We need Audiophile Edition version of Port

Show first post

108 replies

K

There is more than the sunk cost fallacy for the Topping - there is the electricity it consumes. And the footprint and additional cable clutter. 

T
Userlevel 3
Badge +3

I’d agree with all that. I certainly don’t feel missold by Sonos and still think that it does what it is intended for very well. There are some claims on here though which I was previously inclined to believe that in  practice I have found to be missleadingly over the top which isn’t helpful. It actually does Sonos a disservice by seeking to claim it is something that it is not. The reality as with most things is somewhat more balanced and nuanced so I am merely seek to provide an alternative view as a counterpoint. 

M
Userlevel 2
Badge +3

a while back i posted on this forum re distorted output from  my Connect.
i was even tempted to get a Port to see if that resolved the problem, but was assured it would not.
i even ordered a simple DAC and used the digital output from the Connect, still lot of distortion on certain tracks.
i got help from Sonos Support.

after a LOT of investigation turned out a setting in the phone app (that i had no idea about as i mainly use the desktop app) solved a lot of my problems.

under the Settings > Products > Select relevant Product > Volume Limit,

set this to 80% as opposed to 100%, it means i can still use the Variable Line Out, and i no longer experience the distorted output that was causing so much annoyance.

has massively opened my listening experience, headphone listening is no longer exhausting.

maybe this would help some of the folks who have mentioned distortion when using Variable Out from their Port/Connect ?

 
certainly a lot cheaper and easier than building an alternative system.

 

T
Userlevel 3
Badge +3

That is a constructive suggestion but it just highlights that there is a problem with the Port and it ideally needs an upgrade. I don’t think Sonos should be applying DSP to something that is meant to be a hifi source. Sonos should not be painful to listen to on headphones

. The Port is a tricky one as it sits between their main convenience mass market and the hifi component market where it compares poorly. . While there are some Sonos users in denial who claim nothing sounds better than Sonos i have never come across a hifi user with Sonos that claim there is a more convenient product than Sonos.
 

Ideally as someone with a foot in both camps I want the convenience of Sonos with the sound quality of hifi. I don’t doubt that Sonos is technically capable of producing such a product but it just isn’t there market so unfortunately I will just have to look elsewhere. 

M
Userlevel 2

You state: “The current from the power supply is what’s moving the magnets in the woofers and tweeters that creates the sound you hear.” Just to avoid confusion: this topic is about the Port, that does not drive speakers directly. If you want to try a different power supply for the Port, they are available: 

https://www.fidelityaudio.co.uk/sonos-port-pro-low-noise-psu-5089-p.asp

https://wyred4sound.com/products/digital-converters/music-servers/upgrades-accessories/sonos-port-modified

When using the digital out, you are correct that the Port doesn’t drive the speakers directly. Nevertheless, it’s part of a network that starts with one or more power sources and ends with sound waves created by the motion of coils, magnets, ribbons or other components driven by those power sources. If the Port had an optical output that would be a different story.

If you use the variable, analog output then the Port is also both the DAC and the preamp, which are very much in the path of the current that drives the speakers. 

I agree that many audiophiles go overboard with expensive stuff, some of which may make little or no audible difference. I don’t agree that when the source is digital, nothing else matters. If you use the Port’s digital out, there’s little room to improve what comes out of the Port (perhaps none), but I wouldn’t discount the possibility of any improvement. Most of what could be improved, however, could be done at the input stage of an external DAC, e.g. re-clocking, isolation of noise so it doesn’t reach the DAC’s analog outputs, etc. 

If you’re using the Port’s DAC and preamp, that’s a whole different story.

I don’t think Sonos should make an audiophile Port. What they should make is a cheaper version of the Port that only has a digital out. Eliminating the DAC and preamp (analog in and analog out) should provide significant savings.

ratty

If the Port had an optical output that would be a different story.

Not really, apart from the electrical isolation element. You might wish to acquaint yourself with digital transmission techniques. 

 

I don’t think Sonos should make an audiophile Port. What they should make is a cheaper version of the Port that only has a digital out. Eliminating the DAC and preamp (analog in and analog out) should provide significant savings.

In percentage terms? I’d wager it would actually be a pretty small saving, considering the need for processor, memory, DSP, network interfaces, etc would be the same either way. 

jgatie

A DAC chip goes for pennies, it’s a commodity product.  Even the most expensive “audiophile” DAC chips are under $10, which is a rounding error for the Port pricing. Same for the analog out. 

B
Userlevel 3
Badge +3

I have a port connected to a Denafrips Ares 2 external DAC connected to a rogue sphinx integrated amp.

I recently, noting its strong return policy, tried ain ifi ipure2 between the coax and the ares 2. This device claims to both galvanically issolate the signal (removing power supply noise and such) and reclocking it. 

I was commited to trying it and sending it back if I did not hear a dramatic improvmenet. Suprisingly, I did. The dynamic range (especially the base) and the imaging improved quite a bit. I was so startled I contacted IFI to see if they were applying a DSP or something else. They said nope. I then contacted Denafrips, and they said if the jitter of the signal was reduced it would help the sound quality, even though the DAC also does some reclocking. Since they also sell expensive devices to reclock as well, they obviuosly think such is possible. 

At any rate, if you are looking to improve the signal from a port into an external DAC, the IFI is  worth a try. Just make sure to buy from a place with a solid return policy. YMMV.

I still dont know if the improvement comes from reducing jitter/reclocking, or the galvanic issolation, but I’m not removing it! The improvement was way better than any other tweak (interconnects, etc), I’ve ever tried, at least in my setup. 

 

M
Userlevel 2

a frustrating thread in which I’m trying to find some answers as to why my 2-ch system w/ a Sonos Connect into a Pro-ject Pre Box S2 into a Bryson 4B sounded so much better before I replaced all that with an Amp so I could use the 2-channels as rear speakers with an Arc and Sub. Even when I set the surrounds to max for music playback, the music just isn’t as enjoyable as it was before. Probably has more to do with impedance matching with the speakers (B+Ws) than anything else.  

 

 

 

If you want any constructive help here you will have to clarify exactly the signal chain via which the sound in the past, being compared against, was delivered as compared to the signal chain via which it is being delivered now. 

Thanks. I think my issue is relevant, but off topic for this thread, maybe someone could suggest another thread for using an existing 2-ch Sonos system as rear channels for a surround system without degrading the existing 2-ch system because you can only do it by putting an Amp on the 2-ch system.

The Amp replaces the external DAC, preamp and Amp on the 2-ch system. That system now has a Sub too.

That isn’t the only issue though. Switching from TV/surround to playing music on the Surround Channels through the new system is not exactly the same as playing music on the old 2-ch system. I think there is some strong DSP now on the Surround Channels. I have changed music playback from Ambient to Full and set the volume of the Surround Channels to max for Music Playback. I don’t recall if I tried turning off Trueplay, I’ll do that this weekend. If that sounds better for music I’ll just leave it off.

It’d be nice if you could set Trueplay on for TV/Surround and off for Music (or vice-versa).

 

T
Userlevel 3
Badge +3

Sure but it does on the optical output which is not ideal. Appreciate every DAC does but not ideal for a hifi set up that you get the very  Sonos processed sound iwhich is designed for its own products but isn’t ideal when being used as a source for other speakers  

Yes the switching to fixed is a helpful suggestion which I appreciate and  is fine for my ok speakers but the sound quality is still so poor it hurts my ears on headphones  And what ever it is doing that doesn’t mean it should be necessary to move from the convenience of variable to fixed  

im haven’t said the dac is poor.  It just isn’t great. I have various dac options and when I blindly switch been sources I come to the same option and it isn’t Sonos. 

 

it is nothing to do with snobbery. It is about sound quality. With Sonos it is painful and not enjoyable to listen to. on my headphones. With a cheaper USB connection. it is enjoyable and not painful to listen to. That is what matters.  I know this is difficult for the deniers to accept but just maybe the Sonos port is not the best sounding option and just maybe it consistently gets poor reviews because it isn’t the best product in the line up. Just possibly some pother products sound better for some people in some situations and give them more enjoyment  

 

what is snobbery would be to suggest that it is worth spending money on Sonos ibecause it is better than some other eg Bluetooth products but that there is no other product that could just possibly be a better option for some people in some situations  

 

ratty

Port doesn’t have an optical output. 

The data from the coax output in Fixed volume mode is not processed. It’s taken from the output of decoder.

I don’t have the means to diff the Port digital output against a WAV input, but long ago someone did this for a ZP80 and found them to be identical. I can’t imagine why Port wouldn’t be similar.

If you like what your USB connection is doing for you that’s fine. Perhaps you simply prefer the processing that’s going on in the phone.

I didn’t enjoy the Port’s variable digital output via Schiit into my HD650s as much as taking the analog out from the Port straight into the head amp. Each to their own.

T
Userlevel 3
Badge +3

Sorry I meant analog output. I understand that digital sound not processed but what ever it is doing to it in variable mode isn’t good 

 

USB is a digital connection so it is my headphone DAC which is doing the processing. For whatever reason it has solved the problem I had listening with Sonos as the digital source. 
 

Exactly each to their.own.  I use Sonos as my surround sound and I’m perfectly happy with it and have no interest in a specialist system as I’m not a film buff so I completely understand if someone says they are completely satisfied with Sonos and don’t see value in other systems. Generally I like Sonos. but I personally prefer the sound of my hifi system and it Just doesn’t work for me as my headphone source. 

T
Userlevel 3
Badge +3

Sure my DAC is taking whatever the digital signal is from the source just as my DAC is taking whatever digital signal is coming from Sonos. Whatever it is doing the cheaper USB cable option sounds way better and is no longer painful to listen to on my headphones compared to previously using Sonos as a source. I never touch EQ on a hifi as I don’t like a processed sound which is why the Sonos sound isn’t my personal preference for focused listening. 

T
Userlevel 3
Badge +2

Personally I think Sonos missed the boat with the Port when they didn’t make it like the Amp, but with a digital/analog outs instead of speaker outs.  Same features as the Amp, just replace the amp with digital outs. 

ratty

You appear to be in denial that your USB option could already be processed, on the source device. It’s just that you seem to prefer that form of processing, which is okay.

chicks

Personally I think Sonos missed the boat with the Port when they didn’t make it like the Amp, but with a digital/analog outs instead of speaker outs.  Same features as the Amp, just replace the amp with digital outs. 

???

 

 

T
Userlevel 3
Badge +3

Could well be. Not saying it isn’t. I’m only saying that it is a digital signal from the source to the DAC just as Sonos passes a digital signal from the source to the DAC.  Every digital music source is ultimately processed at some point starting with the orginal recording. What I am saying is whatever it is doing it sounds way better than Sonos and is no longer painful to listen to. 

T
Userlevel 3
Badge +2

Amp has a digital in.  And can be used with a TV setup to provide 4.1 sound (phantom center).

T
Userlevel 3
Badge +2

Amp has a digital in.

Amp has an HDMI-ARC digital in, and DD5.1 home theatre decode. A different product positioning from Port entirely. 

Yup, and I wish Sonos positioned Port just like an Amp but without the amp. But they didn’t!  Oh well.

chicks

Amp has a digital in. 

So does the Port, via UPnP or any of the dozens of Sonos-supported services, including your own music on a NAS...

ratty

Given the state of the world your repeated use of the work “painful” in connection with a mere audio product is verging on trollishness. 

M
Userlevel 2

If the Port had an optical output that would be a different story.

Not really, apart from the electrical isolation element. You might wish to acquaint yourself with digital transmission techniques. 

 

Agreed. Not irrelevant, but a different story.

 

I don’t think Sonos should make an audiophile Port. What they should make is a cheaper version of the Port that only has a digital out. Eliminating the DAC and preamp (analog in and analog out) should provide significant savings.

In percentage terms? I’d wager it would actually be a pretty small saving, considering the need for processor, memory, DSP, network interfaces, etc would be the same either way. 

Not sure what DSP you have in mind, but the idea is not to mess with the source at all.

It’s all commodity stuff. I think the end product is such a stripped down version of what they put into all their products that it could be cheaper just because it’s simpler. Every little thing adds complexity. It really is the core of every Sonos product. That’s probably the main reason they won’t offer it separately.

ratty

Amp has a digital in.

Amp has an HDMI-ARC digital in, and DD5.1 home theatre decode. A different product positioning from Port entirely. 

Yup, and I wish Sonos positioned Port just like an Amp but without the amp. 

To feed what downstream equipment? Over what type of connection? 

T
Userlevel 3
Badge +3

I’m not trilling at all. I’m am merely pointing out that listening to Sonos on my headphones was hurting my ears so I could not listen for very long as someone else also suggested was a problem with Sonos sound to illustrate that Sonos just might not be the best option for everyone in every situation. 
 

what is trolling is the constant denial and repetitive attacks from a few individuals on anyone who might suggest that other options just might have a better sound quality for some people is some some circumstances and god forbid if they mention the word audiophile. 
 

i like Sonos. The convenience is excellent just not the sound quality for me.  I have eight units.The only one I don’t use regularly anymore and would replace is the hifi component.  Sonos and streaming got me back into music.  I just don’t think it is the be all and end all and just because I find it painful to listen on my headphones is just that. 

I fundamentally agree with Sonos own view of its sound quality so that is hardly trolling. It anyone is trolling it is those repeatedly disagreeing with Sonos. 

T
Userlevel 3
Badge +2

Amp has a digital in.

Amp has an HDMI-ARC digital in, and DD5.1 home theatre decode. A different product positioning from Port entirely. 

Yup, and I wish Sonos positioned Port just like an Amp but without the amp. 

To feed what downstream equipment? Over what type of connection? 

 

Dac/preamp that can do crossover and room EQ in the digital domain like a MiniDSP SHD.  Then feed a power amp, speakers, and subs.

Port can already do that, but having a digital input and rudimentary home theater decode (like the AMP) would let me feed my TV to it and not have to mess with a big AVR at all.  If I swapped for a Port + preamp setup, I lose the ability to add 2 Ones for surround sound.

Not a big deal and I’m sure I’m a corner case.

 

Reply


Terms & ConditionsCookie settings