SONOS being more informative to their customers


Userlevel 5
Badge +8

Sonos is a well respected company with products usually excellent. However, I feel they are loosing “respect and followers “ of their products. Why? They never, never , never explain in detail why and what the updates are for. Many of us don’t need the updates and are ( or were) happy with the sound we had. Sonos needs to be more informative to the people who buy and support the company. And when there seems to be an issue ( or issues) , they should acknowledge it on the community page not waiting weeks or months. 


17 replies

Userlevel 7

I think this is pretty informative:

https://support.sonos.com/s/article/3521

Userlevel 7
Badge +17

Who can be against more transparancy? But I do think stating you “don’t need the updates” is a bit strange if you’ve just told us you don’t know what they are for……

Userlevel 5
Badge +8

Who can be against more transparancy? But I do think stating you “don’t need the updates” is a bit strange if you’ve just told us you don’t know what they are for……

Most of us with the latest issues brought on by the 14.12 update were happy before and needed no changes.

Userlevel 7
Badge +15

I've said the same, they have a habbit of introducing negative side effects through their updates and all customers can do is wait until they hopefully sort it out.

Shame really as the hardware side is excellent.

 Many of us don’t need the updates and are ( or were) happy with the sound we had.

I agree, though this seems to be something that affects the TV product line, because I have never seen any adverse sound quality effect on any of my Sonos audio products because they are not meant for TV. Now of course I am even less at risk of exposure to this, having opted to stay on S1.

Why the TV products should suffer this when the audio products do not is something I have no answer to.

Who can be against more transparancy? But I do think stating you “don’t need the updates” is a bit strange if you’ve just told us you don’t know what they are for……

Most of us with the latest issues brought on by the 14.12 update were happy before and needed no changes.

Sonos obviously was not planning on introducing issues with their update, so it’s not something they could realistic list out as a ‘feature’ of the update.  Was it a failure of proper testing?  Probably, but that’s not really the question here.

The question really is whether or not Sonos should make it easier, or encourage, users NOT to upgrade if they don’t see any new features in the firmware upgrade. Sonos does not want to support multiple versions of their software for obvious cost reasons.  They already have to support S1 and S2.  They also have designed it so that firmware updates can happen automatically.  There is the issue that the app version needs to be matched to the device firmware versions to work properly.  There is also the issue that older versions may not be able to upgrade to the current version cleanly.

I get the point that some people may want to not apply an update if they see no benefit, only the potential that something might break.  However, I also think it’s reasonable for Sonos to require the most current version for support and to add new hardware.

 Many of us don’t need the updates and are ( or were) happy with the sound we had.

I agree, though this seems to be something that affects the TV product line, because I have never seen any adverse sound quality effect on any of my Sonos audio products because they are not meant for TV. Now of course I am even less at risk of exposure to this, having opted to stay on S1.

Why the TV products should suffer this when the audio products do not is something I have no answer to.

 

I would guess that the required software manipulation of TV audio, given the additional channels, emphasis on dialog, and the expectation to of audio bouncing off walls and ceilings makes it more complex that the standard stereo signal in music.  There is also the matter that Sonos gets the audio from TVs or other sources which may do it’s own manipulation of the audio, that Sonos has to account for in some cases. Indeed, this current issue certainly doesn’t seem to be impacting all users, but just those who meet a certain setup of conditions.   Yes, I can imagine why today’s TV audio might be a little more difficult that streaming music.

 

 

I would guess that the required software manipulation of TV audio, given the additional channels, emphasis on dialog, and the expectation to of audio bouncing off walls and ceilings makes it more complex that the standard stereo signal in music. 

 

That is all fine as an excuse, but what happens when the sound that was the basis of a user buying decision, changes via a Sonos upgrade? The user who bought the unit for the way it sounds, is now left with a unit that sounds different, and with a sound that he/she does not like.

This is compounded by the fact that such a user cannot dial back to the old sound that was preferred. Trueplay can at least be toggled OFF if not liked.

Why should such users not legitimately be entitled for a refund?

 

Why should such users not legitimately be entitled for a refund?

 

Because that is not the contract they entered into with Sonos when they purchased the hardware and installed the software.  Legally this contract is a function of the EULA, which states the software is licensed, not purchased, and is subject to change, with no expectation of continuous functionality of some or all features.  This is a standard in the software industry and has been for decades.

But a user buying a Sonos unit has no idea - and need not have any idea - about EULA etc. Most are not software geeks.

But a user buying a Sonos unit has no idea - and need not have any idea - about EULA etc. Most are not software geeks.

So what?  Caveat emptor.  And I disagree the buyer need not have any idea about the EULA, the evidence in this and other threads makes it quite clear they most certainly should be aware.  At the very least they should be aware that their ignorance is no grounds for a refund.

The legal agreement entered in to by opening the product is not set by the buyer’s expectations, in any product I’m aware of. Whether or not they are  familiar with the product or not. 

I am pretty sure that this argument being put forth by Sonos fans will not be echoed by Sonos.

This is just a speaker people are buying, not a computer or software. But diehard Sonos fans will defend Sonos more than what even Sonos will😂, so I will leave them to their favourite pastime.

Userlevel 4
Badge +3

I was thinking of buying two sonos five for my turntable, but after last update, I have second thoughts. I don’t want a system that can potentially suddenly sound completely different from what I bought. I have sonos devices all over my house, so it would be natural for me to buy those fives, but now I don’t know what to do. Never thought anything like this could happen. My arc with sub and ones now sounds lika my old 100 dollar Samsung sound bar 🤨 

I was thinking of buying two sonos five for my turntable, but after last update, I have second thoughts. I don’t want a system that can potentially suddenly sound completely different from what I bought.

Even for someone like you that has to be on S2, I am pretty sure that what you worry about will not happen for the 5 units in the application you will use them; it seems that Sonos does not quite have its act together only where audio for TV is concerned.

I do not use Sonos for any TV support, and while I too think that most of its updates are heat with no forward motion, none since 2011 has ever changed the way my kit sounds, except for Trueplay tuning, which is optional. Which is also why I got off the upgrade treadmill and decided to stay on S1, but a worry about a change in the way my kit will start to sound like was not one of the reasons for that decision. Although these events do now give me more relief that I am on S1 and not subject to this nonsense, remote though it may be for my use cases.

I am pretty sure that this argument being put forth by Sonos fans will not be echoed by Sonos.

This is just a speaker people are buying, not a computer or software. But diehard Sonos fans will defend Sonos more than what even Sonos will😂, so I will leave them to their favourite pastime.

 

You could not be more wrong, and it is spelled out right here (Section 10.b.):

https://www.sonos.com/en-us/legal/terms-of-use

SONOS DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE PRODUCT WILL OPERATE WITHOUT INTERRUPTION OR WILL BE ERROR-FREE, OR THAT ALL ERRORS AND OR DEFECTS MAY BE CORRECTED; THAT THE FUNCTIONS, FEATURES, OR SERVICES PERFORMED OR PROVIDED BY, INCLUDING THIRD PARTY FEATURES AND SERVICES, CONTAINED IN THE PRODUCT SOFTWARE WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS; THAT ANY FEATURES, FUNCTIONS OR SERVICE WILL CONTINUE TO BE MADE AVAILABLE; THAT THE PRODUCT SOFTWARE WILL BE COMPATIBLE OR WORK WITH ANY THIRD PARTY SOFTWARE, APPLICATIONS OR THIRD PARTY SERVICES.  . . .

 

I would guess that the required software manipulation of TV audio, given the additional channels, emphasis on dialog, and the expectation to of audio bouncing off walls and ceilings makes it more complex that the standard stereo signal in music. 

 

That is all fine as an excuse, but what happens when the sound that was the basis of a user buying decision, changes via a Sonos upgrade? The user who bought the unit for the way it sounds, is now left with a unit that sounds different, and with a sound that he/she does not like.

 

 

You asked a question, I gave my opinion on it.  That had nothing to do with my opinion on sound profile changes.

 

This is compounded by the fact that such a user cannot dial back to the old sound that was preferred. Trueplay can at least be toggled OFF if not liked.

Why should such users not legitimately be entitled for a refund?

 

Refund seems to be a rather extreme position to take at this point. 

 

 

 

Refund seems to be a rather extreme position to take at this point. 

So, at what point would it no longer be extreme according to you?

Reply