Ability to play 24bit/96 files (like the competition: slimdevices transporter)
Page 13 / 41
Certainly you can. Anyone can put their +1 here. The thing to realise is that if a few dozen people do this (what ever incentives them to do it), it's not going suddenly going to make Sonos sit up and listen.
The fact is, these forums are not a good representative sample of Sonos's market, for both demographical and statistical reasons.
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.
The request has been made already. You are free to show your support for it, but I'm saying that trying to organize a campaign to try to drum up support isn't going to help your cause much.
As I said before (but which you seem to have either not read or not understood), Sonos knows that there is a subset of users who want hires. Based on other data, that number is probably pretty small. Sonos will know this through market research which will extend beyond Internet forums. Unless there is a huge latent demand for hires which hasn't shown through in Sonos's market research (almost certainly not true) then the market is what it is, and there's no a damn thing you can do to change it.
Ranting about it or lobbying others to come on here and rant about it may make you feel better, but it's not going to change the size of the market for hires and it isn't suddenly going to make Sonos start developing it. That applies to any other feature too.
You offer no valid way to ask...
No asking is needed. It's already a known feature request. If you want to show your support, feel free to +1 or "me too" to this thread, or contact Sonos directly. You can even invite your mates if you want. ;)
(The question is, if someone else campaigned for users to come on these forums to state why they didn't care less for hires support, would you be happy with that?)
But what you seem to be looking for is a "valid way" to make Sonos start developing hires. There isn't one, and quite rightly too.
There also isn't a good way to get a specific answer from Sonos about their plans for hires support, again for good reason.
I'm not going to respond to the rest of your little tantrum.
Cheers,
Keith
You can dress it up any way you like but these ARE the official Sonos forums.
Yes, but they are provided by Sonos primarily for users. They also post official announcements from the customer support team on Facebook and Twitter.
And, regardless, Sonos has a company policy not to publicly comment on potential future developments. It's a very sensible policy and one which is shared by just about every company I can think of, for good reason. This has been stated many, many times but people don't seem to get it. They seem to think that if they shout loud enough Sonos will make an exception just for them. They won't!
That's their policy folks. If you don't like it, tough!
Cheers,
Keith
The fact is, these forums are not a good representative sample of Sonos's market, for both demographical and statistical reasons.
The request has been made already. You are free to show your support for it, but I'm saying that trying to organize a campaign to try to drum up support isn't going to help your cause much.
As I said before (but which you seem to have either not read or not understood), Sonos knows that there is a subset of users who want hires. Based on other data, that number is probably pretty small. Sonos will know this through market research which will extend beyond Internet forums. Unless there is a huge latent demand for hires which hasn't shown through in Sonos's market research (almost certainly not true) then the market is what it is, and there's no a damn thing you can do to change it.
Ranting about it or lobbying others to come on here and rant about it may make you feel better, but it's not going to change the size of the market for hires and it isn't suddenly going to make Sonos start developing it. That applies to any other feature too.
No asking is needed. It's already a known feature request.
If you want to show your support, feel free to +1 or "me too" to this thread, or contact Sonos directly. You can even invite your mates if you want. ;)
(The question is, if someone else campaigned for users to come on these forums to state why they didn't care less for hires support, would you be happy with that?)
But what you seem to be looking for is a "valid way" to make Sonos start developing hires.
There isn't one, and quite rightly too.
I'm not going to respond to the rest of your little tantrum.
Cheers,
Keith
OK, so Sonos will only respond to their market research. The individuals can say +1 (which I have already done) but they're not really looking. There's a bigger picture for Sonos.
So with the market research, do you have any ideas why the results/action on the results are different to all their main competitors? Either everyone else thinks its something that a decent proportion of their client base want or they find its not too hard/expensive to do at the design stage so might as well put it in. Are the client bases drastically different? Why do you think Sonos' market research comes back with different findings?
Lastly, the babyish comment at the end? I guess that's in response to my precious comment. Well making me out as a whiney child doesn't help that. I know it's been 4 years of this over an over again but can we be civil? 😮
So with the market research, do you have any ideas why the results/action on the results are different to all their main competitors? Either everyone else thinks its something that a decent proportion of their client base want or they find its not too hard/expensive to do at the design stage so might as well put it in. Are the client bases drastically different? Why do you think Sonos' market research comes back with different findings?
I only have intelligent guesses:
1. if you are comparing with newer devices (which I suspect you are) then Sonos was designed 6-7 years ago, when even lossless audio was highly uncommon.
2. if you are comparing with standalone or wired streaming systems, the problem is much, much easier to solve for such a device. I would say it's almost trivial to do so. Sonos is a wireless multiroom system. Solving the bandwidth and sync issues is likely to be very complex.
3. I'm guessing their market stats aren't that different, but perhaps they are aiming at a specific niche of the market, or maybe felt that if it was so easy to add (see 2 above) it would be daft not to. For reasons I state above (1 and 2) that wouldn't have applied in Sonos's situation.
In any case, other than the Transporter which isn't exactly a mainstream product, I've not seen any other streaming solution actively marketing themselves as a hires player (having it on the spec sheet and actively marketing it are different things).
Lastly, the babyish comment at the end?
I'm glad you admit to it!
Cheers,
Keith
Well anyway, I am disappointed in the outcome of this discussion and I wish SONOS good luck in the hard competition for customers with or without hires.
Lossless audio was very common; most people where primarily using cd-players for their home-audio.
Put it in context though, this is a streaming forum.
I'm glad you admit to it!
Cheers,
Keith
Some of the moderators on here seem to use rather immoderate language, such as "I'm not going to respond to the rest of your little tantrum."
The original post by therixonator was a well thought out analysis of several years discussion on this thread. However, the response from Majik in particular was neither constructive or even handed.
Another component in the SONOS decision to support 24/96 are the support and loss of business costs.
Mostly wireless systems in congested WiFi areas may be working just fine now, but will be pushed off the edge with the increased data demands of 24/96. There will be a "cost" associated with these units dropping off the edge. The direct costs will be calls to the support desk and indirect costs as complaint levels rise and drive away current and potential customers.
Will the new or retained customers result in enough additional revenue to offset the development costs, increased support costs, and the loss of retained or potential customers driven away by the resulting bad press? From a crass business standpoint SONOS must weigh all of these options.
There are a number of very vocal 24/96 advocates pressing their case and they feel that there is no valid argument that a reasonable, intelligent person can present for not going 24/96. What I don't know is how many equally vocal advocates would appear if 24/96 support "broke" their systems or reduced the maximum zone count to four or eight units, or (worse) forced these users to wire their units. I can imagine the uproar -- "I bought a WIRELESS system and now I'm, told that I must WIRE my units if I want the system to actually work!!" It would be hard to deny these points too.
Personally, I don't think that 24/96 is currently technically practical at a reasonable "cost" on the scale required to fulfill the SONOS vision of 24/96 music everywhere. However, wireless technology is improving and products that were not practical a year or two ago are suddenly moving into the mainstream. I am willing to change my position when enabling technology arrives.
---
In another market segment there is a huge pent up demand for wireless HiDef video and one can argue that "brain dead" manufacturers "don't get it" for not bringing out the products. Believe me, a lot of very good people are working very hard to develop this product. Yes, there are some expensive fringe products available now, and have been for many years, but the technology is not yet ready for the general market. In a year or two someone might finally "get it" and wires will be gone forever.
Mostly wireless systems in congested WiFi areas may be working just fine now, but will be pushed off the edge with the increased data demands of 24/96. There will be a "cost" associated with these units dropping off the edge. The direct costs will be calls to the support desk and indirect costs as complaint levels rise and drive away current and potential customers.
Will the new or retained customers result in enough additional revenue to offset the development costs, increased support costs, and the loss of retained or potential customers driven away by the resulting bad press? From a crass business standpoint SONOS must weigh all of these options.
There are a number of very vocal 24/96 advocates pressing their case and they feel that there is no valid argument that a reasonable, intelligent person can present for not going 24/96. What I don't know is how many equally vocal advocates would appear if 24/96 support "broke" their systems or reduced the maximum zone count to four or eight units, or (worse) forced these users to wire their units. I can imagine the uproar -- "I bought a WIRELESS system and now I'm, told that I must WIRE my units if I want the system to actually work!!" It would be hard to deny these points too.
Personally, I don't think that 24/96 is currently technically practical at a reasonable "cost" on the scale required to fulfill the SONOS vision of 24/96 music everywhere. However, wireless technology is improving and products that were not practical a year or two ago are suddenly moving into the mainstream. I am willing to change my position when enabling technology arrives.
---
In another market segment there is a huge pent up demand for wireless HiDef video and one can argue that "brain dead" manufacturers "don't get it" for not bringing out the products. Believe me, a lot of very good people are working very hard to develop this product. Yes, there are some expensive fringe products available now, and have been for many years, but the technology is not yet ready for the general market. In a year or two someone might finally "get it" and wires will be gone forever.
Mostly wireless systems in congested WiFi areas may be working just fine now, but will be pushed off the edge with the increased data demands of 24/96.
....
Will the new or retained customers result in enough additional revenue to offset the development costs, increased support costs, and the loss of retained or potential customers driven away by the resulting bad press? From a crass business standpoint SONOS must weigh all of these options.
There are a number of very vocal 24/96 advocates pressing their case and they feel that there is no valid argument that a reasonable, intelligent person can present for not going 24/96. What I don't know is how many equally vocal advocates would appear if 24/96 support "broke" their systems or reduced the maximum zone count to four or eight units, or (worse) forced these users to wire their units. I can imagine the uproar -- "I bought a WIRELESS system and now I'm, told that I must WIRE my units if I want the system to actually work!!" It would be hard to deny these points too.
Personally, I don't think that 24/96 is currently technically practical at a reasonable "cost" on the scale required to fulfill the SONOS vision of 24/96 music everywhere.
I am willing to change my position when enabling technology arrives.
This is a reasonably put and well rehearsed argument.
Although I am not entirely convinced by the "I bought a WIRELESS system and now I'm, told that I must WIRE my units if I want the system to actually work!!" This is because customers who bought a system for 24/96 support (which is still it has to be admitted a niche market) would likely understand that it imposes greater demands on any wireless network; whereas the majority who wanted to stream MP3s or even standard FLAC files would not experience any difficulties (or would they?). You should treat your customers (or contributors to this forum) like grown-ups.
And, regardless, Sonos has a company policy not to publicly comment on potential future developments. It's a very sensible policy and one which is shared by just about every company I can think of, for good reason.
I know and one I agree with, I've never asked for Sonos to comment on matters like that. I'm simply pointing out that Sonos can't treat these forums as if they're nothing to do with them, when they patently are.
I wish there was a popcorn-eating smiley available. I am following this topic with high interest. Not because i care much about 24/96, but because of the hefty-ness of the discussion...
I assume there are a lot of people like me, who think the currently possible quality is good enough for their ears. There are probably even more people (all of our friends are) who don't even care about bitrates, and are perfectly happy with the soundquality of whatever the source is.
I do not have any objection against implementing new features and/or better quality sound support, but it should not interfere with the practicallity of a mid-range hifi system like the Sonos devices.
In my opinion Buzz made a good point about the very vocal advocates.
I assume there are a lot of people like me, who think the currently possible quality is good enough for their ears. There are probably even more people (all of our friends are) who don't even care about bitrates, and are perfectly happy with the soundquality of whatever the source is.
I do not have any objection against implementing new features and/or better quality sound support, but it should not interfere with the practicallity of a mid-range hifi system like the Sonos devices.
In my opinion Buzz made a good point about the very vocal advocates.
I mean lossless digital files, as you well know.
Cheers,
Keith
The original post by therixonator was a well thought out analysis of several years discussion on this thread. However, the response from Majik in particular was neither constructive or even handed.
My post was extremely even handed, and was response on a rather childish little rant aimed at me which I chose to largely ignore (and which I see you have chosen to ignore in your attack against me).
Your post, on the other hand was immoderate, unconstructive, and definitely not even handed. Your criticism is based on the person, not on the post.
If I hadn't had the word "moderator" against my name you wouldn't have commented. But some people will seize on any excuse to pick on a user whose opinion they disagree with.
Picking on a moderator like this is easy because there is no defence I can make which doesn't appear to support you accusation even if, like in this instance, there is no basis to the accusation.
It's a cowards approach.
Unjustified criticism of users (including moderators) is a personal attack. This was an unjustified criticism, and further posts in this vein will not be tolerated.
Keith
Your post, on the other hand was immoderate, unconstructive, and definitely not even handed. Your criticism is based on the person, not on the post.
It's a cowards approach.
Unjustified criticism of users (including moderators) is a personal attack. This was an unjustified criticism, and further posts in this vein will not be tolerated.
Keith
I read through his posts (although I may have missed the offending one you are referring to) and could not find the words you seemed to take issue with.
I apologize if you feel that my criticism was unjustified. My criticism was based on the post which seemed to call somebody childish or at least that they were having a childish rant.
....
I can imagine the uproar -- "I bought a WIRELESS system and now I'm, told that I must WIRE my units if I want the system to actually work!!" It would be hard to deny these points too.
In the interests of balance 🙂 I would totally agree that the issue of backwards compatibility is the biggest issue facing SONOS when they look at whether/how to implement 24/96 support.
This is also a delima for any tech company that has a product that relies on a range of networked devices (ignoring the particulars of 24/96 for a moment). In this case SONOS could run the risk of being stuck with out of date tech. The choice is can the specification evolve or will they need to produce something totally new, ie with only limited backwards compatibility. This issue does not just apply to 24/96 but other issues such as the 65,000 track limit or potential new streaming services.
The only thing I care about is that we can have an open and fair debate on the subject of hi-res on Sonos on this forum. The rest will just wash over me.
Going back to keith's post in 308, I was having a chat with some squeezebox users on AVF, the transporter AND the squeezebox 3/classic play 24/96 so squeezebox should be regarded as a hires multiroom solution. The server analyses which players can support which formats, and any that can't support the format in hand have the track down sampled to the best the player can play. I'm not suggesting this is a solution for Sonos, I'm just saying this is what SB do and pointing out that it has a multiroom hires solution.
Also, new to the market, Simple Audio are offering a multiroom system, they have 2 boxes, one with amplification, one without, both handle 24bit and can be controlled via ipad/iphone. No one has one on AVF yet so not a lot is known about userbility, functionality etc, but there is now a 2nd multiroom competitor out there offering 24bit.
I'm in complete agreement that Linn, Naim and the single room crew have it easy in their compatibility with hi-res. No wifi strain to worry about makes it unfair to compare to Sonos, no qualms there. I don't really see Linn and Naim as a streaming solution personally because of the single room nature, I would just keep playing CDs.
On the more recent backwards compatibility question, I'm in agreement with what's been said already. Wireless is is important and a cornerstone to Sonos. Hi-res should not impact connectivity. This will be, I'm sure, a major factor in the R&D.
Going back to keith's post in 308, I was having a chat with some squeezebox users on AVF, the transporter AND the squeezebox 3/classic play 24/96 so squeezebox should be regarded as a hires multiroom solution. The server analyses which players can support which formats, and any that can't support the format in hand have the track down sampled to the best the player can play. I'm not suggesting this is a solution for Sonos, I'm just saying this is what SB do and pointing out that it has a multiroom hires solution.
Also, new to the market, Simple Audio are offering a multiroom system, they have 2 boxes, one with amplification, one without, both handle 24bit and can be controlled via ipad/iphone. No one has one on AVF yet so not a lot is known about userbility, functionality etc, but there is now a 2nd multiroom competitor out there offering 24bit.
I'm in complete agreement that Linn, Naim and the single room crew have it easy in their compatibility with hi-res. No wifi strain to worry about makes it unfair to compare to Sonos, no qualms there. I don't really see Linn and Naim as a streaming solution personally because of the single room nature, I would just keep playing CDs.
On the more recent backwards compatibility question, I'm in agreement with what's been said already. Wireless is is important and a cornerstone to Sonos. Hi-res should not impact connectivity. This will be, I'm sure, a major factor in the R&D.
I think any customer interested in the output of 24/96 would probably be comfortable making a few concessions knowing the inherent difficulty of streaming the file size.
As was said - high-res is a niche market.
So, I don't see 'Joe The User' being upset that he has to wire his wireless system as he probably doesn't use high-res. The flip side is that SONOS currently brands itself as:
"The Wireless HiFi System"
and
"Able to play all music on the Earth"
So, either way you're not exactly fulfilling the promise. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
There should be something easy SONOS could do in the interim to allow playback of 24/96 - just as a temporary measure. Something to appease those that want it. Maybe make it so only one zone at a time can stream high res? Maybe make it that only wired zones? Something.
As was said - high-res is a niche market.
So, I don't see 'Joe The User' being upset that he has to wire his wireless system as he probably doesn't use high-res. The flip side is that SONOS currently brands itself as:
"The Wireless HiFi System"
and
"Able to play all music on the Earth"
So, either way you're not exactly fulfilling the promise. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
There should be something easy SONOS could do in the interim to allow playback of 24/96 - just as a temporary measure. Something to appease those that want it. Maybe make it so only one zone at a time can stream high res? Maybe make it that only wired zones? Something.
Two points here, Simple Audio is not new to the market, it hasn't reached the market at all yet, until it does, it's vapourware. Secondly, it's not a wireless system, it uses powerline networking, whether you want it or not (that would make it next to useless in my property, the two halves of the house are on separate circuits).
Squeezebox has unreliable syncing when downrezzing/decoding at the server, whether it be 24/96 or ALAC, which isn't directly supported on all players. Specifically, audio quality is compromised in order to maintain sync, not something an Audiophile 24/96 aficionado wishes to hear. :rolleyes: In addition, Squeezebox syncing, even when perfect, is on the order of 10 times the acceptable delay of Sonos, in addition to dropping quality on internet radio and server processed formats. The new Simple Audio system does not sync zones at all, although they claim it is in the works for a future release. If history is an indicator, any system which does not include sync from the get go is always going to be playing catchup to Sonos.
This is a bit misleading then isn't it on Simple Audio's overview page...
A music system just for you
The Simple Audio system will find and play all your digital music wherever it's stored. All you need is a Roomplayer, a broadband connection, a pair of speakers and the free desktop controller. This controller will help you to find all your music and set up your playlists just the way you want them. Your digital music will then be ready to play through one or more Roomplayers, wherever they are located in your home.
Here's the link...
http://simpleaudio.co.uk/overview/multi-room-setup
So this will only be in a software release that is after the initial release? There are some people from Simple Audio on AVF so i'll also query this with them because this could potentially annoy a lot of people.
A music system just for you
The Simple Audio system will find and play all your digital music wherever it's stored. All you need is a Roomplayer, a broadband connection, a pair of speakers and the free desktop controller. This controller will help you to find all your music and set up your playlists just the way you want them. Your digital music will then be ready to play through one or more Roomplayers, wherever they are located in your home.
That doesn't actually say it'll play them in sync, just that any of your roomplayers can play you music. Which is the very least you'd expect really...
The wording on their page is carefully constructed to NOT mention any sync capabilities, while not actually stating it's not there. However, if you look in the Simple Audio thread on this forum, someone has already inquired about sync, and feedback from Simple Audio confirmed no sync at this time:
http://forums.sonos.com/showpost.php?p=140543&postcount=7
And on that note, I understand from feedback from Simple Audio that synchronised zones are not currently supported but are certainly planned as a software update in future, as well as additional music services.
http://forums.sonos.com/showpost.php?p=140543&postcount=7
"Able to play all music on the Earth"
You've interpreted this as "any format on earth" which I think is a misinterpretation.
I can take any music and play it on Sonos. I may have to convert it to a different file format to do so, but I can play any music on earth.
Cheers,
Keith
I can take any music and play it on Sonos. I may have to convert it to a different file format to do so, but I can play any music on earth.
Come on, really?
I read in some article how they wanted to add this or that - in an effort to play all music on Earth.
If I can already play all the music - then they wouldn't need to add it. Additionally, doesn't that destroy their whole "it simply works" concept... not "it simply works when you transcode it to lower bitrates".
Plus, that completely discounts the "Wireless HiFi" ... the notion there is high fidelity. It isn't high fidelity in today's world if it cannot play high resolution.
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.