Zp 24/96

Sonos are a commercial company - they are in business to make money. They've chosen to do this is a certain way, and that doesn't include pandering to the fantasies of audiophiles.

Aptly put. Without malice or directly denigrating anyone. :)

Sometimes the reason that people consistently say the same thing is because it's true...

And that is the underpinning of the Audiophiles worst fears. Science!! (w/musical reference to Thomas Dolby) ;)

If no-one else is making one, perhaps there's a good reason...

Using logic. Now you're just being mean :p

Excellent Post

Best of Luck

Apologies if this is a repeat of a post elsewhere - I had a little look and couldn't see anything obvious.

It looks like someone has picked up the 24/96 Sonos thing and run with it

http://www.bluesound.com/

Very similar product, but with 24/96 support and a ripping / storage option.

Very nice indeed, cant find any delers or a price for the UK.

Personally I now have two Simple Audio Roomplayers which I am happy with.

That's what it said in the email. The title on the recent Sonos email promotion got my attention straight away, "HiFi MEETS HiDEF" in bold letters, and I thought, just for a moment, maybe, just maybe, Sonos are finally doing something with with Hi Res, 24/96 and similar formats, so I clicked the image, which took me to the Sonos Playbar page

And not a mention of "HiDEF" to be found... Just richly textured, HiFi sound

Sigh.

If only I didn't love everything else about the whole system

That's what it said in the email. The title on the recent Sonos email promotion got my attention straight away, "HiFi MEETS HiDEF" in bold letters, and I thought, just for a moment, maybe, just maybe, Sonos are finally doing something with with Hi Res, 24/96 and similar formats, so I clicked the image, which took me to the Sonos Playbar page

And not a mention of "HiDEF" to be found... Just richly textured, HiFi sound

Sigh.

If only I didn't love everything else about the whole system

The Playbar is made to be used with an HDTV. The vast majority of people in this world, when they hear the phrase "HiDef", think HDTV. A very, very tiny minority know 24/96 audio exists, never mind think of it over HDTV when they hear the phrase "HiDef."

Got to disagree with you for once Jgatie, I don't know anyone that uses the term "HiDef" when talking about TV. Even my missus calls it HD, never HiDef.


Must be a regional thing. Where I am, the term HiDef refers to TV. In addition, we have this:

www.highdefdigest.com/

Blu-ray and HD DVD news, release schedules, reviews and discussion forums.

- and -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiDef

HiDef (short for high definition), also called 24p, is a 24 frames-per-second digital video format for high-resolution capture of motion pictures. The 24 refers to the frame rate (24 frames/second) and the p stands for progressive scanning (as opposed to interlaced scanning).[1] As of 2003, there are two 24p HD formats: Sony 24p and Panasonic 24p.

Personally, I've always considered the term "HiRez" or "Hires" as referring to audio and HiDef as video, though I can't say it is orthodoxy and I've probably intechanged them a bit.

'
It's a bad advert, it's asking for more complaints like this, as soon as I saw it
I thought "the s***'s really going to hit the fan now on the forum...". It almost seems designed to annoy people who want High Definition support (I'm not one of them particular btw).

Maybe, but so far we have one person complaining. Though I'm sure the rest of the thunderous horde (all 3 of them) will be here soon. 😉

And leave alone 24/96, I am not sure how many people know or care about lossless and lossy music files. I can't see that changing either, even I am quite happy with the SQ obtained from recent iTunes purchases.

Well, anyone keeping up with this thread should know Sonos has marked support for 24/96 as "Not Planned." Since most ask.sonos Ideas which have been implemented (so far) had a previous status of "Planned", it is probably wishful thinking that one with a "Not Planned" status suddenly got the green light.

As a Sonos user for 3 years, I deeply wish they would allow it to decode high res files 24/96.
I dont mind the reduction in room capacity, I only have 3 rooms and will never have more than 4-5. Everybody I know who uses Sonos have around 3-5 rooms.

I also know some person who bought Streammagic (cambridge audio) because Sonos didnt offer high res decoding.

Sorry, but Sonos has stated Hires audio is not currently in the plans for future development.

I read a review yesterday of Sonos and three other streaming solutions. Sonos was said to have " lack of sonic authority" and "moderate sound quality", while being lauded for all the features we know, which still allowed it to rank second.
As a matter of interest what exactly were they reviewing? A CONNECT outputting digitally at Fixed Volume, or a clutch of Play* units?

Connect Amp, compared to Cyrus, Naim and Cambridge Audio.

Stuff Magazine.

Did they downsample the 'high res' files?

...see the PS I just added to my post above.

Sure - but you didn't really expect a balanced reveiw from a mag like Stuff, did you? 😉

It's a matter of time before some other brand will produce a product which sounds better than Sonos ZP90 (even with external DAC), does play 24 bit files and has the good interface like Sonos does. I know people will want to play a little extra. And it doesn't have to be serious money like the Linn Majik DS or the sort.

In 5 days time (march 26th) a company called Wifimedia in The Netherlands will unveil a completely new audio streamer that promises to do all these things. 24 bit 192 kHz files, indexed music without the 64,000 files limit, pretty nice and sleak design, good interface like sonos, controlled by tablet, etc.

I for one am very interested and will ditch the Sonos after several years of waiting as soon as I am sure this new product delivers. In fairness, I am finally fed up with sonos' denial that 24 bit music is only a niche and them closing their eyes for people who want their music to sound better than average at least in their living room set.

It's a matter of time before some other brand will produce a product which sounds better than Sonos ZP90 (even with external DAC), does play 24 bit files and has the good interface like Sonos does...

Its already happened (in the U.S). Olive, a long-time producer of "audiophile" streaming/rendering/network playing devices, is producing the "Olive One" - a product that clearly has Sonos in its crosshairs. Not much more expensive, capable of Hi Rez file rendering, and obviously stylish with an engaging interface, it is being produced through a public-funding campaign that seems to be working. Unlike their traditional products, the One has wireless, multi-room, distributed audio capabilities that make it look like Sonos on steroids. Odds are better than even, IMO, that they will bring it to market soon. Advance samples were well-reviewed.

I personally don't know what to think about audio files comprising greater bit-depth and higher sampling frequencies than Redbook. I think its foolish to discount the possibility that Hi Rez files might produce a better listening experience when those files are processed properly. First of all, I think too much is made out of the whole "Sampling Theory" argument that you can't hear frequencies above 20 kHz (I probably can't hear above 14 or 15, given my age...), so you don't need to digitally sample/measure the analog waveform at a frequency higher than 40 kHz. I'm sure that 99.9% of the people that trot out the Nyquist/Shannon theorum have 1) never studied it, and 2) couldn't understand it if they did. Both of those parameters apply to me, but I DID try to pursue it in an "analog" fashion for a while - reading about it and trying to understand what Prof. Shannon and Dr. Nyquist (who were NOT collaborators, BTW - weren't even contemporaneous) were trying to say. Forgive me if I have this wrong, but I believe the Nyquist Theorum states that one can reconstruct perfectly an analog waveform if one samples the waveform at a frequency at least twice that of the highest-frequency component wave that is contained within the complex waveform - AS LONG AS 1) THE COMPLEX WAVEFORM IS PERIODIC (REPEATS ITSELF OVER AND OVER), AND 2) YOU HAVE AN INFINITE NUMBER OF OPPORTUNITIES TO SAMPLE THE WAVE. Since neither of those conditions apply to recorded music, it may be inaccurate to dismiss the notion that a Hi Rez file might be able to reconstruct the analog information more richly. And, as far as bit-depth goes, the use of greater word-lengths in recording allows the noise to be shifted away from the real audio information and therefore filtered out more effectively without losing the music along with the noise. But I'm not convinced it doesn't also have some benefit in playback - or that the presence of greater bit-depth can't be used during processing to produce better SQ.

Its pretty clear to me the Sonos is drilling a lot of holes where the wood is thinnest - they haven't substantially improved the product in years, but they keep coming out with new applications for it, and therefore building new audiences and markets...and profits. Can't blame 'em for that. I like the system - it does what its designed to do very well. I do wish, however, that they gave a nod to those of us who are interested in trying to see just how GOOD the experience can be from a sonic standpoint. If they don't want to delve into higher resolution audio processing, fine. But how about offering a product with some concessions to well-recognized features that could improve the sound quality of Redbook? Things like better clocking of the data so those of us who output digitally into an outboard DAC could get the benefits of reduced "jitter". Or better power supplies. Or better isolation...

Come on, Sonos, we're in the minority, but there's a market for a Sonos-based network player with some tech enhancements. Nobody is going to be interested in a Sonos product for 2K, but some of us would pay a reasonable premium for better technology.

Just my two cents...

But how about offering a product with some concessions to well-recognized features that could improve the sound quality of Redbook? Things like better clocking of the data so those of us who output digitally into an outboard DAC could get the benefits of reduced "jitter". Or better power supplies. Or better isolation...

Come on, Sonos, we're in the minority, but there's a market for a Sonos-based network player with some tech enhancements. Nobody is going to be interested in a Sonos product for 2K, but some of us would pay a reasonable premium for better technology.

Just my two cents...

My experience is that with the referred tweaks one is playing at the fringes. Far better to spend that money on better speakers, and time on placing them in the right places in the room while taking care on getting the best possible room acoustics. That's where over 90% of the SQ comes from, maybe more in today's era of digital/solid state electronics upstream.

PS: Recent corroboration for me is a Manu Katche album I bought on I Tunes yesterday. From ECM, who have a reputation for high quality recording and mastering. The file is AAC lossy, 256k and yet the sound produced from my Connect feeding my main system is as good as from any CD/SACD I play in the SACD player in that system which has Harbeth C7 speakers at the business end.