It looks like the Connect is no longer bit-perfect. Here's my evidence: let's discuss this.
First, I constructed a wav file of pink noise with amplitude ramping up from zero to digital max and back to zero.
I play this through my Connect and record the SPDIF output from the coax output into my PC.
The recording uses a Scarlett 8i6 audio interface set to use the Connect as master clock.
I record into a DAW (Sonar) multiple times - all instances are identical.
However, this recorded signal is not quite the same as the original wav file - it can be up to -21dB different.
See https://www.dropbox.com/s/t8od479xo9hi5el/connect_diff.PNG?dl=1
Note the expanded scale on the difference (third) track.
It looks like the difference gets larger when the signal is larger. To confirm this, I import the
original and difference files into Matlab and plot the raw data (difference vs original). There is clearly audio compression
happening here. See https://www.dropbox.com/s/p1yq6wcqafvnhaj/diff_vs_orig.png?dl=1
The scale is such that digital maximum is 1.
There also appears to be a slight bias when the waveform is negative and the signal is below the
compression threshold. See an expanded version of the previous plot
https://www.dropbox.com/s/9001tl9mkle4wly/diff_vs_orig_zoom.png?dl=1
Happy to answer questions about the method and conclusions.
Cheers, Peter.
p.s. Volume is set to fixed - I haven't tried variable.
In a loopback test (8i6 out from DAW to 8i6 in, no Sonos gear involved), I get bit-perfect cancellation.
Page 4 / 19
Interesting comment, Kumar. I'm a very rational-minded audiophile, and have never bought into the thing about magic cables or power conditioners. But there are substantial and audible differences between speakers, speaker drivers and speaker technologies. This is also something that can easily be shown in measurements as well.
The thing is: I don't trust listening tests. I don't trust sighted listening (when we know what gear we're listening to), but I don't trust simple blind tests either. It is very easy to get negative results even when there are in fact objective difference that can be audible. Here's a thread on that on that on another audio forum: http://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/limitations-of-blind-testing-procedures.1254/
In your case, for example, your listening to Sonos will be biased by the fact that you think they make excellent products, and by your conviction that traditional audiophoolery is a waste of money and that sonos is just as good. Others will be biased in their listening by the very opposite convictions.
And I agree that sonos makes excellent gear. A pair of play:1s together with a sub will easily outplay most traditional passive systems in the price range (my subjective opinion is that two play:1 + sub is a better-sounding option than a pair of the new play:5s). But the JBL 305/308s, for example, are superior. When I say that, it is not only based on my own listening. After all, your listening experiences may be different from mine. When I say that, it is based on objective parameters that have been shown to correlate with listener satisfaction in psychoacoustic studies: Frequency response, dispersion pattern, polar response, response in the time domain, the ability to play loud without distortion, etc. On all of these parameters, the JBL 305s/308s perform better than a pair of Sonos play:1 with sub.
But two play:1s with sub does sound very good. Not just "good for the price", it sounds good. But this was a detour, though. The point is there are measurable differences in audio quality. At what point these differences become marginal, that's something one can discuss. But the differences are there. To limit dynamic range IS something that affects objective audio quality in a negative way, and it is within the range we KNOW to be objectively audible. How important this is to us subjectively, is - well - a subjective thing. I really can't see why we can't just leave it at that.
The thing is: I don't trust listening tests. I don't trust sighted listening (when we know what gear we're listening to), but I don't trust simple blind tests either. It is very easy to get negative results even when there are in fact objective difference that can be audible. Here's a thread on that on that on another audio forum: http://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/limitations-of-blind-testing-procedures.1254/
In your case, for example, your listening to Sonos will be biased by the fact that you think they make excellent products, and by your conviction that traditional audiophoolery is a waste of money and that sonos is just as good. Others will be biased in their listening by the very opposite convictions.
And I agree that sonos makes excellent gear. A pair of play:1s together with a sub will easily outplay most traditional passive systems in the price range (my subjective opinion is that two play:1 + sub is a better-sounding option than a pair of the new play:5s). But the JBL 305/308s, for example, are superior. When I say that, it is not only based on my own listening. After all, your listening experiences may be different from mine. When I say that, it is based on objective parameters that have been shown to correlate with listener satisfaction in psychoacoustic studies: Frequency response, dispersion pattern, polar response, response in the time domain, the ability to play loud without distortion, etc. On all of these parameters, the JBL 305s/308s perform better than a pair of Sonos play:1 with sub.
But two play:1s with sub does sound very good. Not just "good for the price", it sounds good. But this was a detour, though. The point is there are measurable differences in audio quality. At what point these differences become marginal, that's something one can discuss. But the differences are there. To limit dynamic range IS something that affects objective audio quality in a negative way, and it is within the range we KNOW to be objectively audible. How important this is to us subjectively, is - well - a subjective thing. I really can't see why we can't just leave it at that.
Therefore, I didn't notice this when the change came. The ear adapts. I only became aware of it when by accident I came to compare directly how some tracks with high dynamic content sounded on my headphones (the Sennheiser 650) and my active monitors when fed by the connect. The difference seemed quite substantial to me. After that, I started to read up, and became aware that the Connect was no longer bit perfect. By now it has biased my listening, and I tend to be aware of it all the time when listening to classical music, which I wasn't before.
These words beg two questions:
1. Why is not possible that the same difference would have been heard - between the headphones and the active speakers - before the change? I realise that this isn't a question that can be easily answered, but it remains a valid one even so. And as I am sure you know, it is very difficult to obtain the same sound quality that a good headphone can deliver, from speakers that have to overcome all the challenges of room responses and ambient noise levels even in a very quiet room. The closest comparison can only come from a speaker set up that is optimised for near field listening, but even that is disadvantaged compared to quality headphones. Comparing sound quality between headphones and speakers is apples v oranges.
2. And to complete your own line of thinking in the second part - why can't it be said that what you are now aware of is just the result of Expectation Bias and not any change in the Connect?
Therefore, I didn't notice this when the change came. The ear adapts. I only became aware of it when by accident I came to compare directly how some tracks with high dynamic content sounded on my headphones (the Sennheiser 650) and my active monitors when fed by the connect. The difference seemed quite substantial to me. After that, I started to read up, and became aware that the Connect was no longer bit perfect. By now it has biased my listening, and I tend to be aware of it all the time when listening to classical music, which I wasn't before.
These words beg two questions:
1. Why is not possible that the same difference would have been heard - between the headphones and the active speakers - before the change? I realise that this isn't a question that can be easily answered, but it remains a valid one even so. And as I am sure you know, it is very difficult to obtain the same sound quality that a good headphone can deliver, from speakers that have to overcome all the challenges of room responses and ambient noise levels even in a very quiet room. The closest comparison can only come from a speaker set up that is optimised for near field listening, but even that is disadvantaged compared to quality headphones. Comparing sound quality between headphones and speakers is apples v oranges.
2. And to complete your own line of thinking in the second part - why can't it be said that what you are now aware of is just the result of Expectation Bias and not any change in the Connect?
Good questions. I'll try to brief:
1) My monitors of choice are quite excellent, and I listen to them in the near-field together with a subwoofer. It's the DM10s from the small English manufacturer AVI. Outstanding value for money. They are more revealing than the Sennheiser 650s, probably on a par with the Sennheiser 800s. But the room can obviously mess things up. That's why I listen to them in the near-field. EDIT/clarification: So ordinarily, my near-field setup with speakers provides better clarity and better dynamics than my headphones. But you are completely right that headphones usually outplay speakers in those regards.
2) You are obviously right. I don't see my own listening impressions to be the final word on anything. I'm as prone to expectation bias as everybody else. That's why I try to find out whether there are measurements and objective facts which back up my listening impressions. In this case, I believe that there is.
Digressing from the thread, but this is a very interesting point.
I would argue that not all measured differences will result in audible differences, and of those that do, not all will be preferred.
For something like a speaker, all that matters is which one I prefer to listen to. Not what you do, or not what has been "shown" to correlate with listener satisfaction in studies, although I grant that the odds in that case are skewed to that speaker ending up to be preferred more often than not. And some things that aren't measured, like looks, will also influence the preference.
Which is why it is never a good idea to buy a speaker only based on its reported measurements. For instance, I may prefer the way the 1 pair + hidden Sub looks, compared to the industrial looks of the JBL, and that may drive my preference for the Sonos set up. Or not.
So for speakers, the only use of measurements is to make a short list; ideally before buying, they should be heard at home, sighted, with preferred music, from the usual source, and the ones that then sound best for the budget should be the ones to buy.
And although this is a digression, it does underline the irrelevance of the bit perfect thing, except to meet psychological needs. That said, I get that those that are influenced by these needs will not be happy with the Connect as it is stated to be these days.
By the way - when you say the 305/308 perform better than the 1 pair + Sub, you also need to say whether this is the case with today's Connect, or the one before the change was made, and also based on what kind of inputs are given to the JBL pair...:) Which makes things complicated and just an example of why a listening test at home of the kind I described trumps all measurements for electro mechanical devices like speakers.
Does Sonos care about this state of affairs for the Connect? For them to say, so let's see if any response is forthcoming.
Good points. Agreed.
1) My monitors of choice are quite excellent, and I listen to them in the near-field together with a subwoofer. It's the DM10s from the small English manufacturer AVI. Outstanding value for money.
Excellent speakers those; I also know that ratty, who is one of the true wise heads here, has a Connect driven AVI active set up, so maybe he will find his way here some time soon and shed some light on any thing different he finds with the sound quality he now obtains.
Not any more. That room has a pair of PLAY:5 Gen2 plus a SUB. Trueplay tuned of course, smoothing out what would otherwise be a very lumpy room response starting with a major peak at 30Hz.
In any case, it wasn't a CONNECT it was a 2007 ZP80. Now doing service driving a combo DAC/headphone amp into Sennheiser HD599s for late night listening.
Not any more. That room has a pair of PLAY:5 Gen2 plus a SUB. Trueplay tuned of course, smoothing out what would otherwise be a very lumpy room response starting with a major peak at 30Hz.
.
Oh, ok.
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.
Seems to me from conversation here that there are the following five categories of people for whom Connect has/had some relevance:
1. Those that don't care about bit perfect, and have moved on to play units/Sub for even serious listening
2. Those that don't care about bit perfect, but use the Connect for its other features on the input side
3. Those that don't care about bit perfect, realising that all that the lack of it does is the fuelling of Expectation Bias driven perceptions of sound quality degradation
4. Those with high end legacy tech kit who won't touch even a bit perfect Connect because they don't believe that Sonos kit is worthy of a place on their component racks, because it is cheap in price and looks
5. Those that are affected by this bit perfect thing.
The odds that Sonos will act to address the needs of just the last category don't seem very good, also because the change would have been made for valid reasons that may then have to be addressed in a different way.
1. Those that don't care about bit perfect, and have moved on to play units/Sub for even serious listening
2. Those that don't care about bit perfect, but use the Connect for its other features on the input side
3. Those that don't care about bit perfect, realising that all that the lack of it does is the fuelling of Expectation Bias driven perceptions of sound quality degradation
4. Those with high end legacy tech kit who won't touch even a bit perfect Connect because they don't believe that Sonos kit is worthy of a place on their component racks, because it is cheap in price and looks
5. Those that are affected by this bit perfect thing.
The odds that Sonos will act to address the needs of just the last category don't seem very good, also because the change would have been made for valid reasons that may then have to be addressed in a different way.
You have no idea why the change was made - this is pure speculation.
The thing that I find most ironic is that for years the fanboys have been yelling 'bit-perfect, bit perfect' (because it says so in a very old test of a ZP80) and shouting down people who claim that other dacs and conversions sound better. We now find out that, since 2011, people who care about sound quality could have been right all along...
You have no idea why the change was made - this is pure speculation.
The thing that I find most ironic is that for years the fanboys have been yelling 'bit-perfect, bit perfect' (because it says so in a very old test of a ZP80) and shouting down people who claim that other dacs and conversions sound better. We now find out that, since 2011, people who care about sound quality could have been right all along...
You won't find anybody who "yelled" bit-perfect before defending Sonos on this issue. At least I won't be. Sonos, for whatever reason, screwed with what should be bit-perfect output, and that is not good. So can it with the "fanboy" nonsense, it's a weak and cowardly tactic to attack the messenger and not the message. Either you can defeat the argument, or you can't.
You won't find anybody who "yelled" bit-perfect before defending Sonos on this issue. At least I won't be. Sonos, for whatever reason, screwed with what should be bit-perfect output, and that is not good. So can it with the "fanboy" nonsense, it's a weak and cowardly tactic to attack the messenger and not the message. Either you can defeat the argument, or you can't.
Agreed, this is about being able to stream the original bits to my DAC. If they are transcoded before they get there, there is not much point, why bother to have two digital outputs, they could save the money and not confuse people.
The chances are they won't get that big and, in which case they can be a viable alternative to Sonos, catering to a niche of customers who want something over and above what Sonos does.
Couple of questions:
1. As to bits not being perfect - I don't really care since I don't hear the difference and I suspect that many that do, started doing so after this thread started. But I take your point about bits and what would have made a useful difference to me is availability of volume normalisation; has that really improved consequent to this change? I haven't found that to be the case either, unfortunately, but that maybe because what I am looking for is normalisation across mixed source playlists and that may be a different problem altogether.
2. Sonos went mainstream largely at the expense of Squeezebox, I imagine. Because, with Sonosnet, and less tinkering to set up/stabilise, it offered a better alternative to a large part of the user base, is my guess. Other than Hi Res, what does Bluesound do that Sonos does not? On the negatives, it does not offer mesh architecture, and costs a lot more.Expanding the question, is there anyone visible at this time that threatens the Sonos castle in home audio? Echo?
You do realise that you're not a mod, don't you?
So I'm not allowed to call you out on weak and cowardly arguments unless I'm a mod? Who makes these rules?
How about both of you move on so we can get back to the discussion.
The silence represents Sonos's arrogance IMO. Does Sonos have a great products yes. Is there room for improvement on on both the hardware and software -Yes. I think the secrecy surrounding new product refreshes(if any are even coming) is getting a little frustrating for us loyal Sonos supporters. Lets look at the outdated Connect. Aesthetically it ugly. I personally hide my three behind all my other gear. Not bit perfect, does not have a 12v trigger output, does not support high res files (even over a hard wired connection) wont be able to support MQA even if MQA is successful. Compeditors like the Bluesound and their Node 2 hardware has surpassed offering from Sonos. They have listed to their customers and critics and responded with upgraded equipment. Why can't Sonos do the same for their customers. If Sonos is working on a Connect replacement what would be wrong with a small press release from Sonos to stating exciting times ahead for you Sonos Connect users. Give us loyal customers a bone. if they are not working on a replacement connect then let us know here in this thread. If Sonos does not feel a replacement Connect is where they want to spend their resourses at this time please let the rest of us know. Maybe they dont sell enough connects to warrant an upgrade in their opinion. I dont think there are many users here who are heavily invested in the Sonos ecosystem want to change from Sonos. This is of course provided the Sonos offereing are up to date and current. I personally do not what to change. I only what an upgraded connect that will compete with the majortiy of other streamers in the market today addressing todays requirements. Sure Sonos is going through some overdue changes in management. Hopefully the new president will have vision of the future and wont be scared to talk about it. If new connect hardware is not in the future then let us know so we can move on to other offerings in the market place. We all want Sonos to succeed. Sonos not answering valid customer questions makes me feel slighted and unappreciated by Sonos.
To throw in my 2c...
I'm personally fairly disappointed with Sonos making this change without considering the impact on users, many of whom purchased the Connect precisely because it was bit-perfect. I understand, to an extent, why they did it (implementing such a compression scheme makes sense when volume normalisation is involved). However, doing so without maintaining what many would consider to be baseline functionality of the Connect in same way (such as a user option to disable) seems like a huge misstep.
I do hope they address this in a future update to avoid reputational damage.
I should add that, whilst I have a Connect in my collection of Sonos kit, it's currently not in use and is certainly not likely to be used in anything approaching an "audiophile" setup in the imminent future: that sort of tweaking and tinkering is in my past. So I'm not directly impacted by this, but I understand that others are.
Cheers,
Keith
I'm personally fairly disappointed with Sonos making this change without considering the impact on users, many of whom purchased the Connect precisely because it was bit-perfect. I understand, to an extent, why they did it (implementing such a compression scheme makes sense when volume normalisation is involved). However, doing so without maintaining what many would consider to be baseline functionality of the Connect in same way (such as a user option to disable) seems like a huge misstep.
I do hope they address this in a future update to avoid reputational damage.
I should add that, whilst I have a Connect in my collection of Sonos kit, it's currently not in use and is certainly not likely to be used in anything approaching an "audiophile" setup in the imminent future: that sort of tweaking and tinkering is in my past. So I'm not directly impacted by this, but I understand that others are.
Cheers,
Keith
I agree on the MQA front, but it still does not address the silence from Sonos. I just spent the last hour reading over at the the Bluesound forums. I must admit it was refreshing. Bluesound employees answering questions and concerns.
If the Node2 bit perfect. Answer yes. Employees addressing issues and acknowledging customer requests for future software upgrades. It is just a different culture over there. I think Sonos could learn a little from visiting their compeditotrs forums. Like I said i dont want to change from Sonos but the Node2 is looking more interesting everyday. In the mean time we the Sonos supporters are left with well, nothing to look forward too on the connect front.
If the Node2 bit perfect. Answer yes. Employees addressing issues and acknowledging customer requests for future software upgrades. It is just a different culture over there. I think Sonos could learn a little from visiting their compeditotrs forums. Like I said i dont want to change from Sonos but the Node2 is looking more interesting everyday. In the mean time we the Sonos supporters are left with well, nothing to look forward too on the connect front.
Bluesound caters to a tiny niche market, audiophiles who often believe things which have no basis in fact. They really aren't much of a threat. Sonos has moved well beyond that niche to become the premier provider of high quality connected speakers for the fast growing music streaming market. So long as they don't lose their focus on sound quality, ala Bose, I'll be a happy customer.
Sorry for the hope folks. Roon does not have any control over the hardware only what it sends to it.
Jgaitie
Like I said a completely different culture over there. I hope to in the next few days write to the new Sonos President and use your reply as an example of how the Sonos community is moving forward with a positive attitude and direction. Let's hope he does not take your lead or Sonos will be destined to fail.
Let's hope he appreciates the customers he does have.
Enjoy the rest of your day.
Like I said a completely different culture over there. I hope to in the next few days write to the new Sonos President and use your reply as an example of how the Sonos community is moving forward with a positive attitude and direction. Let's hope he does not take your lead or Sonos will be destined to fail.
Let's hope he appreciates the customers he does have.
Enjoy the rest of your day.
Chicks
I can appreciate your response if all you may be looking forward for is good sounding wireless speakers. I agree and I enjoy the Sonos speaker lineup. I personally would like to see enhancements to products other that their speaker lineup. I would like a 12v trigger in a connect to be able to turn on a separate amp to drive a better set of speakers than what Sonos is the offering. The Sonos connect amp does not have enough power for my use.
I can appreciate your response if all you may be looking forward for is good sounding wireless speakers. I agree and I enjoy the Sonos speaker lineup. I personally would like to see enhancements to products other that their speaker lineup. I would like a 12v trigger in a connect to be able to turn on a separate amp to drive a better set of speakers than what Sonos is the offering. The Sonos connect amp does not have enough power for my use.
Use a Sonos Connect with an amp that can turn itself on when it senses audio. These amps also usually provide 12V out in case you need to activate other devices as well.
UpstateMike
Thanks for your reply.
I have tried that with inconsistent results. Parasound A23 amp set to turn on when it senses audio worked inconsistent. Low volumes it would shut down. Better audio equipment use 12v trigger as a standard. I would hope Sonos would consider my suggestion in future upgrades to the connect.
Thanks for your reply.
I have tried that with inconsistent results. Parasound A23 amp set to turn on when it senses audio worked inconsistent. Low volumes it would shut down. Better audio equipment use 12v trigger as a standard. I would hope Sonos would consider my suggestion in future upgrades to the connect.
Update:)
It may appears that Roon may have a solution. . From another forum "We do support lossless streaming up to the limits of the hardware, which are 48kHz/16bit audio."
Great news if true. You just have to use alternative software.
It may appears that Roon may have a solution. . From another forum "We do support lossless streaming up to the limits of the hardware, which are 48kHz/16bit audio."
Great news if true. You just have to use alternative software.
Jgaite
And I like you I want to make Sonos better than what it is today. I agree with you in on MQA. I personally would like to get batter mastered audio files streaming to our Sonos gear at a reasonable price. How ever that can happen is what I seek.
I do not know your history with Bluesound but obviously you must have a long history with them to be so passionate.
My personal quest for better sounding music involves many components: Sonos, other audio products and different sources of music (both purchased and 3 streaming services)
It is because of the streaming services that I really enjoy the Sonos interface. It is the best I and I would like it to stay that way.
Although my Sonos connect is ok on it own feeding some of my other equipment the sound was definitely improved by feeding an alternative Dac.
I have 2 connects feeding 2 Schiit Yggdrasil DACs and then onto other equipment and speakers.
The improvement in sound quality with the Schiit DACs Was quite apparent and worth every penny to me.
I have Sonos equipment and speakers running in 7 rooms in my house so keeping within the Sonos environment is very important to me.
My mentioning of Bluesound equipment it to draw attention what other competitors are doing in there quest to unseat Sonos.
I personally want Sonos to use us the Sonos Community as a resource. To take suggestions and help make their future products better.
Things are changing so fast these days that everyone including Sonos must do there best to stay ahead. The play 1 and the new play 5 were a nice addition to the Sonos lineup.
In my opinion they also need to refresh the Connect and Connect Amp. Yes these possible refreshed devices may share some of the features of their competitors and that is a good thing.
We are all guessing why there is a MIC in the new Play5. My hope is it will interface with Echo in the near future. Maybe a future Connect might have a similar MIC.
A 12v trigger, a new MIC. It does not matter Any improvements to me are great as long as we keep moving forward. Let's not stick our heads in the sand.
New enhancements can't just be software related. It must also include new equipment. I am a realist to know I will have to replace my connects just like I replaced my original Play5's. the original hardware is too old to support all the future enhancements Sonos has in store.
I would just like Sonos to acknowledge our attempts in trying to make them a better Company. I would like them to provide feed back on why some of my ideas may not fall within their future plans.
That ego stroking you refer to is not to benefit me. It is meant to benefit Sonos.
We only need there participation
And I like you I want to make Sonos better than what it is today. I agree with you in on MQA. I personally would like to get batter mastered audio files streaming to our Sonos gear at a reasonable price. How ever that can happen is what I seek.
I do not know your history with Bluesound but obviously you must have a long history with them to be so passionate.
My personal quest for better sounding music involves many components: Sonos, other audio products and different sources of music (both purchased and 3 streaming services)
It is because of the streaming services that I really enjoy the Sonos interface. It is the best I and I would like it to stay that way.
Although my Sonos connect is ok on it own feeding some of my other equipment the sound was definitely improved by feeding an alternative Dac.
I have 2 connects feeding 2 Schiit Yggdrasil DACs and then onto other equipment and speakers.
The improvement in sound quality with the Schiit DACs Was quite apparent and worth every penny to me.
I have Sonos equipment and speakers running in 7 rooms in my house so keeping within the Sonos environment is very important to me.
My mentioning of Bluesound equipment it to draw attention what other competitors are doing in there quest to unseat Sonos.
I personally want Sonos to use us the Sonos Community as a resource. To take suggestions and help make their future products better.
Things are changing so fast these days that everyone including Sonos must do there best to stay ahead. The play 1 and the new play 5 were a nice addition to the Sonos lineup.
In my opinion they also need to refresh the Connect and Connect Amp. Yes these possible refreshed devices may share some of the features of their competitors and that is a good thing.
We are all guessing why there is a MIC in the new Play5. My hope is it will interface with Echo in the near future. Maybe a future Connect might have a similar MIC.
A 12v trigger, a new MIC. It does not matter Any improvements to me are great as long as we keep moving forward. Let's not stick our heads in the sand.
New enhancements can't just be software related. It must also include new equipment. I am a realist to know I will have to replace my connects just like I replaced my original Play5's. the original hardware is too old to support all the future enhancements Sonos has in store.
I would just like Sonos to acknowledge our attempts in trying to make them a better Company. I would like them to provide feed back on why some of my ideas may not fall within their future plans.
That ego stroking you refer to is not to benefit me. It is meant to benefit Sonos.
We only need there participation
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.