Connect no longer bit-perfect?

Peter Mc wrote:

It seems people who claim hi-res sounds better cop a beating on this forum for not providing suitable evidence of what is taken to be a statement of fact, whereas a claim that someone is a liar is to be inferred as opinion and therefore need not be backed up with evidence. How do your "people that know better" tell the difference between these two scenarios?

Sorry, I still don't get you. In my view, both statements obviously are opinions, I don't need the "in my opinion" caveat to be attached to each to infer them to be so. And if challenged, both need to be backed up. I see that jgatie is doing just that with respect to the second, so I will not add anything there except to say that he is making a fine point of distinction that needs to be discerned.

Just for the heck of it, let me give what would my response have been if asked!

I'd have said that the author of a study that found and reported some perceived differences at times between Hi Res and CD based on a meta analysis of reports, some of admittedly dubious quality that his study relied upon, allowed himself to be directly quoted as saying things in favour of Hi res found by his study, that his own study did not admit to have found. And this was cleverly done, with the admittedly wrong quote only accepted to be so where and when challenged.

How's that, Ump?!

Peter Mc wrote:

Mostly we try and approve the final copy, but this is not always possible. There is no evidence that the inaccuracy was found and allowed through. When you say "cleverly done", this implies a deliberate act, and there is no evidence of this. Also, the wrong quote can only be admitted when it is observed. Finally, the primary source is the paper. No such statement appears in the paper. So I would say, on appeal, Not Out!

Oh come now Peter, aren't you stretching things a tad?
The author of the report said this himself on the other thread on this site:
"Press releases are put forward by organisations with the aim of trying to get the press to cover their story, and as such are a combination of spin, marketing, opinion and fact. In this case, it was written by a press officer at my university, and then AES issued another similar one." I have cut/pasted, no spin!

This isn't just a random release on the net that the author can be excused for being ignorant about, but is from the author's organisation! You really think that the author, if he did not make these fully fleshed out and attributed in quotes to him statements, also remained ignorant of what his own organisation is saying what he said, and that too in italicised quotes? In this day and age? And then also continued to remain ignorant of the AES doing the same thing? Knowing as he says he does that press releases are used for spin? Is it then that his organisation is the one doing the clever shill and our author is just the naive scientist labouring honestly in the lab, not knowing what his evil superiors are doing to spin his report?! Give me a break!

I am not saying this isn't possible, just making my assessment of the probabilities. And why can I not say that if he really did not know how his organisation is spinning his report, that is in itself an indictment of sorts?

My question is... how did Sonos allow the Connect to NOT become bit-perfect with the Fixed Volume setting?! Surely someone, somewhere would have realized that a change being made would affect the audio output, and that the Connect - the one Sonos device that has been reported as having bit-perfect digital output - would no longer be able to make that claim. If they decide that they want to still allow the level adjustment for the fixed volume setting, there should at least be the option to disable it, returning bit-perfect output for those that want it.

On the other hand, many have wanted some kind of volume leveling in the speakers... and while Sonos has never said anything about it, it appears that they've been working on it.

kumar wrote:

...a combination of spin, marketing, opinion and fact

None of those imply stating something that is incorrect. My organization also puts out press releases with the same four qualities. This is done by science journalists after talking to the authors of the work. The copy is not always checked by the authors before release due to press deadlines. But I strongly believe that where at all possible a press release should always be checked by the author of the work, and this is one lesson to be learned here. Even after checking, I know of cases where the sub-editor of a newspaper chose headlines or picture captions that were just plain wrong. This occurred after any chance of checking.

On the flip side, there is also an obligation on the part of a reader of internet information to check the primary source before getting too carried away by what they have read. In this case it is the published paper itself. The press release contained a link to the paper, which is freely available. Anyone who is mislead by the press release has not done their due diligence and checked the primary source.

So, to summarize, both sides of the argument need to get their checking act together 🙂

Bigot can mean the same in the UK too, but we are talking about hifi, not races or cultures.
I presumed that people were intelligent enough to understand the context of the discussion we were having.

"a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as in those who believe in Hi Res) with hatred and intolerance" 😃

Maybe I should have said 'insular' instead, or 'snob' but then most people don't understand the word 'snob' many think it means stuck up or posh.

I think the problem maybe that Bigot has been used so much in the last few months with what has been happening with Brexit and Trump that many maybe only know it from hearing it in a derogatory way.
It is the same when you call someone ignorant, so many people get all annoyed and say things like "Don't call me stupid!". Which is always kind of ironic.

jgatie wrote:

There is only one person here showing a degree of intolerance that rises to a level of calling for people to shut up and stop posting their opinion.

Leave Chicks out of this, I think he/she has some issues. 😉




All I was saying, is if you don't see why someone would want a player that offers say Hires or MQA or bit perfect, then why bother entering the thread of those that do want that to tell them they are wrong and it is not needed?
There are so many threads that I don't agree with, but I don't feel the need to go in there and say to those posting "You're wrong!!".

Try and bite your tongue, let those that want these options ask for them?

So yeah, if I am asking Sonos for an audiophile connect, and you jump in to say it is not needed I have the right to say "Shut up, just because you don't want it doesn't none of us can have it.".

Moderation edit: Please watch the language. - Ryan S.

Kumar wrote:

gizze wrote:

I think the problem maybe that Bigot has been used so much in the last few months with what has been happening with Brexit and Trump that many maybe only know it from hearing it in a derogatory way.

I disagree; accusing someone of bigotry has been a serious thing for a long time now and I am saying this with confidence even as someone whose mother tongue isn't English. A lot more people may be throwing the word around these days, but an undeserved/unproved accusation of bigotry would be derogatory in my book for decades now.

Really?

I think I am a bigot when it comes to many things.

I can't stand those left wing snowflakes that mouth off so much at the moment, you know, the ones that tend to be offended on behalf of others. I think their views should be ignored completely, that is me being a bigot.

Hi Kumar

Sonos DOES respond to volume normalization information contained in the metadata of individual songs. However, this CANNOT be turned off, so songs that follow on from each other on an album can have a volume jump.

In your audiophile days, if an amplifier was advertised as modifying all inputs by applying a 1dB compression, would you buy this in preference to one that was advertised as being a "straight wire with gain"? The Connect applies such a compression without the option to disable it.

Cheers, Peter.

Peter, in my old audiophile days, I would not touch even wireless with a barge pole, let alone what you refer to. Straight enough to not be heard as bent is good enough now.

I am wiser today and I don't care now about anything that I can't hear. Even more so, if it means added convenience and music access.

More importantly, if as you say Sonos responds to normalization information, why do I get volume changes from one album to another, both ripped or bought in iTunes? Or from ripped CDs to Apple Music streams?

"Straight enough to not be heard as bent..." - what a great phrase and philosophy - I love it!

The background to my concerns is this: I bought a new amp recently - a Peachtree Nova 125SE to replace a Cambridge Audio Azur 640a. I believe amps are all much the same, but the Cambridge was cutting out randomly, and the Peachtree has digital inputs that allow me to ditch an external DAC and clear up some cables. Surprisingly, the Peachtree sounds much better through my speakers (an old pair of Duntech Marquis). Two friends commented on this independently - it is a very clear difference. This was using the analog outputs of the Connect. When I tried the digital outputs of the Connect into the Peachtree DAC input, the bass on my favourite test song was substantially worse. It had lost a lot of punch. I tried a number of other songs, and the same difference was clear. So I decided to test the difference between the two setups. The first step in this test was to ensure the Connect passed the digital signal through unchanged. It doesn't. So now I'm left wondering whether the Connect is the cause of the problem.

The Connect should be "a straight wire with gain" so it cannot be suspected of being a source of audio problems.

To your other point. Coincidentally, my partner just complained that there was a substantial difference in volume between tracks she was listening to (not a single album - a Deezer "best of"). I think volume normalization can help somewhat, but it's not perfect. It is an amplitude correction that cannot fully correct for RMS differences caused by compression. Different albums with different mastering engineers use different degrees of compression. Almost all modern songs peak at very close to 0dB, but can have very different loudness as judged by RMS. No amount of amplitude correction can fully compensate.

Cheers, Peter.

Kumar wrote:

Lol. I prefer the short route these days; if it sounds good to me and if I enjoy the music/experience, I don't bother about objective measurements to confirm or in any way validate my experience! Perhaps this is the result of a decade of equipment obsession that I am happy to have left behind.

I have never been that kind of an audiophile, perhaps that's why I'm still interested in getting as good sound as I can get, as I've not been dogged down too much by audiohilia nevrosa... After getting my first stereo system it took me exactly two weeks to get over the subjectivist tinkering thing. A salesman convinced me to get some very expensive cables. I took them home, and heard exactly zero difference... So I started to read up on what cables actually did, and realized that I had been scammed. I became so angry that I went back and demanded to get my money back. At first they refused, but when I threatened to sue them for misleading me as a customer, they gave in.

As for now, this new connect unit is the first audio thing I've bought in three years. Prior to that I also had the same system for 8 years, without a single change. When I buy audio stuff, I try to buy durable and sturdy stuff that measure as good as possible, and which fit aesthetically. That's basically it.

Btw, I agree that two play:1s plus sub, equalized with trueplay, is almost laughably good. I have that setup in my kitchen. I do prefer the other setup I have in the salon by some degree, but the sonos setup really is superb.

I agree that comparison of minor differences requires careful technique. The bass punch I'm referring to is not minor. You are right that the digital and analog cases require different volume settings. I have tried subjective matching as I switch. Sometimes I get it too loud, sometimes too soft. The conclusion is always the same - analog output sounds punchier. So, I think this is a case where the difference is sufficiently large that small volume mismatches will not confound the comparison. But as a scientist I remained somewhat skeptical. I was hoping to record the digital and analog signals into my recording software to do a more rigorous comparison. This was when I discovered that the digital signal was not bit-perfect. So I am stuck on this issue for the moment.

If you play the same track ripped via itunes, and streamed from Apple, do you notice a difference?

I just recorded part of a song while auditioning within itunes and compared to my ripped CD version. All this was in the digital domain on a PC. If I left soundcheck on in itunes preferences, the peak was about 3dB quieter than the CD version but the RMS was the same. If I turned soundcheck off, the peak was about the same but the RMS was about 3dB larger. What this means is that itunes is different to the CD version - I suspect itunes applies compression. The itunes version is also out of phase with my CD version - this isn't the case when I use Sonos rather than itunes.

As you can see, there are some interesting issues with streaming music. It's why I prefer ripped CDs from a NAS. If only the Connect would have an option to play them back as intended!

One final point - this is not reducing my enjoyment of music at all. I have listened to so much good music lately and enjoyed it all thoroughly. Some of it comes from podcasts at 128kbps, so I can't be all that fussy! If you get a moment, listen to a track called All Day All Night by the group River Whyless from their latest album We All The Light.

Cheers, Peter.

I think that sums up your attitude a treat.

At least we all know where we stand.

Peter Mc wrote:

When itunes rips to a format that allows metadata (I use Apple lossless - ALAC), itunes computes and stores the volume normalization in the track metadata and Sonos then responds to this.

This is where I discovered the 1dB compression.

My CD rips are all in ALAC, while iTunes purchases are in AAC, so the volume normalisation information is available to Sonos, I should think. I just don't think that Sonos is using this effectively in playback.

I hear what you are saying about bass frequency effects that you are seeing and how volume increases don't/won't work selectively. And if using Music Eq is what is needed to restore things - even if that is possible here - then the Connect has stopped being the straight wire, I agree.

A question though: do you think that the measured compression of 1dB that you are seeing will cause this selective frequency effect? Or is there something more that is happening here?

Kumar wrote:

I also notice that Sonos still hasn't replied to my normalisation question posed elsewhere for a second time.

And is noticeably silent here. Either their engineers don't know what is happening or they are choosing silence.

I get the feeling that they're choosing silence. I still don't know why they would remove the ability of a component with a digital output to provide the bit-perfect digital output that it used to be capable of, and was well lauded for. They should at least provide some kind of setting to allow bit-perfect digital output again, whether it's tied to the already existing "Fixed Volume" setting or a separate setting that can be enabled only when Fixed Volume is enabled.

Do I personally care about it? Not anymore... my Connect now serves as an input-only. But obviously there are others that do.

jgatie wrote:

Peter Mc wrote:

jgatie wrote:

I never called anyone a liar.

jgatie wrote:

Mr. Reiss is lying in his PR statement.

jgatie wrote:

I stand by my accusation. Dr. Reiss is lying in his PR statement.

jgatie wrote:

...in reality a lie, attributed directly to you.

And not once did I say Mr. Reiss is a liar. Only that his statement (if in fact, it was his statement) with regards to the PR release for his study was a lie.

I stand by that assessment.

@jgatie

OK, I've done some more reading and thinking about lying (not really what I expected to get out of this forum, but what the heck, always ready to learn). I had thought that accusing a person of lying must mean you are also accusing them of being a liar. However, it seems common usage of the word liar means someone who habitually and deliberately tells lies. A lie is a deliberate mistruth, told in the knowledge it is false.

The other distinction to be made here is between a deliberate mistruth (a lie) and an error (statement is wrong without deliberate intent). Without solid evidence, I don't think it can be claimed that Dr Reiss is lying. In fact, the evidence from the primary source (his paper) indicates otherwise.

So here is what I propose if you agree with my analysis:
I will agree that you did not call Dr Reiss a liar, but that you accused him of lying; and
You will agree that the statement attributed to Dr Reiss is wrong but not deliberately, so it is not a lie.
If you still believe his statement to be a lie, you will provide evidence of deliberate intent.

Do we agree?

@PeterMc

I just managed to get hold of a pre-2011 Connect (ZD90) in perfect working order. Happy camper here! If Sonos doesn't solve this, I guess those connect units might become more expensive on the second hand market as the issue becomes more widely known (so far I've yet to read about it on any of the audiophile websites). So I'm happy I got one now. Will install it in my system in a few days.

Btw, I've done some more listening tests, where I compare the sound from my connect-fed monitors+sub to the sound from my Sennheisers. It seems to me that the biggest audible change is about volume normalization between tracks. The compression of peaks CAN be audible on some tracks, but it's still relatively subtle. What is not subtle, however, is what happens when I play full orchestral pieces where some of the tracks/movements are much more loud and explosive than the rest. Much of this between-tracks dynamics gets lost with the volume normalization applied. And according to the information from Ryan from Sonos here in the forum, this volume normalization is not applied to the pre-2011 Connects.

I do realize that I'm in the clear minority here - as a person who listens critically to very dynamic classical music, and who possesses a system that is actually able to do justice to such dynamics. What I perceive as a problem, will not be a problem for 99 percent of sonos users. It might even be that this volume normalization makes life easier for most people out there. I don't know. Still, I would have liked Sonos to cater to people like me as well, and I'll watch over this new/old connect as if my life depended on it 😉

Kumar wrote:

Would I be right in thinking that this sounds better to you than the bit perfect ZP80 into the AVI actives - even if the Sonos Sub was to be removed for an apples to apples comparison?

I now longer have the AVIs (which had a subwoofer too) -- so can't make a side-by-side comparison -- and they were early ADM9s in any case, so several generations back. My recollection was that the P:5s sounded more natural in the midrange (piano, voice), and of course with Trueplay the bass response at the sweet spot is much smoother.

Kumar wrote:

I also notice that Sonos still hasn't replied to my normalisation question posed elsewhere for a second time.

And is noticeably silent here. Either their engineers don't know what is happening or they are choosing silence.

I just replied to that thread. We just hadn't read it yet.

Kumar wrote:

When I read the thread over I found nothing definitive about why Sonos "degraded" the Connect. It can't have been for volume normalisation because that, as far as I can see, still doesn't work.

Normalization for tracks does work, but we'd be happy to help take a look with you to make sure it's working right with your system.

Kumar wrote:

So why degrade the digital output at all?

We are talking about a minor change to the audio when applying normalization.

Kumar wrote:

And does this have any effect on sound quality where Connect is the first player in a group that is wirelessly broadcasting a digital stream to other players in the group? Is that stream not bit perfect any more? If so, this is a bigger problem than of being one only for such people that are using the Connect wired to the digital inputs of an external DAC? Based on my experience of the Connect used in that mode, I'd say that I haven't noticed any sound quality loss, but I don't have a reference baseline anymore, so I can't be certain!

Short answer, no. When players are grouped together the audio that's sent across the system is the original digital file of the track, retrieved from the source by the group coordinator and then distributed untouched to the others. Each player uses its own DAC and settings on that original file once they receive it.

Ryan S wrote:

We are talking about a minor change to the audio when applying normalization.

Normalization is ALWAYS applied, therefore the minor change (compression) is also ALWAYS applied. I can defeat normalization by either removing the tags or using wav files. I CANNOT defeat the compression. It applies to everything I play through a Connect, and presumably every other component of Sonos.

Surely any hi-fi gear that forcibly altered the signal in this way would be reviewed poorly and eventually fail in the hi-fi marketplace. The best audio gear tries to reproduce the signal without adding its own coloration. Surely the Connect should be capable of passing through the digital signal faithfully and unaltered.

Please consider adding a switch so we can choose to disable the coloration, or at least return to the old setting where fixed volume output bypassed it.

Cheers, Peter.

Ryan S wrote:

Normalization for tracks does work, but we'd be happy to help take a look with you to make sure it's working right with your system.

When players are grouped together the audio that's sent across the system is the original digital file of the track, retrieved from the source by the group coordinator and then distributed untouched to the others. Each player uses its own DAC and settings on that original file once they receive it.

Ryan, very good, thank you. How do we proceed with seeing if things are ok with my system? It will be easy enough for me to set up a playlist with just two ripped tracks, one of which plays louder than the other. Do you need to know which tracks I will be using in advance?

Peter, to the second paragraph in the quote, this should mean that in grouped mode, your weakened bass problem ought to disappear when the Connect to digital input on Peachtree set up is in use and reappear when the Connect is not in grouped mode? Although Ryan confuses me by saying each player uses its own DAC. In your set up, the Connect obviously will not. Or does it mean that you will still see the bass issue via the Connect fed zone, but the other zones won't see it even if the Connect is the group coordinator? And in a later post you refer to this being a minor change - going by your description of how it affects bass quality, it is a MAJOR issue even if the compression may be minor?

Kumar wrote:

Ryan S wrote:

Normalization for tracks does work, but we'd be happy to help take a look with you to make sure it's working right with your system.

When players are grouped together the audio that's sent across the system is the original digital file of the track, retrieved from the source by the group coordinator and then distributed untouched to the others. Each player uses its own DAC and settings on that original file once they receive it.

Ryan, very good, thank you. How do we proceed with seeing if things are ok with my system? It will be easy enough for me to set up a playlist with just two ripped tracks, one of which plays louder than the other. Do you need to know which tracks I will be using in advance?

I just opened up an incident for you with the support team to take a closer look into this. They'll want to see a couple tracks where you've noticed trouble like you described above and will likely want to remote in to take a look at the metadata of the tracks themselves. The reference number is: 160913-001584. I'll see if a technician can reach out to you directly, but feel free to give us a call on our support line with that number too.

Kumar wrote:

Peter, to the second paragraph in the quote, this should mean that in grouped mode, your weakened bass problem ought to disappear when the Connect to digital input on Peachtree set up is in use and reappear when the Connect is not in grouped mode? Although Ryan confuses me by saying each player uses its own DAC. In your set up, the Connect obviously will not. Or does it mean that you will still see the bass issue via the Connect fed zone, but the other zones won't see it even if the Connect is the group coordinator? And in a later post you refer to this being a minor change - going by your description of how it affects bass quality, it is a MAJOR issue even if the compression may be minor?

My comment in regards to the DAC was if you were grouping the CONNECT with a PLAY:5 for example, the PLAY:5 would do it's own conversion. In short, when you group players they each get the same starting digital stream from the original source without any alteration done. Once the player gets it they will take it from there as if you'd played the audio right to the unit. tl;dr Grouping doesn't affect audio quality of a stream.

Hey Ryan - Thanks for the clarification. Please note that I think it unlikely the Connect DSP is responsible for the bass issues I hear, but I can't rule it out because I can't turn the DSP off.

How do we make progress on this issue? Should I open a support ticket?

Cheers, Peter.

Peter Mc wrote:

Hey Ryan - Thanks for the clarification. Please note that I think it unlikely the Connect DSP is responsible for the bass issues I hear, but I can't rule it out because I can't turn the DSP off.

How do we make progress on this issue? Should I open a support ticket?

Cheers, Peter.

We're looking into it on our end here right now. We may want to get a ticket started up for you as well, but I'll let you know on that.