Hey Sonos Engineers!
I know this has been touched upon. I previously submitted this request to support and they encouraged me to share here to keep the conversation going.
Is there any chance we could implement a soft switch for line-in audio to bypass the computer for "delay disable" functionality.
I understand and appreciate the reason for the delay.
However, I'm running turntables through a mixer and into the line-in of the PLAY:5. Can't teach my son to mix records with that delay, and since we're set-up in a communal space, my wife is not too keen on bringing out the old mix monitors. Can you dig it?
Can we figure out a way to manually disable the delay on an individual speaker basis?
Otherwise love the gear!
Thanks!
Here's quote from customer support. Hope it isn't too heavy handed or out of school to post:
"I'm not on the development team, but I personally think that it wouldn't be too hard to implement some kind of soft switch to bypass the computer altogether and pipe line-in audio directly to the amplifiers (something like a computer-controlled solid state IC relay network)."
This topic has been closed for further comments. You can use the search bar to find a similar topic, or create a new one by clicking Create Topic at the top of the page.
Page 3 / 8
Maybe Sonos has concluded it’s really technically complicated. Maybe they've concluded the potential market is just too small. Doesn’t seem that way to me, but those are legit issues, and I obviously don’t have solid evidence.
Yep.
But the argument that Sonos wouldn’t do this because it’s not in their main wheelhouse — multiroom wireless speakers — is weak. As many people have said, Sonos has branched out far from that original two-thousand-aughts mission, to reach more customers and make more money. Maybe Sonos has gotten stuck in thinking about the line-in architecture one way; maybe they could become unstuck. Sonos’ new CEO changed the approach to development so they release new products a lot faster (and the next two products are apparently non-wheelhouse: headphones and smaller portable speaker). Maybe this new attitude will be more open to more use cases, like getting rid of line-in delay.
First off, the new headphones and mini-move are likely to operate similar to the Move, in that they will have a WiFi mode and BT mode. No delay (other than standard BT delay) in BT mode. So in some way you’ll likely get what your asking for in these products. The headphones are even rumored to have a aux line in. I’d argue they are still part of Sonos wheelhouse though, as they surely will be able to to participate in the whole home network, as the Move does in WiFi mode.
Worth noting thought that all three of the products have a BT mode not so much to remove delays but so that they can be used away from the home. So does it makes sense for Sonos to make products that work with TVs and be part of the whole home system? Yes, they have made several of those. Does it make sense to make a product that can be used as a computer speaker, DJ speaker, or PA system? Right now, doesn’t appear to be a high priority.
For people who are repeatedly criticizing this request, we got it. We fully understand that most Sonos users don’t care at all about this feature, that it’s not part of the core function (which is amazing!), and that it would take some work. Even so, we think it’s a small feature that would make Sonos a lot more useful to a lot more people, and we wanted to voice that here.
I’m not criticizing the request personally. I just think it’s a bit much to conclude the development and support of the feature on existing products is easy and cheap, or that loads of customers consider it a must have feature.
To quote Sonos marketing:
“Everything works together, and Sonos works with all your favourite services so you can listen to what you want, where you want, how you want.”
Perhaps this should read:
“Everything works together, and Sonos works with all your favourite services so you can listen to what you want, where you want, how you want - unless you want to use Sonos for PC gaming, Youtube streaming, DJ turntables, electronic drums….”
BINGO. The current marketing is a fraud. For instance, they should not be calling it a line in port. Line in ports do not have delays.
What Sonos has is a DLIP “Delayed Line In Port”. Market it as such, or don’t market it at all. Just don’t defraud the consumer with false expectations. If you’re finding this thread because you just dropped > $500 on a speaker with more lag than a $5 PC speaker, RETURN IT TO THE STORE, and tell them why.
I did not mean to be condescending. I’m just very surprised when people do not read up on stuff before they buy.
What is the latency on your car’s audio system and it’s line-in port? It’s more expensive than a Sonos. so I’m sure you had that info before you bought it. Right?
Just had a marketing email from Sonos suggesting that I use a Sonos speaker in my home office as a “ home office assistant”. I’m confused - why would you introduce a Sonos [rather than, say, an Echo Dot] into a home office where the chances are you already have a computer with speakers … unless of course you could replace the computer speakers with the Sonos … but for many, the latency issue may be a barrier to doing so … ?
And to borrow some logic from elsewhere in this thread…
Wait a minute…. Why on earth would they integrate with Alexa or Google Home? This is a multiroom buffered audio product, not an office assistant. Don’t tow a horse trailer with a ferarri already! Reply to that Sonos marketing guy would you, and fill him in about ferarris.
Oh. Wait. People wanted it. Like the TRUE line in capability. So they did it. So do it already with the true line-in option. I’m not interested in excuses and apologizers with rose colored glasses defending a caustic design decision.
We all know the real reason the line in has delay to it. You just don’t want to say it. Products with line-in don’t cost enough, and the latency is your penalty/incentive to buy the more expensive model. “Don’t be a cheater” says SONOS. “You need to pay for the expensive home theatre products if you want true line in. Proles.” And you better like it too.
The fact that they do sell low latency versions for home theater tells you it is 100% doable. They just want a bigger pound of flesh. And good for them i guess. Capitalism.
All my sonos products have wired ethernet. And all products that are on a wired gig-e lan together, at this price point, should have 1ms or less latency. Full Stop.
Arrgg. I just brought home a Sonos amp to drive a second set of monitor speakers in my studio, and use the line in as a drum/bass monitor during rehearsals. 70 ms = unusable for any live performance. I appreciate the reasons for the design but it is not something I would have anticipated.
Return to the store. Tell them why. Ask for more refund than what you paid because of the time wasted.
Again, it’s been 4 years. More time isn’t going to increase the level of interest. Not unless there is a dramatic change in how people listen to music. I kind of doubt people are going to start using more computer speakers and DJ music...in their multiroom audio system.
yep. Not like there’s been a big societal change. likely a permanent one that has more people using their home differently than before. Perhaps necessitating that people use an entertainment space for computers some times, and entertainment for others.
Nope. Can’t think of anything like that happen recently…. cough…
exactly what evidence
uhm. how about the settings screen in their own app…. where the Sonos gods graciously let us choose which delay of four choices they personally excreted, which happen to all be round numbers.
Get your facts straight before you open your mouth.
That setting should be a variable slider with 0ms on the left side. If 0ms results in jittery audio, great! pop up a little we told you so notice when the user selects less than 70ms. But don’t interfere with 0ms if that’s what users paid for. (And it is what they paid for unless you can show me where on the box it says 70ms minimum latency.)
Suggest 70ms as the minimum if you want. Let the slider “snap” to 70, and the other recommended latencies. fine. but get out of the user’s way and OBEY THEM if they want to choose 5ms or 10 or 0.
Hi! sorry for my english. I have the same problem as many. I´d like to use the Sonos Play 5 Gen:2 as a DJ speaker and latency is big issue.
I understand that latency is necessary to connect via wifi but when connecting via minijack i shouldn´t have this problem. In my Bowers & Wilkins Zeppelin Air I can use the minijack input for DJ without any problem...
Userlevel 7
+21
It's never going to happen. It is such a niche feature for a limited audience and would require so much work that it's never going to reach anywhere near the top of the Sonos to do list.
The same answer was given when this thread started a few years back and nothing will change that unfortunately.
The same answer was given when this thread started a few years back and nothing will change that unfortunately.
Having this same issue and am confounded by the response. I DJ and discovered the latency issue across the entire Sonos range. Sonos Amp, Sonos Play Five. The latency completely throws off my mixing. Fast cuts? Forget about it.
I understand the need for the delay if we are synchronizing multiple Sonos devices wirelessly. But for basic single line in on the Sonos Amp or Play Five? That is completely unnecessary, unexpected and had I know, I would never have bought these devices.
Sonos seems to be ignoring this.
Some of the reasons I see to not implement a ‘no-delay’ audio feature is the development cost and the lack of any customer demand, relatively speaking ...and perhaps ‘most important of all’ it also goes against the main purpose of a Sonos Audio System, which is first and foremost designed as a multi-room wireless home audio speaker system.
The Sonos products are not a speaker for use with a DJ mixing desk, or to use for karaoke. The patented computer-based technology inside a Sonos device would be somewhat irrelevant for that lesser-type of functionality and I guess many other manufacturers would (and do) make a similar sounding speaker cheaper for that ‘limited-only’ purpose.
Sonos is geared towards quite a niché market area and I personally think they should continue to concentrate their development efforts in that area, rather than perhaps trying to be "all things to all men”… er … and women.
Userlevel 1
OK, y’all have made your points, you’re not making any progress here. Accept that there might be someone wrong on the internet. The thread would be more fruitful if it’s just a space for people to post their support for low-latency line-in and how they’d like to use it.
Userlevel 1
Just to add clarification, Sonos already has speakers that can be used for TVs. The Beam, Arc, and Amp. The Move has bluetooth.
The three devices that have line-in capability are the Amp, Port, and Five. As mentioned already, the Amp has the ARC port for no delay/TV audio. The Port is usually used with a 3rd party amp that will likely have an input itself without delay. So this feature you’re asking for would likely be used with the Five only. I’m not sure why Sonos would want to make a no delay mode, to use with a TV, when they already have devices for TV use.
The other negative of this is that it would add some confusion to an already too complex, IMO, system. When in this no delay mode, would grouping be disabled? Would you need to remove the mode in order to group? Would grouping be allowed, but grouped speakers delayed, as it currently is for TV audio?
I am not against the idea, and likely would use it myself, but I definitely see reasons why Sonos hasn’t done it. As far as the amount of replies, ~120 in 4 years doesn’t say a lot. Granted, these are not people who buy if the feature existed, but more people who bought Sonos without realizing the feature wasn’t there.
This thread has little to do with the reasons why Sonos has not done this before. There are plenty. Otherwise they would’ve done so years ago. It’s a feature request, to persuade Sonos to add the functionality.
So, Sonos supports no-delay with HDMI ARC & optical audio. Why not provide this same functionality in the RCA / mini-jack line-in where available?
Group-wise: the Playbar, Beam & Arc have an implementation, you can set the group delay, expand the feature in a consistent way.
The request is not for just the Five. You forget the RCA line-ins on the AMP & Port. My example provides the exact usecase for those devices. It’s not feasible to run a computer speaker, dj controller or similar gear through HDMI.
---
The amount of replies & votes does not imply this should be implemented. What I tried to say: Maybe over time, there will be enough for Sonos to listen.
One would also think that buyers of an expensive multiroom speakers system would invest in a little more research than the pictures on the Sonos website (that show turntables but should not show DJ set ups) but or acting on what one would think when seeing a line input. Yes, the 70ms delay is a disadvantage in some use cases, but it is not a hidden fact and plausible seeing the multiroom system.
Thanks for your condescending reply; does that line of response net you many friends? When 99% of consumers see a line input on a device, they don’t immediately run for the FAQ to find out if there is or isn’t a delay on said line input. They just expect it to work like any other line input. Sonos doesn’t advertise that fact on the product box or anywhere obvious, so we all get to “discover” this in real time after buying it. I found a great solution though by putting my Sonos device on Craigslist.
Hi
Welcome, thank you for reaching out to Sonos Community.
You can try to check this link for Use Line-In on Sonos
Let us know if it works. If you need help with any other information, please be sure to let us know.
Great that Sonos has seen this issue and replied in this thread. However, the articles provided do not provide any solution to the problem presented here.
I would like to connect my Play 5 (Gen 2) via Line-In to another system - a Naim Atom that is already connected to speakers but can also connect via RCA. If there was no delay on the Play 5, this would mean that the Play 5/5 (and its older, almost redundant brother the Gen 1) could have further use in third party set ups (not to mention all those listed above).
I LOVE my sonos, but +1 on this being an issue I’d not anticipated and is stopping me buying further into the ecosystem.
Userlevel 1
You are correct. They don't care about live music producers because their speakers simply were not designed for live music producers. There are plenty of other purpose specific speakers, amps and/or PAs out there designed for live performance, why would one waste their time on one that is not even designed for that purpose?
i don’t think there’s any high-end speakers that don’t have low-latency options.
they don’t have that big sign saying ‘hey theres a delay so you can’t even sing karaoke’
not trying to argue with you, cuz clearly you only care about your use case instead of all the customers they are trying to sell their products to.
i have great speakers for my dj equipments. im just asking sonos that if i dropped over 2k on their products can they at least try to solve a problem that a group of their customers have.
my friends love my sonos. but all of them also said it sucks that i can’t hook it up with my equipment so i can use them for my house party. you lose potential customers right there.
Indeed. The 30ms for HT setups is there in all configs. There has to be some finite playout buffer on an asynchronous network to allow for packet jitter. The tight 5GHz coupling allows this to be reduced to 30ms from the 75ms minimum requirement on the shared 2.4GHz.
As for
Using development costs as a reason not to build something is just a fallacy. The more so if the functionality already exists in the platform.
(a) the functionality -- a direct pass-thru -- doesn’t already exist, and (b) the idea that costs have no bearing on business decisions is quite simply risible.
Hey
Yes, Sonos is a multi-room wireless home audio speaker system. Yet they’ve gone into homecinema, added a mobile speaker with bluetooth, added line-in and added the no-delay functionality. Because they apparently thought it was worth the effort, it’s not up to us to decide that for them.
This is a feature request to expand the no-delay functionality to the analog inputs.
I’m certainly not deciding it for Sonos. I’m just attempting to look at the issues here objectively.
As a speaker hardware manufacturer, the Home Cinema market with ‘wireless’ surround sound speakers, was a ‘no brainer’ for Sonos from a sales point of view. The demand for it was clearly there before they ventured into that market.
In support, a number of similar speaker manufacturers have taken that same route, due to such demand and it’s perhaps been the same too with portable devices, like the Move, which do have a purpose to take music outside of the home, but also a user is still able to use the Move in the home as part of their wireless multi-room system. The demand for that product with Bluetooth was there too. Again some other ‘similar’ manufactures chose to go down this route aswell.
At the end of the day it is about demand from the public and ultimately, hardware sales.
All Sonos products still centre around a multi-room wireless home audio system and a ‘no audio’ delay product simply does not directly fit in with that purpose. The demand for such a Sonos speaker within this community, or elsewhere online, is quite insignificant too, it appears.
There are reports in this community where some Sonos audio dropout issues arise with products running on some (often quite poorly managed) wireless networks, which Sonos have tried to help with, by introducing various ‘group audio delay’ settings to help counteract those dropout issues in order to assist users to obtain a stable platform even in the poorest of WiFi environments. To switch and suddenly introduce a ‘no-delay’ option, seems a rather backward step when looking at the main purpose of their speakers and their continued use in a wireless multi room-speaker system.
Development costs would certainly play a role, because there are many implications when adding ‘no audio’ delay - A user would clearly have to detach the speaker from the rest of the audio system to make it standalone, so it could then not be ‘grouped’, ‘paired’ or ‘bonded’ at all in that state, because otherwise that currently requires some audio delay/buffering and options to keep the audio in sync over a wireless network.
Sonos could, I guess, create a new standalone speaker to achieve no-delay audio, like they did with the Move in order to take the audio outside the Home and arguably, even that was against the Sonos main purpose, but clearly there was a good deal of customer demand there for such a ‘new’ device to switch between ‘outside’ use and also being part of a multi-room wireless system
There are ‘cheaper’ standalone/wired speakers on the market that do ‘no delay’ line audio already and I don’t personally think it’s an area that Sonos would ever want to step into/compete with, nor do I honestly think that there is any great demand from their customers for them to do this. I just don’t see there being much in terms of any additional speaker/hardware sales either.
Development costs would certainly play a role, because there are many implications when adding ‘no audio’ delay - A user would clearly have to detach the speaker from the rest of the audio system to make it standalone, so it could then not be ‘grouped’, ‘paired’ or ‘bonded’ at all in that state, because otherwise that currently requires some audio delay/buffering and options to keep the audio in sync over a wireless network.
This stated earlier in the thread, but the idea that the Tech need for the Five to be ‘no delay’ already exists in the HT equipment isn’t true. The Five has an analog input, while the HT devices have digital inputs. That means that the Five would need to convert from analog to digital without delay, or have some sort of bypass mode (analog input to analog speakers) that hardware may not support. I don’t know. Regardless, that analog mode would only work when the speaker isn’t playing with any other speaker in the system. No stereo pairs or sub.
If they did do something like this though, I don’t know that they would necessarily have to lock out groups, just have a mechanism that switches to normal playback when grouped. I imagine the inability to group without delay defeats the point for a significant portion of people looking for the feature though.
Sonos could, I guess, create a new standalone speaker to achieve no-delay audio, like they did with the Move in order to take the audio outside the Home and arguably, even that was against the Sonos main purpose, but clearly there was a good deal of customer demand there for such a ‘new’ device to switch between ‘outside’ use and also being part of a multi-room wireless system
I think Sonos is rather hesitant to create audio devices that are separate from their home audio system. I get that in some respect, as they don’t want to drift to far from their ‘wheelhouse’ or confuse people buying a standalone speaker they think is part of the system. On the other hand, it seems like Sonos has a developed a brand name now, and they could make easy income by leveraging that name to make other types of audio devices, same as most other audio companies.
There are ‘cheaper’ standalone/wired speakers on the market that do ‘no delay’ line audio already and I don’t personally think it’s an area that Sonos would ever want to step into/compete with, nor do I honestly think that there is any great demand from their customers for them to do this. I just don’t see there being much in terms of any additional speaker/hardware sales either.
I’m not 100% sure on this. I certainly have audio needs that Sonos doesn’t currently fill. If Sonos made other audio equipment, there is a good chance I would buy the Sonos brand based on brand reputation only.
A good article here, knowledgeable input on the subject of unfortunate latency on the Sonos 5's.
https://darko.audio/2021/03/3-more-thoughts-on-the-sonos-five-vs-kef-lsx/
Not knowledgeable at all. The delay is not due to any DSP. It is due to the need to buffer the input for multi-room sync. Sonos needs to build up a buffer before playing, so that any timing issues have a buffer to work with in case of signal errors or dropouts. The buffer allows each unit to re-request any bad packets before the buffer runs out, thus not affecting the stream and keeping the units in sync.
May I point out that there are various tricks that can be employed in debate. One is to accuse those with a different viewpoint of corruption.
Another trick is to mis-characterise the views of others so that you can ridicule them. @by7 uses the term ‘dismissal’. Looking back, I don’t think there has been any ‘dismissal’. I don’t think anyone on this thread has argued that Sonos should not make this change. Speaking purely for myself, I have only sought to point out that this is not self-evidently a good change with zero downsides. And that even if it were a uniformly good change, it isn’t necessarily going to be top of Sonos’ priority list of developments. And that even apparently simple changes may not be quite so simple in a system that may comprise millions of lines of code.
So for the record, I do not not dismiss this request, and nor do I think I have any right to do so. Those requesting this change have a rational case and valid reasons. But it is not self-evident that Sonos should do this right now. And if they prioritise other developments over the one requested on a particular thread, it doesn’t necessarily mean that they are incompetent or indifferent to customers’ requests.
That is my view. Please accept my right to express it, as I respect the rights of others to express theirs. Wild, evidence-free conspiracy theories don’t help the discussion.
And please don’t accuse me of being in Sonos’ pay. There is no way I can disprove that accusation, but I do believe and hope that others on here are too sensible to side with
Edit please note: I had not seen
As to the 15k replies over 8 years, I am afraid I am sad enough to have made these entirely in my own time. Most of them are helping people with technical issues. But I do not see any point in debating
If any moderators feel like editing @by7’s posts or my responses please don’t. As he knows zero about me his accusations are worthless and water off a duck’s back to me. Please don’t edit a word of this. Let everyone make up their own minds. If they are bothered either way - this is just a sideshow.
Sonos simply wasn’t engineered for zero latency. It didn’t need to be.
Indeed, it needed not to be.
It sure needs to me now.
It’s a false dichotomy to think the only options are zero latency or annoyingly large latency. A false dichotomy designed to throw your hands up and say well gee even light has latency, so I guess perfection isn’t possible, so there’s no reason to try.
Nobody wants latency. I’ll permit 2-5ms. maybe 10ms, and be ok with calling that good enough. If I can perceive it with standard human senses, then it’s too much.
Sonos simply wasn’t engineered for zero latency. It didn’t need to be.
Indeed, it needed not to be.
It sure needs to me now.
Of course, but yours is a use case which, if Sonos cares about it at all, is very low down on the priority list.
With Sonos stopping the availability of updates for products like the Gen 1 Play 5 starting in May 2020, this line-in delay is even more of a nuisance. It would be nice to pull it from use as a streaming speaker and use it for something like a TV or computer speaker but the delay prevents this possibility. I just bought our Play 5 Gen 1 five years ago and it is already antiquated it seems...
Leaving aside the hyperbolic verbiage, you implied a use case that required zero/low latency, otherwise why would you post on this thread?
As for audio in conjunction with video, as has been pointed out countless times Sonos makes home theatre products for just such a purpose.
We paid for them, we’ll use em how we please thanks!
Products are designed to do what they do. Caveat emptor.
I agree with you for once. And if they’re designed with a “line-in” port (as opposed to a line-in-with-delay port), they they need to provide line-in without a delay.
Unless what you mean is by definition no product can ever do wrong because what a product does defines what they are designed to do. Which I’m sure that’s not what you mean, or else recalls, warranties, class actions, wouldn’t exist in this world. And that would be a terribly flawed logic of course.
DFTT.
There's no 'bottleneck'. Sonos is designed as a networked music system, for which a measure of buffering is required to prevent dropouts when playing in sync across a multi-hop wireless network. In the case of PLAYBAR, it can afford a tighter buffer (30ms instead of 75ms) because it's tethered to its bonded satellites via dedicated 5GHz links.
Sonos is not designed to be computer speakers. Could the latency for standalone operation be reduced? Potentially. Would it 'take a lot of engineering'? We cannot know (and I've lost count of the number of 'it must be only a few lines of code' claims). What we can say is that, whatever the software development effort, it would require the full QA process come what may, it could risk destabilising the existing audio pipeline in the players, and it would be a significant distraction from other more lucrative feature developments. All for a use case for which Sonos is not designed.
Page 3 / 8
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.