Why is Connect more expensive than Play?

I just got my first pair of Sonos units - two Play:3's for the kitchen and bedroom and I absolutely love them. I'm not a huge audiophile, but the convenience and total plug 'n play nature of Sonos is what attracted me to it.

Of course the next thing that occured to me was how to get this connected up to my stereo.

What I don't understand is why the basic Connect is $349 while the Play:3 units are $299 each. I mean if anything it seems like a Connect is just a Play:3 without the speakers and amp? Why does it cost so much more for fewer features? Seems like the guts of the connect should be a $99 unit - I meant he appleTV is $99, and it does way more (At least in terms of technological capability - video/etc) than the connect.

To be honest I've been drooling over Sonos for years - and I know the quality is very high, but the expense of the units has always put me off. It wasn't until the Play:3 that I felt like there was enough bang-for-the-buck to justify diving in... I'm probably going to get at least 2 or 3 more Play:3's for elsewhere in the house, but it's going to be hard to justify the Connect until the price comes down further. It's still cheaper to just put a Play:3 in the same room as my stereo - it's small and powerful enough to just sit near my existing speakers.

Page 6 / 8

...

Now if the sonos team had jumped in at some point and explained the connect is expensive becase... "we have to do a lot of processing to make sure the music sounds great going into your system, and we don't have to do that with the play 3 because we control the amp and the speakers... etc etc" well that would make more sense...

Do you mean to say you prefer advertising over a $100 reduction in price?:)

As someone who is looking a purchasing a Sonos system for whole house (probably 3 kids rooms - bedroom, dinning room, shed!), the only bit of the pricing which seems odd is the Connect. Which is how I came across the thread in the first place.

I'm looking at the various options for value / utility / longevity / openness / connectivity options etc. Be a shame if this odd pricing was the sticking point.

I think that the PLAY:3 price is low balled to increase market penetration. As unit volume increases, the manufacturing costs will decrease and allow some profit. SONOS used this strategy on the original ZP100 which was initially priced very low, considering the manufacturing costs. The ZP100 was priced at a fraction of the cost of anything remotely competitive in terms of function. This was a gutsy, high risk strategy that worked.

That seems to be in line with Sonos now selling into a different market segment - ie high volume rather than the near custom integration market - and hence selling with a lower margin. Connect will always be low volume. But still grates...

Therefore, if the connect was cheaper, more people would purchase them. Absolutely no doubt in my mind on that.

And Sonos would not make as much profit as they do when selling less units at a higher price. It's not a question of the number of sales (I bet they'd sell millions of them at $10, why not lower it to that???), it's a question of overall profit, and Sonos knows a heck of a lot more about their profit margin than you or I.

To end the agument - Someone needs to open up a Play 3/5 and a ZP80/ZP90/Connect and see what hardware is in them. I am certain that the network/computing hardware would be identical for compatibility and cost reasons.

You would lose that bet, and I don't have to open them up. To whit: The Play:3 networking hardware is dual-band 2.4/5 GHz, the Play:5 is 2.4 GHz only.

It would also suppose that the retail price is fundamentally based on the cost of the components in the system.

Of course that is a totally bogus supposition, as are the arguments that are based on it.

Cheers,

Keith

Exactly. Though I do find it funny that we have two separate threads going right now; one that says if the Connect really performs as they say, it swould be priced with the $5-10K streamers from Linn and Naim, and another thread which says $350 is too much because the cost of manufacturing is low.

The connect is priced high because Sonos has no interest in customers connecting their existing or new hi-if equipment, they basically want you to buy their entire range. It's a shame since it's chicken logic (Danish Saying) that the price should be around what an Airport Extreme cost - I personally think the Bridge and Connect should be the same price.

I have 2xPlay5, 2xPlay1, 1xSpeakerbar, 1xsub, 1xConnect Amp and a bridge, but it doesn't make sense for me buying the connect when the Airport does the trick for 1/3 of the price!

Welcome to the forum.

Your logic is flawed. The Connect model is the latest in the line that provides the "connect to existing audio equipment" role, going all the way back to the ZP80, which was introduced in 2006, a full three and a half years before the appearance of the ZonePlayer S5 (the first Sonos standalone unit, now called the Play:5).

Sonos was charging $349 for the equivalent of the Connect for years before they even had "an entire range" to buy into. That's what it costs. It's not mandatory to buy one.

When my 7-year-old ZP80's encounter trouble, I have the option of requesting help from Sonos Support. Try that with a Airport Extreme that old.

I personally think the Bridge and Connect should be the same price.

You're entitled think that, but it makes no sense on cost grounds let alone market pricing. Feature-wise the Bridge is a small subset of the Connect.

In fact, since the Bridge is often included for free in a bundle I guess you're asking to be given a Connect.

Let me chime in and say very clearly that Connect is totally overpriced. I am one of the new PLAY:3 customers but rest assured, it was a present. I contemplated "upgrading" to a Sonos system last year until I learnt that you needed "Bridge", that "Connect" costed a little fortune and there could be no iTunes Match support. No ITM support wasn't that much of a big deal since I was used to it but a 'Bridge' device? What year is it?

To top it all I am underwhelmed by the PLAY:3 sound ( slight bass distortion ), though I have yet to play around with the equalizer.

Sadly I don't feel like I own a premium system, I feel my 5 year old squeezebox was massively ahead of its time and probably still is.

Sadly I don't feel like I own a premium system, I feel my 5 year old squeezebox was massively ahead of its time and probably still is.

Awww, another Squeezebox lamentation. You folks are so cute! 😃

Let me chime in and say very clearly that Connect is totally overpriced.

Bullsh-it! I don't know your budget, nor your expectations versus price, but I've the Connect (it was called ZP90 when I bought it); for 5 years. The system performed without any glidge up till now.

So, you're saying that 349€ for 5y (In my case, and ongoing) on a 24/7 basis music is not satisfying?? Whatelse you want more for that price??? Calculate it on a daily basis if you're a real music lover.

I've connected the Connect to an external dac on my 50k€ hifi system. So far, I haven't found any system on the market providing the same flexibility as a SONOS system. And yes, I've found a better sound performing system than SONOS (sorry jgatie), but lacking basic user interface functionality, which made me going on with SONOS, since sound quality is marginal versus flexibility (not taking into account the price)

k

but a 'Bridge' device? What year is it?

Irrespective of the year the function of 'bridge' devices is to connect together link-layer network segments. Sonos have their own wireless mesh dedicated to audio.

... 'Bridge' device? What year is it?

It will soon be 2014 and the competing products are still stuck in an older age, attempting to use WiFi for a purpose (streaming music) for which it is ill suited. The WiFi based products struggle with a few rooms while SONOS shines at several times the room count.

I've connected the Connect to an external dac on my 50k€ hifi system. So far, I haven't found any system on the market providing the same flexibility as a SONOS system. And yes, I've found a better sound performing system than SONOS

k

In such a set up as you mention, which component have you found that can improve the SQ provided by the Connect? Wired or Wireless, is there any such in either flavour?

Sorry to revive this thread. Jumped into sonos last year with a playbar/sub/play1s for bedroom HT. Love the sound and simplicity!

Another pair of play1s in diff rooms I arrived at the connect and the value it had to bring my main HT into sonos land. I balked for months as I think it is a ripoff price. Bought one begrudgingly last week. Opened up a new world where I could enjoy streaming without AirPlay in my maranta pre/pro.

I have a Bowers Zep not used in 3 years as AirPlay can be spotty. Moved the connect to it and now I enjoy this amazing speaker.

Alas my HT now needs the missing connect. $350 is a ripoff, but I will buy another one for it. Will curse but once installed will be happy with the value it brings via music enjoyment.

Yes a ripoff price but in context of the value , not too bad. Like most apple Products, My MacBooks and iPhones served the family with lot better quality than my windows and android hardware ever did. Yes I love my nexus 7 on lollipop.

Amortized over five years, it's what? 20 cents / day? Those little coffee pods are twice that per day if you only have one cup, and we won't even mention Starbucks. Put it to perspective!

Totally agree.just got the second connect . all hooked up to main HT and buyers remorse gone like that! Enjoying the music whole house. No more sonos gear required .... All in perspective and quality of experience.

I think the Connect is a ripoff. I can do the same thing the Connect does with a Roku box or streaming stick. Hook the Roku to a TV and to your stereo, and you have all the capabilities that Sonos has, at a fraction of the cost.

Can Roku give you music that is perfectly synchronized with 31 other Roku boxes?

I thought not.

The point is, whatever you think it cost to make a connect, does not account for any R & D. Not many products in this world are worth their cost in materials.

While I agree, all that was done a decade ago or more. A price break of a hundred or more would be nice... The Plays seems to be more of a gadget in terms of cost, yet cost considerably less (and right where I think the price point is warranted).

No question the Connect price is a rip off. At least Sonos could make it work exactly as advertised and offer it in black so it doesn't clash with the majoruty of A/V systems it is designed to accompany. Even all white Apple saw that as a no brainer with the much less noticable ATV. It is what it is though, and as frustrating as it is, the option is to say no to the connect or just "frown and bear it". For now I will say no in hopes that with new market entrants Sonos is forced to play nice and price accordingly.

At least Sonos could make it work exactly as advertised

Are you suggesting they're selling it under false pretences? Kindly be more specific.

The Connect doesn't necessarily sync your AV system with all other Sonos components. This should be made known to potential purchasers as it is a significant flaw when this is one of Sonos biggest selling points. I have a direct pass on my Pioneer Elite so is not an issue for me, but for others to shell out the price of a PS4 for a simple media streaming box and then not work as advertised is misleading.

I understand (and this is also the subject of various long threads) but this is hardly a deficiency on Sonos' part. Any downstream delay, in whatever equipment, is obviously going to have the potential to upset sync.

The engineering challenge in such circumstances boils down to delaying all the other members of the group to compensate for the AV receiver delay. So if there were two AVR's in the group, each with a different processing delay? Not simple.

It's worth observing that Mother Nature is also unfair in this regard. Sound takes about 1 ms to travel 1 foot in air, so two rooms where perfectly sync'd speakers are 30 feet apart can produce an obvious echo at the listener owing to the 30 ms skew.

Sign up

Login to the community

Scanning file for viruses.

This file cannot be downloaded