I absolutely love the Sonos Windows and Android apps and my new 5.1 and other Play speakers. You did an excellent job on this system! I also want to listen to all the great music sources while working at my PC and don't always want to bother everyone else turning on the real speakers (I develop Windows software at home). Please create a new "Play:Win" device that can be a Sonos "Room" which can send audio to any of the Windows Playback devices. E.G. headset, speakers, digital audio S/PDIF 5.1 etc. same as how a user can select audio playback output on a PC. You can build a Windows device driver to do this. This way I can use my local USB headset and you don't need to come out with those wireless headsets quite so soon. I don't want to have to also run WinAmp or Kodi or something to play my local FLAC files that I can already play via Sonos reading my NAS drive. And I want to use the great features in the Sonos app for internet radio, playlists, favorites etc. which would be yet additional apps if I can use Sonos. Please add a Play:Win device as part of the Sonos PC app. You of course could also build Play:Android etc. but I sit at my PC all day and that one is top priority :D Please consider this especially for the Windows PC. Thanks for your consideration. This would set Sonos way above the emerging IP speaker crowd! Dave

I currently have a connect hooked between my PC output and my PC speakers. That makes my PC a Sonos Zone where I can play anything from my PC to any Sonos speaker in the house and I can play Sonos music to my PC speakers (making them a zone and I could just as easily have a splitter to use my wired headphones as well.If speakers are built into the PC you could hook the connect to the MIC/Audio input of your PC to play Sonos sound - and from the audio out to play PC sound to other Sonos units.How does the Connect not work for you?

Pretty please - Build a Play:Win device

C

Userlevel 1

+1

hopefully they encrypt their remote command protocol so no one actually does clone it.

It uses UPnP, which is in clear text. Many have implemented third party controllers.

That seems a business risk they have. They could still use uPnP for their own sake, yet at the app layer, encrypt commands thus preventing someone from creating 3rd party controllers. Since those exist, it also seems it would be possible to create a PC zone or 3rd party speakers. Just sayin...

C

Userlevel 1

+1

And you wouldn't need to open source a Sonos software player in order to blow a big hole through Sonos' business model, just a Win32 emulator.

They would still need to get the software onto the emulator and would have to either buy it or steal it since it would not be free. They could also teach the PC software to not run if it did not find a key or some real Sonos speaker elsewhere to exchange a key with, or some such protection.

Anyway got to go do some work now. Thanks for all the comments everyone. It was just a suggestion on how I could have a Sonos headset...and my belief they could make a business case for it. They should protect their command stream within uPnP.

[I guess the great USB and HDMI sound I hear from other apps on my PC is my imagination and 30 years in computer software and hardware doesn't count. I'm quite aware of how interrupt logic works having written device drivers for Intel. Yet I don't care to keep arguing. I'll hope for them coming out with a wireless headset and/or look into a Connect.

Oh Jeeez, you actually went there. . .

Alright smart guy, do an experiment: Start a playlist on your PC, and start the same playlist on your Sonos at the same time. Or better yet start a long symphony, so any gap management does not affect the results. See how long it takes the PC to go out of sync with the Sonos device. Surprisingly, it is not too long. Why is this? Because the clock on the PC, being based on interrupts that are in use by many other processes, is as inaccurate as can be designed. It can drift off by tens of seconds a day, which is why we have internet servers that are set up just to resync the clocks on your PC. A drift of tens of seconds a day means over the course of a long piece of music, it doesn't take long to drift the few microseconds it takes for the human brain to detect a difference. Which is fine if you are only listening to music on your PC, but when you try to accurately sync the music to Sonos hardware players, it all falls apart.

This is also why the SqueezeSoft application listed above was incapable of playing synchronized audio, even when compared to the rather poor sync of the Squeeze hardware. Still didn't stop people from using it for a free player, though.

Now I'm sick of arguing with a person bringing up already rebutted points from an almost decade old thread. Read the thread and learn something, and you should change your mind about this request.

[They would still need to get the software onto the emulator and would have to either buy it or steal it since it would not be free. They could also teach the PC software to not run if it did not find a key or some real Sonos speaker elsewhere to exchange a key with, or some such protection.

Or they could just not make the software, and instead rely on hardware sales to become the billion dollar a year company they have become.

C

Userlevel 1

+1

Now I'm sick...

...and insulting. I wasn't wanting the headphones to be in sync with other speakers. That was the point of wanting headphones as the others would be off. And hopefully no one clones their speakers if the protocol is clear. Anyway Chris offered a solution where I can use Sonos to control the music and listen on my headphones which is what I wanted. Still, I'd love to see them come out with their own headphones at some point when room enough for the battery and the logic and memory.

I don't care what you wanted. You stated the clock interrupt was not a valid reason for not making a software based zone. Which, given your specific needs and wants, may be true. However, software is not written to please the needs and wants of a single individual, and therefore the lack of sync, when every other device sold by Sonos has perfect sync, is a valid hurdle to bring up when discussing the possibility of releasing a software based zone.

C

Userlevel 1

+1

I don't care what you wanted. You stated the clock interrupt was not a valid reason for not making a software based zone. Which, given your specific needs and wants, may be true. However, software is not written to please the needs and wants of a single individual, and therefore the lack of sync, when every other device sold by Sonos has perfect sync, is a valid hurdle to bring up when discussing the possibility of releasing a software based zone.

The sync was a valid point in general but there is a way around it. And clearly I'm not the only one that wanted a PC zone and did not expect it to be free. Thanks.

T

I don't care what you wanted. You stated the clock interrupt was not a valid reason for not making a software based zone. Which, given your specific needs and wants, may be true. However, software is not written to please the needs and wants of a single individual, and therefore the lack of sync, when every other device sold by Sonos has perfect sync, is a valid hurdle to bring up when discussing the possibility of releasing a software based zone.

The sync was a valid point in general but there is a way around it. And clearly I'm not the only one that wanted a PC zone and did not expect it to be free. Thanks.

Well, no, to be honest you are about the only person that's ever said you'd be happy to pay for it...

Some reluctantly stated they would pay for it when backed into a corner by the cannibalizing sales argument. However, none were willing to pay over a token amount of $50, and they certainly balked when I and others proposed it cost the same as a Connect, since they only wished to "eliminate another box with wires on my desk sucking up watts". Long story short, people want a Sonos zone without paying the price of Sonos hardware, which if taken to the obvious conclusion, would mean a decrease in sales of Sonos hardware.

C

Userlevel 1

+1

Well, no, to be honest you are about the only person that's ever said you'd be happy to pay for it...

Some reluctantly stated they would pay for it when backed into a corner by the cannibalizing sales argument. However, none were willing to pay over a token amount of $50, and they certainly balked when I and others proposed it cost the same as a Connect, since they only wished to "eliminate another box with wires on my desk sucking up watts". Long story short, people want a Sonos zone without paying the price of Sonos hardware, which if taken to the obvious conclusion, would mean a decrease in sales of Sonos hardware.

C

Userlevel 1

+1

Well, no, to be honest you are about the only person that's ever said you'd be happy to pay for it...

Some reluctantly stated they would pay for it when backed into a corner by the cannibalizing sales argument. However, none were willing to pay over a token amount of $50, and they certainly balked when I and others proposed it cost the same as a Connect, since they only wished to "eliminate another box with wires on my desk sucking up watts". Long story short, people want a Sonos zone without paying the price of Sonos hardware, which if taken to the obvious conclusion, would mean a decrease in sales of Sonos hardware.

Well it should be some less than a Connect if no hardware. What would be quite reasonable would be to pay Sonos their same profit on selling a device minus the manufacturing cost, overhead, packaging, shipping etc. I fully support their right to make a profit on their IP. The system overall is fantastic and they deserve the rewards from their efforts. I certainly want Sonos to stay in business and was trying to think of additional product they could offer that would also fill need and desire. Especially mine => to have headphones and a single sound app.

You can meet your needs and desires with a Connect.

Userlevel 7

+22

Chris
Lead Maestro
17582 replies
7 years ago
20 December 2016

Did you really just chastise someone quoting a year old thread?

Interrupts? PC clock? RTC maybe? What are you stuck in the 80's of PC technology running 8086 games on your super fast 486? Not all of us have crap PC setups... I run a full professional grade DAC in async that has no dependency on the "PC Clock"...

Your test, start two playlists is absurd. Please stop commenting when you have no idea what you are talking about. However, thank you for the laughs. :8

So you want Sonos to create, maintain, and support an application to serve the minuscule market that has professional grade DACs and other advanced hardware? An application that can be used to duplicate Sonos hardware on a PC, thus making their own hardware redundant? You also needed to resurrect a long dead thread in order to do it?

No, thank you for the laughs! 😃

Userlevel 1

Interrupts? PC clock? RTC maybe? What are you stuck in the 80's of PC technology running 8086 games on your super fast 486? Not all of us have crap PC setups... I run a full professional grade DAC in async that has no dependency on the "PC Clock"...

Your test, start two playlists is absurd. Please stop commenting when you have no idea what you are talking about. However, thank you for the laughs. :8

So you want Sonos to create, maintain, and support an application to serve the minuscule market that has professional grade DACs and other advanced hardware? An application that can be used to duplicate Sonos hardware on a PC, thus making their own hardware redundant? You also needed to resurrect a long dead thread in order to do it?

No, thank you for the laughs! :D

Yes. Also, I do not think the market of people with quality DAC's is as small as you think, given how many new models came out in 2016. I think it is actually Sonus's sweet spot tbh.

I'd like to know what protocols are going to be used to sync the DAC's autonomous clock with the Sonos hardware players.

I do not think the market of people with quality DAC's is as small as you think, given how many new models came out in 2016. I think it is actually Sonus's sweet spot tbh.

Nonsense. Sonos' sweet spot is the PLAY:1.

Yes. Also, I do not think the market of people with quality DAC's is as small as you think, given how many new models came out in 2016. I think it is actually Sonus's sweet spot tbh.

We will agree to disagree. Regardless, the vast majority of PCs made have no such capabilities, so for those standard PCs not equipped with specialized equipment, the above applies. Also applicable is the fact that Sonos would be cannibalizing sales a la Squeezebox if they released a PC based emulator, and we all know what happened to Squeezebox.

Bottom line, Sonos isn't going to make your PC/Mac into a Sonos player. Period.

Userlevel 1

Yes. Also, I do not think the market of people with quality DAC's is as small as you think, given how many new models came out in 2016. I think it is actually Sonus's sweet spot tbh.

We will agree to disagree. Regardless, the vast majority of PCs made have no such capabilities, so for those standard PCs not equipped with specialized equipment, the above applies. Also applicable is the fact that Sonos would be cannibalizing sales a la Squeezebox if they released a PC based emulator, and we all know what happened to Squeezebox.

Bottom line, Sonos isn't going to make your PC/Mac into a Sonos player. Period.

I doubt they would make it as well... That does not mean spreading incorrect information as fact is good form. A high-end pro grade DAC is not the only option here for your cited "Clock" issue which is total crap.

OLD INFO, PROBLEM SOLVED YEARS AGO:
http://www.tested.com/tech/pcs/454839-tested-why-high-end-pc-sound-card-matters/

You should probably read the thread again if you think this is 100% reclocking. There are other factors at work here, the most significant of which is the timing between synchronized players. But hey, think what you want. Your input means nothing to the fact it isn't going to happen.

Userlevel 1

I doubt they would make it as well... That does not mean spreading incorrect information as fact is good form. A high-end pro grade DAC is not the only option here for your cited "Clock" issue which is total crap.

OLD INFO, PROBLEM SOLVED YEARS AGO:
http://www.tested.com/tech/pcs/454839-tested-why-high-end-pc-sound-card-matters/

You should probably read the thread again if you think this is 100% reclocking. There are other factors at work here, the most significant of which is the timing between synchronized players. But hey, think what you want. Your input means nothing to the fact it isn't going to happen.

I was referring/correcting the misinformation portion. Nor was I expecting they would make it.

Sign up

Login to the community

Scanning file for viruses.

This file cannot be downloaded