It plays 24/48, not what you were expecting?

I aspected at least up to 24/192.

24/48 is not a step forward, while Roon, Audirvana and others are playing up to DSD256.

It only plays them on local library files we have.

Which brings out the question- how do we put the high res files from streaming services into the "local music" folders, as all of them are encrypted formats, readable by only the service provider.

Does this basically mean we have to purchase the physical CD and rip it in flac format and move that file manually to the music folders on the phone so Sonos app can see it on local device?

What am I missing?

I do not stream, I have all my music files on a NAS.

In stead of streaming you just buy and download the music files. No ripping and converting. So I create my own cloud without any subscriptions or links to third parties. The new Port is a nice step forward and could compete with USB based apps like Roon, Audirvana etc.

Is it that difficult to let Sonos play local stored files up to 24/192 ??
Furthermore I do not like Sonos to direct me to streaming services.

Same here. Well, I do also stream. But anyway, S2 does not play the 24/192 files I have on a NAS.

Where did Sonos say there would Hi Res audio playback when S2 was released?  The did loosely say that S2 was going to allow them to bring in Hi Res, but never said when.

You can purchase a digital copy from streaming service like Amazon, Google, and Amazon rather than CD.  You won’t be able to playback content you downloaded as part of a subscription service.

I feel deceived.

I guess in two years Sonos will demand we purchase all new products to handle 24 / 96.  Then, two years down the road 24 / 128.  Then, two years laters DSD256.

Pathetic.

This really will make people run to Roon.

Sonos didn’t demand you purchase all new products.  The majority of Sonos existing products, the ones with hardware to support it, are S2 capable.  And nothing in Sonos history of operating for over a decade suggests that you’ll have to repeat this S1/S2 change over every 2 years.

And for what it's worth, in some European languages, words resembling 'deception ' actually mean 'disappointment'. It is very likely that was the OP's intended meaning. So as well as being evidence-free and absolute nonsense, the contribution from @RickInHouston1 is agreeing with something that wasn't even said.

It does feel a bit harsh that Sonos has always kept away from DTS imlplementation because they cater for the streamers, not the physicals. Now we are in an age where streaming picks up HI-RES audio and suddenly it is the other way around.

Yes indeed, a big disappointment.

Sonos could have closed the gap with competition.

The point is even if I purchase an album, which allows me to download 24bit 94KHz FLAC files, these files will not play even from the local music library.  All the 24 bit downloads I get form Qobuz is in 94KHz, but sonos 24bit streaming is limited to 44KHz, rendering it unusable.  so have to download the 16bit version flac at 44KHz.

Which means all the time we spent organizing our libraries, will have to be redone if and when sonos 24/94 support is available (or if when one changes the streaming device).

As the leader of the streaming home audio system, I was hoping their S2 update would at least support the high-res streaming (or at least from local library it should support 24 bit/94Khz).

Anyway, I think you get what the disappointment is.  With massive amount of competition offering hi-res, not sure why they could not squeeze this in the S2 update. If there is a technical limitation, just say any existing units (gen1 or gen2), cannot handle high-res at 24/94 level…

Hello,

The geek inside me is also a bit disappointed with the limitations of the “His Res” audi capabilities.

I also have albums from Qobuz delivered with 24/96 or 24/88 and 24/44 but nothing in 24/48!!!

Most of the records I have are in 24/96. Therefore I can’t do the listening tests I wanted to do for so a long time!!!

In fact, I genuinely think that 16/44 is already enough for the human ears (I don’t want to launch the old troll again) so that’s why I chose Sonos over Denons Heos or Bluesound. I tested a Sonos One against a  Heos 1 and Sonos won. 

That being said, it looks like High Res audio implementation is not even close to “halfway”. Certainly to get the label High-Res Audio to put forward in display to compete against others brands…

Supporting higher sampling rates would certainly have required to put in the Legacy category much more hardware if not all of the current existing units except for the very recent ones...

If I’m honest I don’t believe that I could hear the difference between AAC and CDs or between Tidal and Apple Music at least on regular equipment so I very much doubt i could hear the difference to Hi-Res but that well worn argument misses the point.  I can hear the difference between different recording quality and different equipment. Therefore, I would like to be able to listen to all sources including MQA.at least when using my Hi-Fi with reference headphones.

The market trend is very much to streaming from buying music and HI-Res is expanding due to mainstream Amazon adoption and the expansion of bandwidth with fiber and 5G. The reason for lossy music files is becoming redundant. The Port is designed to connect to hi-fi but I would struggle to find another hI-fi streamer that doesn’t support Hi-Res. I would buy a Hi-Res streaming Port to replace my Gen 2 connect so I could listen to all sources otherwise I’m thinking of switching away from Sonos. 

I’m a big Sonos fan but from a technical and marketing point of view it needs to find a way of offering the option of Hi-Res streaming without obseleting its main products. Selfishly a Hi-Res Port that allows me to listen to all sources for focused listening on H-Fi would be the next step compromise. I suspect that the S2 OS is recognition that this is way the the technology and market is moving regardless of what any one thinks on the sound quality argument.      

Its seems like the hi-res audio support is the same in S2 as it was in S1. Sonos downsample audio to 16/44.1. This is at least what I can see when playing a 24/48 flac file via a Connect gen 2 hocked up to an external DAC.

Presumably the Connect/2 is running S2.

How exactly are you measuring this? At anything other than Fixed Volume a 16-bit file would output on the S/PDIF with a fully populated 24-bit width anyway. This has always been the case.

About the only way I can conceive of a “24/48” file appearing as 16-bit to a DAC is if the volume is Fixed and the lowest byte of the 24-bits is empty, i.e. the file is actually only 16-bit. 

The connect is running in fixed volume mode. Playing the same file via Roon and a hifi berry the DAC displays the correct sample rate.

I don’t think Hi Res audio was something they could just squeeze in, considering their main focus was on the S1/S2 split itself and the release of 3 new products.  I am actually surprised they did anything at all regarding the audio quality, and expected to see Hi Res, in any form show up a couple months from now at best.  I think disappointment regarding Hi Res is premature.

Ah, it’s the sample rate, not the bit depth. That makes sense, since AFAIK Sonos devices do a sample rate conversion on anything not in the native 44.1k format. In that case the DAC ought to show 24/44.1.

I agree with @melvimbe .  S2 is a platform for Sonos to build on, not a system that is delivered today and that is an end of it.  Judging S2 right now is just not clever.  Come back in five years with your verdicts please.

By which time Hi-Res could be as successful as SACD.

5 years may be a bit too long to wait.  I do think Hi Res is here to stay, regardless of whether it makes sense or not.  However,  the music industry will definitely have a new format that we all must move to to get the better sound.  They always do, whether it catches on or not.  My guess is that it’s atmos music.

Sonos developed in a time of lower bandwidths.. Music sources and competition increasingly offer Hi-Res. You can argue about the technicalities all you like but I’ve no doubt starting now from a sales and marketing persepctive then Sonos would offer Hi-Res. Sonos themselves are increasing the bandwidth  to start to offer Hi Res so regardless of the sound benefits on a Sonos system Sonos are accepting that tecnology and the market is moving on otherwise Sonos could be as successful in the future as SACD.  

All very true about market forces. VHS didn’t vanquish Betamax for any technical reasons.

When you use Roon with Tidal and an endpoint without MQA support. Roon is doing the decoding of the MQA stream from Tidal to “regular” PCM. If the source MQA stream from Tidal is 24/92 the PCM stream to the DAC will also be in 24/92. If the endpoint does not support higher resolution than eg 24/48, then Roon will down sample the MQA audio stream to PCM 24/48.

I think it would have been nice if Sonos would be able to do that (down sampling MQA).

But I agree with you guys, I don’t know if the end-result will be better than ordinary 16/44.1.

There is a lot of hype around hi-res audio in general. I remember the “hdtrack/BIS gate”. HDtrack was selling BIS content as 24/192 but the source material was mastered in 24/44…

In the end, I think the setup with mics, studio layout etc is much more important than the sampling rate.