Ability to play 24bit/96 files (like the competition: slimdevices transporter)
Page 12 / 41
Yes, it is. I don't discount the merits of double blind testing, I discount the methodology of sensory tests and, more to the point, the results (and what people assume they mean).
Generally speaking, since we want to go down the science road - there is no way to ever scientifically conclude that there is no audible difference between two objects (unless it is outside of the known hearing range). The reason for this goes to the most basic of principles - the scientific method. In science, you can only make a hypothesis and develop proof for it, but never completely discount the null hypothesis. (in the immortal words of Carl Sagan: "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence")
Blind tests have two outcomes:
1) Either you establish scientifically that there's a high degree of probability that someone would be able to tell the difference between A and B, or
2) You fail to establish that there is a discernible difference.
But here's the rub - one that is overlooked by people that have a passing knowledge of scientific theory: While a positive result establishes, to a certain level of confidence, the reality of different perceptible acoustic differences, a null result, or a failure to reliably detect a difference, does not indicate the nonexistence of that difference.
The reason DBT is currently used is because we don't have a better, testable method. So, people run forward with the tests they have at their disposal and we have to accept the flaws and variables of the test. The human response is flawed and biased - and any researcher worth his grain will list this as a potential draw back in this methodology. While the goal of DBT is to remove bias, once memory is introduced it only succeeds in amplifying stress to prove the bias. It is the nature of testing. All tests can be refined and improved upon, but when conducting this test the bottleneck is human memory and fatigue. This is an issue.
I, personally, would be more interested in watching brain activity and overall body reaction (blood pressure, breathing pattern, oxygen levels) of a listener when exposed to extensive listening of compressed vs non-compressed vs high resolution - both from a double blind and a non-blind test. I would be interested to see how the brain/body system reacts. *THAT* is pure science without the statistical variance imbued by the unreliability of human sensory memory.
I have never seen any of the popular criticisms of double blind audio tests, including the ones listed above, subjected to peer review in accredited publications. If you can point me towards an article of this type, I will gladly cede the point that double blind audio tests are flawed.
Sigh.
It is a well-established, scientific fact that the only aspect of the human senses that meet scientific standards for accuracy belongs to sight, and it is called direct visual comparison. Further, the only direct comparison that succeeds scientific scrutiny is the visual comparison of color tone between objects lying directly next to each other with no gap between them.
The reason that direct visual comparison is the only scientific form of comparison among all the human senses is because it places zero demand on human memory. All other forms of sensory comparison, including non-direct visual comparison (objects with spacing between them), depend on a person's highly unreliable memory for sensory impressions. The more testing performed, the more the characteristics of the stimuli blur within the human mind.
Extending upon the direct vs non-direct visual comparison example - when the objects have no space between them - one is able to pinpoint the differences easily whereas showing them one at a time introduces a degree of uncertainty and doubt - this leads to stress, second-guessing and ultimately an unscientific answer. The result of such a test would actually morph from testing whether or not there is a perceptible difference between the shades to testing whether or not we have the capacity to remember - thus nullifying the entire testing methodology.
At the end of the day, no matter which sense is tested, the lac of dependability in human memory for sensory impressions is the bottleneck in all such comparisons. As such, there is no true direct comparisons that are possible with other senses, even in A/B tests. Thus, at best makes these tests highly unreliable and at worst it would innately invalidates such a test.
I will stick to my first instinct: The critique of the tests are a convenient way to discount the results in order to further the audiophile agenda.
You can continue to parrot your rhetoric - I don't have an audiophile agenda. I don't have cobololo wood feet - nor do I even know what they are. When you say green marker, my first instinct is to assume you mean it's environmentally friendly.
I have a decent, in-home system - but I also have a decent disposable income. I bought nice gear because I could. Much like the reason I drive a nice car isn't because I can drive faster. Most of my money went to solid sound-proofing (mainly to not annoy my girlfriend), a good DAC and decent speakers. I would assume my setup is better than most, but only half as good as the people you continue to align me with.
At the end of the day - Jim Morrison is *NOT* in my speakers bleating his war cries at me -- it's a sonic reproduction. If, at the end of the day, I believe that high resolution audio makes it sound like he is that much more real ... why does it offend your sensibilities so?
I am simply stating that I believe that Sonos should offer hi-res simply because I own some hi-res files. Not because they innately sound better, but because I want to be able to play them as is. I want to be able to own one copy of the Rolling Stones' catalog in my library ... even if they are acoustically identical.
My agenda is simple - I want Sonos to be able to play anything I may wish to throw at it.
With that said, let me ask you one of your redundant questions (that, like you, I will ignore the answer to) - is your agenda quite as simple?
Hmm...very interesting thread. I have been a Sonos lover since I got my system, but have also been interested in being able to stream my hi-rez downloads (without downconverting) and DVD music through Sonos. I also wish they would just tell us what they're going to do instead of keeping it secret.
Before I had my Sonos, I streamed 320 kbs MP3s from my computer. I did careful comparisons on Sennheiser 600 headphones and (ON MOST MUSIC) could hear no difference whatsoever between the streamed files and the CDs they were burnt from. On music with cymbals or orchestral climaxes, however, the CDs were cleaner, either to my ears or to the placebo center in my brain. On 90 percent of the music I listen to, and on ALL music if I am also reading or otherwise not concentrating, there is no audible difference in my system.
Why, then, do I want hi-rez? Well, because I know that my SACDs and DVD Audios sound better than my CDs did in the same universal player (Denon 5900). I also know that when I bought my first CDs (which, for various reasons, all sounded like crap in the early years), I was told by all the experts that "bits is bits" and that there was no difference between players, etc. I believed this until I bought my second player and heard a readily audible improvement, although I had no expectation of hearing any. My point is that sometimes it takes time before things develop. Nowadays, well-recorded CDs sound fantastic. If recording engineers such as Doug Sax tell us that 24/192 sounds better than CD, in fact equivalent to the master tape, why shouldn't we ourselves get a chance to see whether there is an improvement? I have also found in the past when buying new equipment (amplifiers, receivers, etc.) that there is seemingly no improvement, only to find, when forced to temporarily install the old unit, that I can hear a negative difference. This is, of course, subtle, but subleties in sound reproduction, as in music itself, can significantly improve the experience.
I agree that doing other things, like fixing your room by acoustic treatments and by products like Audessy, buying better speakers, and the like, will make a much more immediate improvement to sound quality in the home than going hi-rez. Cleaning up the EMI and RFI will do even more (another subject for another day). But I would like the opportunity to see, over time, for myself.
I really hope that Sonos goes this route, and I really hope that they'll let us know their plans, one way or the other.
(A side note: The CD layer of "Dark Side of the Moon" was reportedly deliberately compressed in order to make the SACD version sound that much better. If companies resort to this type of thing, they are hurting the very agenda that they want to advance.)
Before I had my Sonos, I streamed 320 kbs MP3s from my computer. I did careful comparisons on Sennheiser 600 headphones and (ON MOST MUSIC) could hear no difference whatsoever between the streamed files and the CDs they were burnt from. On music with cymbals or orchestral climaxes, however, the CDs were cleaner, either to my ears or to the placebo center in my brain. On 90 percent of the music I listen to, and on ALL music if I am also reading or otherwise not concentrating, there is no audible difference in my system.
Why, then, do I want hi-rez? Well, because I know that my SACDs and DVD Audios sound better than my CDs did in the same universal player (Denon 5900). I also know that when I bought my first CDs (which, for various reasons, all sounded like crap in the early years), I was told by all the experts that "bits is bits" and that there was no difference between players, etc. I believed this until I bought my second player and heard a readily audible improvement, although I had no expectation of hearing any. My point is that sometimes it takes time before things develop. Nowadays, well-recorded CDs sound fantastic. If recording engineers such as Doug Sax tell us that 24/192 sounds better than CD, in fact equivalent to the master tape, why shouldn't we ourselves get a chance to see whether there is an improvement? I have also found in the past when buying new equipment (amplifiers, receivers, etc.) that there is seemingly no improvement, only to find, when forced to temporarily install the old unit, that I can hear a negative difference. This is, of course, subtle, but subleties in sound reproduction, as in music itself, can significantly improve the experience.
I agree that doing other things, like fixing your room by acoustic treatments and by products like Audessy, buying better speakers, and the like, will make a much more immediate improvement to sound quality in the home than going hi-rez. Cleaning up the EMI and RFI will do even more (another subject for another day). But I would like the opportunity to see, over time, for myself.
I really hope that Sonos goes this route, and I really hope that they'll let us know their plans, one way or the other.
(A side note: The CD layer of "Dark Side of the Moon" was reportedly deliberately compressed in order to make the SACD version sound that much better. If companies resort to this type of thing, they are hurting the very agenda that they want to advance.)
.... (in the immortal words of Carl Sagan: "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence")
Blind tests have two outcomes:
1) Either you establish scientifically that there's a high degree of probability that someone would be able to tell the difference between A and B, or
2) You fail to establish that there is a discernible difference.
Sigh.
It is a well-established, scientific fact that the only aspect of the human senses that meet scientific standards for accuracy belongs to sight, and it is called direct visual comparison. Further, the only direct comparison that succeeds scientific scrutiny is the visual comparison of color tone between objects lying directly next to each other with no gap between them.
The reason that direct visual comparison is the only scientific form of comparison among all the human senses is because it places zero demand on human memory. All other forms of sensory comparison, including non-direct visual comparison (objects with spacing between them), depend on a person's highly unreliable memory for sensory impressions. The more testing performed, the more the characteristics of the stimuli blur within the human mind.
.....
I am simply stating that I believe that Sonos should offer hi-res simply because I own some hi-res files. Not because they innately sound better, but because I want to be able to play them as is. I want to be able to own one copy of the Rolling Stones' catalog in my library ... even if they are acoustically identical.
My agenda is simple - I want Sonos to be able to play anything I may wish to throw at it.
Nicely worded critique of the Nay-saying contributors to this forum.
24/96 is a logical extension for any network music player. With Sonos the wait has been long....
24/96 is a logical extension for any network music player. With Sonos the wait has been long....
Thanks.
I guess my issue is that "nay-sayers" typically resort to the scientific evidence argument, and that just isn't credible in this situation. Most scientists understand the inherent flaw in this methodology and realize the pedantic nature of this type of testing.
The argument against the network supporting the stream in multiple rooms or against the hardware supporting it - those arguments I think are fair. The argument that audiophiles or people with hi-res are a minority is accurate and fair.
There are plenty of valid reasons to argue against the implementation of this feature - audible difference is not one of them.
I am a bit worried of Sonos. If you look the market situation and the competitors policy in highres, Sonos is very alone with its "lowres" profile.
Are all the others wrong ?
Are all the others wrong ?
Are all the others wrong ?
It's very easy to incorporate hires into a system if you don't care about multiple zones, working with legacy components or synching (Squeezebox) or you are not wireless (Linn, etc.). If, like Sonos, your entire design is based on multi-room wireless audio that can be linked together in perfect sync, the ability to do hires and still keep true to your core design is much more difficult. So far, no one has proposed a solution that does this (and no, a standalone player which won't sync with others does NOT stay true to the Sonos design). The closest anyone has come to a solution is downrezzing on the non-Hirez boxes, and nobody outside of Sonos knows if this is even possible, given the CPU power available.
That said, aside from the "check mark on the box" factor, Hirez audio is a niche of a niche market. Sure there is a tiny but vocal minority screaming about it here, but it is small, very very small. Maybe Sonos feels leaving this market behind is not leaving much at all. I couldn't say I blame them. And speaking of the "competition;" as Sonos reaches 1,000,000 units and is doubling sales every year; Squeezebox is relegated to lower and lower importance on the Logitech ladder. Devices are being discontinued, support is in freefall, and software is buggier than ever before (which is saying a lot!). Take a look at their forums, the compaints aren't about what comes next, they are much more worried Logitech is abandoning the brand entirely.
Well I do not care so much for the multiroom system. I have only one room to listen to the music and I mean music not Muzak.
For a good sound and for serious music I use DACMAGIC from Cambridge Audio to support the Sonos system. I can hear the difference and I recommend it.:)
For a good sound and for serious music I use DACMAGIC from Cambridge Audio to support the Sonos system. I can hear the difference and I recommend it.:)
For a good sound and for serious music I use DACMAGIC from Cambridge Audio to support the Sonos system. I can hear the difference and I recommend it.:)
So Sonos should abandon its core design functionality for you? Especially when there are dozens of standalone Hirez players on the market which will fit the bill just fine?
For a good sound and for serious music I use DACMAGIC from Cambridge Audio to support the Sonos system. I can hear the difference and I recommend it.:)
While I think jgatie was a little harsh, as I believe that SONOS could make a concession to the core functionality with regards to hi-resolution audio (as an interim solution) - I can understand the desire to maintain full functionality in all cases.
With that said, a standalone player is probably what you're after. If you want a solid solution - a mac mini is a perfectly capable device, although not as elegant as other solutions. If price isn't an option, take a look at Olive's products ... they are pretty stout in the hardware department and don't require an external DAC. The downside is that you pay through the nose for that type of hardware. There are other options as well, but for now, having one room set up off-Sonos (or have two inputs - one for Sonos and one for the other) is the solution.
I hope Sonos solves the issue of trying to deliver high resolution audio to multiple zones one day. It is a big issue for me as there are recordings I would like to put on the system, but cannot.
For once (or maybe twice) I have to agree, if you are only doing one room and want to play Hi Rez there are numerous solutions. I have the PS Audio Perfect Wave Dac with Bridge that allows me to stream Hi Rez.. I also use the PWD as the Dac for my Sonos in that room. The beauty of Sonos is it absolutely seamless functionality.. no way will Sonos move off that nor should they.
I saw the PS Perfect Wave Dac with Bridge - but what's the interface like? Is it clunky or easy to browse a library?
The PS interface is not as good as Sonos, but almost nothing is. I'd suggest starting here http://www.psaudio.com/ps The bridge is still a bit of a work in progress, but PS is very customer centric. If you don't like the idea of tweaking and want a turnkey virtually idiot proof system then it might not be for you. As I said I use my Sonos system in concert with my PWD/Bridge..
+1 from me, I want it too.
I read through all the posts yesterday and posted my findings on AVforums. This is what I put...
I had a bit of a slow afternoon yesterday so decided to read all 291 post on the sonos forum posted over the last 4 years of customers asking about sonos playing hi-res.
http://forums.sonos.com/showthread.php?t=7951&page=1
It all starts of quite jovial, then gets serious, then desperate, and then people start to give up and go to the competitors - linn, naim, squeezebox et al.
No one from Sonos comes on and says anything in that period, it's against their policy to divulge anything about future development and releases so that explains why. But they really are tight lipped, not a single word said to all these desperate people.
The moderators on the site also defend the position a lot. As there are no official Sonos representatives on there, the moderators get it in the neck instead. The moderators say they want hi res too on many occasions and they are first and fore mostly Sonos users. But they go on to say that the difference on most systems is negligable, can you really hear it? only a handfull of people want it, most people have never heard of hi-res and listen to 128kbs mp3 etc and this is one thing on a wish list of hundreds.
I also learnt that it could still possibly be only a software upgrade rather than a hardware upgrade, but nothing is certain until they start testing. The chips, circuits etc can handle 24bit, they just need the software to handle the hd codecs. But there's also the network speed factor. I think the sonos mesh network can handle up to 300kbs and current cd quality songs streaming around your house are less than 1kbs. But then it supports 32 zones so that gets multiplied up, and i think 24/192 format is going to push that number, so they may still need a hardware upgrade for that reason.
Many have argued that they only want one room hi-res and the rest can play lower res formats, and I'm user most hi-res askers would fall into that camp. But Sonos seems to be the only streamer that built itself around the multiroom technology, and that is a cornerstone of their business, others that do this added it afterwards. It seems that they really want to keep the multiroom aspect, that everything it can play can be played everywhere and don't want to look for the happy medium. I think that is the real reason why they are the only serious music streamer that doesn't offer hi-res. It's not that tricky to support hi-res in a single streamer, but trying to make it multi room adds quite a few head aches.
Others have said only the digital out needs to support hi-res. If the user cares that much about hi-res audio, they'll be happy to supply their own dac, which is a valid point.
My honest findings from all this reading... I think Sonos have looked at hi-res many times and probably in a lot of depth, and they come back with the same findings, quite difficult to do in keeping with their current plans, not enough people want it, lets do something that increases our appeal in the mass market.
The best thing people can do if they really want it is post on their forum, write to them, write on here, put it in magazines, let their voices be heard. The more people, the more they'll listen. Lets see if there is enough of us to push it through.
I read through all the posts yesterday and posted my findings on AVforums. This is what I put...
I had a bit of a slow afternoon yesterday so decided to read all 291 post on the sonos forum posted over the last 4 years of customers asking about sonos playing hi-res.
http://forums.sonos.com/showthread.php?t=7951&page=1
It all starts of quite jovial, then gets serious, then desperate, and then people start to give up and go to the competitors - linn, naim, squeezebox et al.
No one from Sonos comes on and says anything in that period, it's against their policy to divulge anything about future development and releases so that explains why. But they really are tight lipped, not a single word said to all these desperate people.
The moderators on the site also defend the position a lot. As there are no official Sonos representatives on there, the moderators get it in the neck instead. The moderators say they want hi res too on many occasions and they are first and fore mostly Sonos users. But they go on to say that the difference on most systems is negligable, can you really hear it? only a handfull of people want it, most people have never heard of hi-res and listen to 128kbs mp3 etc and this is one thing on a wish list of hundreds.
I also learnt that it could still possibly be only a software upgrade rather than a hardware upgrade, but nothing is certain until they start testing. The chips, circuits etc can handle 24bit, they just need the software to handle the hd codecs. But there's also the network speed factor. I think the sonos mesh network can handle up to 300kbs and current cd quality songs streaming around your house are less than 1kbs. But then it supports 32 zones so that gets multiplied up, and i think 24/192 format is going to push that number, so they may still need a hardware upgrade for that reason.
Many have argued that they only want one room hi-res and the rest can play lower res formats, and I'm user most hi-res askers would fall into that camp. But Sonos seems to be the only streamer that built itself around the multiroom technology, and that is a cornerstone of their business, others that do this added it afterwards. It seems that they really want to keep the multiroom aspect, that everything it can play can be played everywhere and don't want to look for the happy medium. I think that is the real reason why they are the only serious music streamer that doesn't offer hi-res. It's not that tricky to support hi-res in a single streamer, but trying to make it multi room adds quite a few head aches.
Others have said only the digital out needs to support hi-res. If the user cares that much about hi-res audio, they'll be happy to supply their own dac, which is a valid point.
My honest findings from all this reading... I think Sonos have looked at hi-res many times and probably in a lot of depth, and they come back with the same findings, quite difficult to do in keeping with their current plans, not enough people want it, lets do something that increases our appeal in the mass market.
The best thing people can do if they really want it is post on their forum, write to them, write on here, put it in magazines, let their voices be heard. The more people, the more they'll listen. Lets see if there is enough of us to push it through.
Thanks for a thoughtful summary. A couple of corrections:
I think the sonos mesh network can handle up to 300kbs...
I'm not sure that there's anything official but from recollection the data rate is more like 30Mbps.
You're actually out by a factor of ~1000. Uncompressed 16/44.1 stereo is 1.4Mbps plus overheads. FLAC would probably be around 800-850kbps.
I'm not sure that there's anything official but from recollection the data rate is more like 30Mbps.
... and current cd quality songs streaming around your house are less than 1kbs.
You're actually out by a factor of ~1000. Uncompressed 16/44.1 stereo is 1.4Mbps plus overheads. FLAC would probably be around 800-850kbps.
Oh yeah, my maths isn't very good there. I'll correct it on AVforums. Thank you!
I wish, at the very least, Sonos would scan a file to determine if it is playable. If not, it would not import it to the library.
I have a single music library so that multiple devices can access it. Some can play hires some cannot. I wish Sonos would simply see the specs and not import.
At least until a solution is at hand.
I know I can move the files into a different directory ... yadda ... yadda... but software should be able to do this without much issue.
I have a single music library so that multiple devices can access it. Some can play hires some cannot. I wish Sonos would simply see the specs and not import.
At least until a solution is at hand.
I know I can move the files into a different directory ... yadda ... yadda... but software should be able to do this without much issue.
The best thing people can do if they really want it is post on their forum, write to them, write on here, put it in magazines, let their voices be heard. The more people, the more they'll listen. Lets see if there is enough of us to push it through.
A few comments on this:
Firstly, these forums are primarily user forums. Sonos do read them and many ideas suggested here do get implemented, but posting here is not necessarily the best way to get their attention.
For a start Sonos have a good idea who are customers and who are not. In my view they aren't that likely to take notice if a burst of new users register on these forums simply to make a couple of posts argung for hires, especially if they don't appear to be existing Sonos customers, but are simply people who are promoting the general "hires agenda".
These forums (and Internet forums in general) are also not really representative of a userbase. It's also easy for people to "game the system": we have had polls in the past where people have recruited others to support a cause. It's easy to spot these as they register, vote (or comment) and then are never seen again.
I suspect (and hope) that the majority of Sonos's market research is not done based on Internet forums, as this is a poor market research technique. Surveys of target markets and their buying habits, questionnaires for existing users, and market intelligence reports are what is most likely to be used.
That is the mistake a lot of people are making: there are some that seem to think that if they shout loudly enough, are obnoxious enough, come up with enough "reasons" however bugs or tenuous, or recruit enough friends to post on a few forums they will get Sonos's attention, and convnce/shame/cajole them into developing hires support.
I think that, in reailty, if you want to demonstrate a sigificant desire for hires to Sonos, I think none of these tactics will work. Basically, Sonos ain't that dumb!
You will need to infiltrate the general population with this view. In other words, you will genuinely have to make it something a significant proportion of the population (or at least Sonos's target market) want, and will tell Sonos they want.
Cheers,
Keith
Strange talk from Majik. I do think that if Sonos is clever enough they understand that every customer feedback is important where ever it comes from. To make it clear I am real a customer.
Strange talk from kullervo.
If you have hundreds of thousands, if not millions of potential customers you cannot satisfy the individual whims of every single one of them.
You can listen to them, but that doesn't mean you have to fulfil every possible wish. Expecting that would be crazy. That's how you would go out of business. You target the needs or desires of the majority of your target market. That's Marketing 101.
What was suggested (and which has been attempted before) is tactical ways to make the user base for this feature seem higher than it really is. Sonos knows that some people want hires, but they know better than anyone here what proportion of their target market that is. Trying to cheat by gaming the numbers simply will not work. I was trying to point out how pointless this is.
And, to make it clear I am real a customer, one with a clue!
Cheers,
Keith
And I will add that although Sonos certainly should listen to every real customer, I suspect the aforementioned "call to arms" on an audiophile website was not a call to real customers at all, it was a call to fans of hires audio. As Keith said, this hamfisted technique to skew numbers has been attempted before, and I doubt Sonos was fooled. The market is what the markets is: A tiny niche of a niche in the world of digital music. If satisfying this niche of a niche is worth it to Sonos, they will do it, if possible. If it is not worth it, or it can't be done, they won't. And all the strum and drang, idle threats to E-Bay systems, or gaming of polls here or anywhere else isn't going to change that.
Well said, jgatie!
As this is an official SONUS forum i would like to here an official opinion or company vision of the hires in the future.
The spekulation does not interest me.
The spekulation does not interest me.
kullervo,
SONOS does not publish their roadmap.
Note that hese are user forums. SONOS provides the server and a few simple rules (be nice to each other, don't spam, and don't share illegal stuff). Other than occasionally providing announcements, technical input, and disciplining surly users, SONOS does not dialog here.
SONOS does not publish their roadmap.
Note that hese are user forums. SONOS provides the server and a few simple rules (be nice to each other, don't spam, and don't share illegal stuff). Other than occasionally providing announcements, technical input, and disciplining surly users, SONOS does not dialog here.
If you have hundreds of thousands, if not millions of potential customers you cannot satisfy the individual whims of every single one of them.
You can listen to them, but that doesn't mean you have to fulfil every possible wish. Expecting that would be crazy. That's how you would go out of business. You target the needs or desires of the majority of your target market. That's Marketing 101.
What was suggested (and which has been attempted before) is tactical ways to make the user base for this feature seem higher than it really is. Sonos knows that some people want hires, but they know better than anyone here what proportion of their target market that is. Trying to cheat by gaming the numbers simply will not work. I was trying to point out how pointless this is.
And, to make it clear I am real a customer, one with a clue!
Cheers,
Keith
Cheating? Gaming the numbers? I'm simply putting that if you want something, ask for it. And I suggested this forum is one of many places you can do this.
You seem to be suggesting that there is no way to ask for hi-res, if you post then you're doing it cos you were told to. If lots of people do then Sonos won't listen cos they'll all been bitten and infected. Dammed if we do, dammed if we don't. You offer no valid way to ask and to be honest I think you're getting a bit precious of this thread. I think I've been as fair as I can be in my analysis, and you now accuse a lot of posts on this thread as trying to propagate some kind of hi-res riot. Can you honestly say that if I made a similar post on a topic that hadn't been going this long you would have replied the same way?
And link to forums from their official website, under the "Support" heading, no less and they make official announcements here.
You can dress it up any way you like but these ARE the official Sonos forums.
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.