hi res streamers....
i must admit that i just bought a small naim unitiqute for the study or bedroom, and it s great. To be honest i did not even consider sonos until after my purchase and stumble onto it in a non high end AV shop,just sitting all by itself.
A few years ago, there would have been signs everywhere about it, but now it seems to just get forgotten.
Quite sad as they were one of the original streamer kings, way ahead of the game.
Will they bounce back?? I guess some people still prefer a dedicated streamer to an all in one device.
Is there any real advantages to have a dedicated streamer vs a streamer/dac combo or even using a computer to feed a dac with music via a computer media server??
regards

 

[amey01]

I have been asking the same question myself. I don't know. They're still around of course, but they are not exactly market leaders any more. With the future of the Squeezebox in doubt, the forthcoming Olive One is about the only thing that looks partially reasonable.

Perhaps these products are a victim of being too far ahead of their time. Their purpose is poorly understood. Most people seem happy to connect an iPod via an analogue headphone lead.

Many audiophiles use a computer to feed a DAC as you say, which I think is ridiculous. There are many that think otherwise (including some of us) and I'd encourage them to contribute here.

For me though - the difference between a computer and a dedicated/purpose built device (in an audio system in a listening room) is night and day in terms of operation, ease of use, fluidity, and dare I say it - sound quality (as a ratio to effort). The last thing I want is a whirring hard disk or fan in my listening room.

Back to Sonos though - they have a great range, and it has been limited by two issues in particular since inception - that is a limit to 16/44.1 (as you say) and a 64,000 track limit. Both are showstoppers for audiophiles, and both (you would think) would be eminently easy to fix.

 

[jmstpierre]

Hi Amey01,

Sonos have really taken a back step and like I mentioned, they seemed to be more interested in their speakers and sub than moving forward with their streaming products. Question is, is sonos more of a lifestyle product more than a hifi device.?
most hifi manufacturers are coming out with streaming devices that also act as dacs and sometime preamps, it does make me wonder if the R&D has been poured into the streaming or dac/preamplifier function.
Would one be better off having a dedicated device designed and built for one purpose or do all in one devices come a long way and can be as efficient as seperates?
I did not know about the fact that sonos could only read and stream 64000 files only, but did know about the 16/48. However, I believe that wired for sound do offer a mod to the original sonos which in turns makes it a 24/96. Is that the redirection of sonos? I guess time will tell.
I admit I bought a little naim unitiQute to put in my study and may be move to my master room, and it s a great little unit. Really makes me want to explore naim higher range. Who knows, I may even get the superuniti to pair with ethos and get the uniti serve, though not cheap.
I know you r not keen on a computer in your system, but m not really sold on that yet,( just my opinion ). Lots of people have commented how good a Mac mini is. I also got one, and in the process of loading all my music onto it but using under a windows set up so that I could use jrivers. I will play around between streaming from it and direct feed into dac via jrivers.
Regards

 

[amey01]

wonder if the R&D has been poured into the streaming or dac/preamplifier function.
Would one be better off having a dedicated device designed and built for one purpose or do all in one devices come a long way and can be as efficient as seperates?

Good question, and I think absolutely yes.

Hifi companies are great at doing hi-fi, but not so good at doing IT/streaming/network functions. Even something as simple as the UI is lacking on most hi-fi streaming products, not to mention control options, software updates, et al.

A dedicated streaming device to handle the network side of things is essential in my books. Leave the hi-fi manufacturers to take care of the hi-fi side only.

 

[timm]

Hi guys --

Not meant to be a thread hi-jacker - but this is in relation to the squeezebox (so it is streaming related... )... I have a usb connection to a hard drive... (the hard drive is completely silent)... The SB touch hooks directly to my preamp via its rca outs. Comparing it to my denon 5900 - I find the SB to be flatter in presentation. Not real noticeable until you do an a/b....and still enjoyable as it is.... but is there any sound degradation within the SB using the direct USB connection to the hard-drive (vs streaming wirelessly from a PC)... and since the denon sounds better than the SB right now - do you think it makes sense that it would sound better as a transport (compared to the SB) going out to a DAC?

 

[Hocky]

Hi guys --

Not meant to be a thread hi-jacker - but this is in relation to the squeezebox (so it is streaming related... )... I have a usb connection to a hard drive... (the hard drive is completely silent)... The SB touch hooks directly to my preamp via its rca outs. Comparing it to my denon 5900 - I find the SB to be flatter in presentation. Not real noticeable until you do an a/b....and still enjoyable as it is.... but is there any sound degradation within the SB using the direct USB connection to the hard-drive (vs streaming wirelessly from a PC)... and since the denon sounds better than the SB right now - do you think it makes sense that it would sound better as a transport (compared to the SB) going out to a DAC?

Make sure that you have all of the digital volume/dynamics control junk on the squeezebox turned off. That could be the difference.

 

[sleepysurf]

The Squeezebox DAC's are "OK" (Transporter and Touch better than the others), but feeding digital out from them to an outboard DAC is really best for serious listening. I have seven Squeezebox devices around my house, including a Touch in my primary setup paired with a Bel Canto DAC 3.5. The others are used for casual listening and/or whole-house audio (Boom, 2 Radios, and 3 older Squeezeboxes feeding powered or in-ceiling speakers).

 

[timm]

Make sure that you have all of the digital volume/dynamics control junk on the squeezebox turned off. That could be the difference.

Hmmm.. interesting... I will have to check that out... I have seen the volume control.... I usually have it turned down... but things happen...and I am not sure if 'turning it down' means turning it off....

 

[Hocky]

Hmmm.. interesting... I will have to check that out... I have seen the volume control.... I usually have it turned down... but things happen...and I am not sure if 'turning it down' means turning it off....

You should completely disable the volume control on the device, effectively setting it at 100% and using your pre to control volume.

 

[amey01]

.. and since the denon sounds better than the SB right now - do you think it makes sense that it would sound better as a transport (compared to the SB) going out to a DAC?

Possible.

Unlikely.

You might find the Denon sounds better when you use it as a DAC - ie. Connect the SB to the Denon via digital.

As others have said - make sure you have any processing in the SB turned off.

 

[shakham]

I have no problem with Sonos, but it is really hard running a niche business IMO. Limited resources makes large initiatives difficult, and I bet they have felt going 24/96 isn't worth the R&D at this stage. Logitech is a company with much deeper pockets and look at what happened to the Squeezebox.

I guess I'm doing my own thread hijack...

I feel that Apple has been improving their offering tremendously over the years. I have said this before, but I'm a fan of the Airplay line of products. It has evolved tremendously and still continues to evolve.

Airplay only streams 16/44.1 but that's still CD quality. The Airport Express has optical out, which mean you can use an external DAC.

You can stream to multiple outputs each with their independent volume. You can stream from iTunes, an ipad, iphone...pretty much anything Apple.

People can come over and bring their iphone and stream on your system. You can stream YouTube, or any app that you may have. If you are using an Apple TV, you can stream video as well.

What Sonos needs to do is partner up with one of the big boys and take their price point down, then develop a flagship 24/192 product .

I'd love to test out Sonos, but not at $500/pop. I presently am running 5 zones.

 

[amey01]

I feel that Apple has been improving their offering tremendously over the years.

What? I haven't seen any improvement sorry. Same boring and functionality-hobbled products.

Airplay only streams 16/44.1

Case in point. No improvement since the inception of iTunes. Say no more.

That pretty much rules it out for any half-respecting audiophile.

then develop a flagship 24/192 product

Agree with this though Olive already are though - the Olive One looks promising.........we'll see.

 

[shakham]

What? I haven't seen any improvement sorry. Same boring and functionality-hobbled products.

Case in point. No improvement since the inception of iTunes. Say no more.

First the disclaimer...
I am not an Apple fanboy. I am a tech guy and have a wide variety of equipment (could list them if you really want). However I tell it like it is.

What is functionality hobbled about the Airplay?

Improvements...
They have done a lot about managing a whole house solution including video.
You can output any Apple product audio/video to any Airplay Device.

Each zone is independent and each person can play their own music/video/app/software sound on the zone of their choice. These are all improvements since the inception of iTunes.

That pretty much rules it out for any half-respecting audiophile.

Sonos does 16/48. Even Squeezebox does 16/48. They upped in their latest Touch to 24/96, and then proceeded to kill the product. How is Airplay's 16/44.1 really any different?

There is no reason they can't do 24/96. It's more a matter of time.

Besides most people don't want 24/96 in the whole house...an easy solution would be to setup a MAC mini server sending 24/192 to your Audiophile setup directly by wire, and spread a bunch of Airplay devices everywhere else.

You can control it all via your iphone/ipad/etc.

Agree with this though Olive already are though - the Olive One looks promising.........we'll see.

http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/o...-player-designed-by-you?website_name=OliveONE

This is very early stage. Issue is going to be price point. Are they focusing on the whole home concept? Then $400/pop is going to limit their exposure. If it's for the single system, then they are pretty much the former Squeezebox touch competitor.

What concerns me about Olive is the same thing...
If they kill it, I'm stuck with $2K of equipment that I can't sell and will get deprecated, and no longer work, as new phone OS versions come out.

 

[amey01]

What is functionality hobbled about the Airplay?

The 24/44.1 limitation for a start.

How does it handle FLAC? Does it handle it at all, or do I need to keep two separate music libraries.

You can't stream different music to different locations (although this might be an improvement - not sure)

The AE doesn't support coax out.

I can't control it from Android devices.

Do I need to go on? I'm not really interested in the product, so I haven't researched it.

It's more a matter of time.

Why? Is 16/44.1 pushing the limits of human understanding or something? Have we only just worked out how to stream anything higher?

Pure and simple - it's just planned obsolescence, and this is my main bugbear with Apple products. I enjoyed 24/96 back in 2009 with the Squeezebox Touch - why should I go backwards?

 

[MiTT]

I enjoyed 24/96 back in 2009 with the Squeezebox Touch - why should I go backwards?

Ah...but what happens now if something goes wrong with your Squeezebox? Will they continue to support this discontinued product? Say what you want about the Sonos, I've added additional zones in my house because it's a great distributed solution. For my critical listening I have a different solution in the audio room (Mac Mini>new Audiolab M-DAC>Main System). Using Pure Music I don't have to maintain different libraries, I only have to exclude the higher resolution material from my Sonos play lists.

I'm not so concerned about music I'm sending to my deck, bedroom, dining room etc., but frankly, the UI and convenience for sharing is awesome (I can control it from my computer, iPad, iPhone - yes, I'm an Apple guy because it just plain works) and it usually ends up drawing people into the audio room for serious listening once they hear good music elsewhere in the house.

 

[shakham]

The 24/44.1 limitation for a start.

How does it handle FLAC? Does it handle it at all, or do I need to keep two separate music libraries.

You can't stream different music to different locations (although this might be an improvement - not sure)

The AE doesn't support coax out.

I can't control it from Android devices.

Do I need to go on? I'm not really interested in the product, so I haven't researched it.

For the above questions...
- ALAC not FLAC. iTunes isn't going anywhere, and everybody can play ALAC.
- Not one instance of iTunes playing 2 songs to two places, but you can stream any source to any destination.
- AE has both optical and coax.
- No Android support.

There are limitations, I NEVER denied that, but while everybody else has done little over the last 2-3 years, Apple has made changes to the positive. That is all I was saying. Also iTunes has a TON of 3rd party support for managing your music. I have had friends come over...they can stream their playlist from their iPhone at my home.

Everybody has some issue or another..
Sonos has that 6400 music limit...Correction: 64,000 limit
It's slow to reindex if you add songs.
It's expensive.

Even though, I would seriously consider it for my next home as it is supposed to "just work" and it has the "Connect: Amp" which is nice. I do the same with a workaround for the AE.

Squeezebox touch...
You need to use a server if you have over 2 players, I use 5 zones presently.
It has a 10,000 song limit.Correction: limit unknown...44,000 songs minimum
Playlist has a 100 track limit.
It's big...I have AEs hidden away in tiny places.

Logitech's 24/96 was interesting to me, even though most of my library is from CD which is 100% perfect at 16/44.1. I was considering getting one for my audiophile setup while retaining my AE setup before Logitech pulled the plug.

I'm not trying to start a war here or anything.

Why? Is 16/44.1 pushing the limits of human understanding or something? Have we only just worked out how to stream anything higher?

Pure and simple - it's just planned obsolescence, and this is my main bugbear with Apple products. I enjoyed 24/96 back in 2009 with the Squeezebox Touch - why should I go backwards?

MITT pretty much summed this up. I would do that, put a MAC mini straight on my ML setup.

 

[amey01]

- ALAC not FLAC. iTunes isn't going anywhere, and everybody can play ALAC.
- Not one instance of iTunes playing 2 songs to two places, but you can stream any source to any destination.
- AE has both optical and coax.
- No Android support.

There are limitations,

You may not have said there were limitations, but you did ask why I said it was functionality hobbled. You've answered your own question.

But yes - I agree - there are positives and negatives for all systems. That's why there is a place in the market for all of them. Personally, the SB was the best match for my requirements. And there is nothing that can come close to replacing it. That's why I'm so interseted in the Olive ONE.

 

[MiTT]

Actually, Sonos currently has a 64,000 track limit - or 54,000 more tracks than the Squeezebox Touch mentioned above. I have a little over 17,000 tracks in my library at present and I add more all the time. As I write this I have all of those tracks in a "Master" playlist for when I want unlimited variety, so there aren't any limits on playlists that I know of. Once the library is initially set up it doesn't take long to reindex, I add new material regularly and usually reindexing takes about as long as it takes me to go refresh my drink. Overall it probably is a little more expensive than an Apple TV/Airport Express setup. Last week I added a Bridge in my audio room so that I could take my ZP90 from the audio room to my bedroom. That cost me $49 bucks, though to be fair, the Connect runs about $349 I believe. Adding the new zone took me about 10 minutes.

 

[amey01]

Actually, Sonos currently has a 64,000 track limit - or 54,000 more tracks than the Squeezebox Touch mentioned above.

The Squeezebox does not have a 10,000 track limit.

It is practically unlimited. I currently have 24,500 or so tracks in mine.

 

[Hocky]

44,000 tracks in my SB.