Zp 24/96
A
Ability to play 24bit/96 files (like the competition: slimdevices transporter)
This topic has been closed for further comments. You can use the search bar to find a similar topic, or create a new one by clicking Create Topic at the top of the page.
Page 33 / 41
Ok. So I have given Sonos a great "set and forget" potential solution for all their customers to save them from this conversion process... so they can use this great product even more and better..
And all you can do is rudely put me down?
And all you can do is rudely put me done?
Once again for those in the cheap seats -
[SIZE="4"]IT'S NOT MY FREAKING PRODUCT!! I'M A CUSTOMER JUST LIKE YOU!!![/size]
[SIZE="4"]IT'S NOT MY FREAKING PRODUCT!! I'M A CUSTOMER JUST LIKE YOU!!![/size]
Well then why are you always trying to put *YOUR* spin and what can or cannot be done with the product>?
If a way can be found to easily stream 24>16 bit files on the fly.. without disrupting the way you use the Sonos product Mr jgatie, ... no disrespect, but what has it got to do with you.. or how *you* wish to use it??
Because unlike you, I actually know something about digital audio, computer science, software engineering, product development, networking, etc., etc., etc. Unlike whatever "rainbows and unicorns" world you are living in, I know what can and (more importantly) should be done for a company like Sonos to remain profitable.
Everything, considering the development and support time/money wasted on a niche of a niche format takes away from useful development and support of features I (and many others) may want. And obviously Sonos agrees with me, for they have very definitively declared Hi-rez support to be NOT PLANNED!!
^ What?
So an easy way can't be found to simply switch on Sonos to share an independent UPnP server?
Is that what you are saying?
When pretty much every single electronics manufacturer on the planet like Sony, Sharp, LG, Samsung, Oppo, Denon,....etc etc (till the cows come home) seems to have absolutely no trouble??
So an easy way can't be found to simply switch on Sonos to share an independent UPnP server?
Is that what you are saying?
When pretty much every single electronics manufacturer on the planet like Sony, Sharp, LG, Samsung, Oppo, Denon,....etc etc (till the cows come home) seems to have absolutely no trouble??
So an easy way can't be found to simply switch on Sonos to share an independent UPnP server?
Is that what you are saying?
When pretty much even single electronics manufacturer on the planet like Sony, Sharp, LG, ....etc etc (till the cows come home) seems to have absolutely no trouble??
Man, I hope this series of silly obsessive postings doesn't last any longer than the last one. The sooner the forum is rid of these ramblings again, the better. :rolleyes:
Sir...That is a totally outrageous and frankly ignorant comment....
..whatever..
See if I care.
Let Sonos lose potential customers (when all it would take would be a simple software fix like this)
Whatever man!!
I'm outta here..
I'm outta here..
Promise?
Unfortunately, history says otherwise. :rolleyes:
Sonos has generally poor support for UPnP servers. Don't ask me why. I wish it was otherwise too, but that is the current situation.
All the UPnP server is doing is advertising your files for media players, such as your TV, but not your Sonos sadly.
Sonos finds and indexes (sort of) your files independantly.
You could create a transcoded version of your high res files into a share that Sonos can see. That can be outside your UPnP server. There are many tools that would do this for you. dBpoweramp and MediaMonkey are two in the Windows environment.
On MediaMonkey, you select the album, then Tools|ConvertFormat.
Select a destination. Set format to flac, or whatever, then set bitrate etc via the settings button underneath.
So an easy way can't be found to simply switch on Sonos to share an independent UPnP server?
Easy enough. Go download BubbleUPnP from Google Play, install it on your 'droid device. It can talk to your UPnP server, and to any of your Sonos devices. Select your transcoded UPnP source, select your Sonos device, click Play. Done. It will cost you $4.69.
http://chicksolutions.com/ak/Sonos/Screenshot_2014-06-06-22-48-39.png
Since I don't understand the tech so well, perhaps a stupid question:
If you did as above, would it not impose a stress on Sonosnet, by virtue of much more information loaded hi res content being streamed around, causing failures elsewhere?
Ahh, I notice the word transcoded - that means down sampled to Sonos compatible code? On the fly?
Yep, transcoded on the fly by his server/NAS to some format Sonos can render.
If this is so easy - and cheap - why is there so much heat here about this subject?
I am shocked you can't see why:
It's because it drags eyeballs and customer use AWAY FROM THE SONOS controller environment to a third party UPnP Control point like bubbleupnp..
Does Sono seriously want this to happen, when 90% of their product experience therefore sales is about THEIR (Sonos) software?
That's why I am astounded they aren't treating this seriously and providing this within their OWN software GUI and platform....
It's because it drags eyeballs and customer use AWAY FROM THE SONOS controller environment to a third party UPnP Control point like bubbleupnp..
Oh, you should not be shocked, once you know that I am in the camp that does not believe in the merits of 24/96. Just seems to me that if there is an easy workaround available for those people who Sonos has chosen not to serve, why not use it and get on with life?
Guys, can we calm down here please. It's getting a bit silly on all sides.
Keith
Keith
It's because it drags eyeballs and customer use AWAY FROM THE SONOS controller environment to a third party UPnP Control point like bubbleupnp..
Does Sono seriously want this to happen, when 90% of their product experience therefore sales is about THEIR (Sonos) software?
That's why I am astounded they aren't treating this seriously and providing this within their OWN software GUI and platform....
I can't think why it would make any kind of business sense for Sonos to support DLNA based on the needs of a small minority (who refuse to do a one-time transcode), of a small minority (the hi-res believers), of what could well be a minority (those with lossless libraries).
In fact users with local libraries of any format probably represent a diminishing share of Sonos' new customers, who increasingly pull all their music from the Internet.
There may be arguments for Sonos supporting DLNA servers for other reasons, such as to address the old 65k track issue, but not for on-the-fly hi-res transcode.
It's because it drags eyeballs and customer use AWAY FROM THE SONOS controller environment to a third party UPnP Control point like bubbleupnp.
Because the number of eyeballs is negligible. Why put significant development resources into solving a problem which only affects a tiny number of people, and for which there are easy workarounds for.
I'm astounded you think Sonos should spend any time on this at all, given the very small number of people who it would benefit.
BarryM has provided another solution: transcode your files into a standard resolution version. This is, actually, the most sensible option as it's not particularly difficult to do, disk space is cheap, and you only need to do it once for each file.
May I politely ask why you've not looked at this approach as I am sure it's been suggested many times in the past.
I'm expecting a rational reason, by the way. Something like "I don't see why I should have to" is not a rational reason.
Cheers,
Keith
Keith
Possibly - and if I came across as rude, sorry. I did not mean to. I expressed genuine puzzlement - but more strongly than I ought to have.
In fact users with local libraries of any format probably represent a diminishing share of Sonos' new customers, who increasingly pull all their music from the Internet.
Exactly. I would guess well over 90% of customers do not bother with locally stored files anymore. Ripping CDs is a chore. Virtually all of my ripped CDs are now readily available on Google Music, in transparent 320kbps form, so the local NAS is rarely used.
I'm astounded you think Sonos should spend any time on this at all, given the very small number of people who it would benefit.
BarryM has provided another solution: transcode your files into a standard resolution version. This is, actually, the most sensible option as it's not particularly difficult to do, disk space is cheap, and you only need to do it once for each file.
May I politely ask why you've not looked at this approach as I am sure it's been suggested many times in the past.
I'm expecting a rational reason, by the way. Something like "I don't see why I should have to" is not a rational reason.
Cheers,
Keith
Hi Keith.
I have always found your support and replies on this forum measured, rational and logical. So I thank you for your patience in this matter.
I continue to use Sonos as my main multiroom setup. All these years on, because IMHO it remains THE BEST digital networked multiroom platform. And has by far and away the most outstanding GUI. Others have come and gone. As we all know. This however doesn't mean passionate Sonos users, who want an easy way of dealing with our 24 bit files, don't have a legitimate case to continue to explore better ways of handling these files both outside and within the Sonos platform. Trancoding "on the fly" is one of these ways. As is the others mentioned by BarryM. There are two rational reasons why I favour transcoding over the BarryM method. The first is time. Once set up, transcoding takes no further time. The second is transcoding leaves the end user with one library to manage. Both 24 and 16 bit files can remain in the one library. I accept in full why Sonos may never want to support 24 bit. I accept this. It would make it easier for me obviously if Sonos allowed 3rd party UPnP server share points. To this day, I'm still not sure why they can't do this. Whether it's too difficult, it interrupts their own menu handling, or they simply don't want to: I have no idea. I guess I will have to accept this as well. In the meantime, I'll continue to use Sonos, the great Rhapsody, Pandora and Spotify and other services (that work so well within the Sonos GUI) and use this BubbleUPnP workaround to stream 24 bit files: both to additional non Sonos renderers which can directly handle 24 bit within my network, and as 16bit transcoded files directly to my Sonos ZP's. It's messy and obviously not ideal. Of course I'd much rather remain 100% within the Sonos GUI, but at the moment, the company leaves me with no other choice.
For some time now, these files have been available to use and purchase. As I have said in the past, it really is nobody else's business to tell anyone else, whether or not there is "any difference" between these files and 16 bit files. And whether or not any individual should purchase them. That's irrelevant. The arguments for/against will continue add infinitum! 🙂
Some users just want to play 24 bit files. With a minimum of fuss. It is as simple as that. At the end of the day, "someone owns" the problem here. It's either Sonos or customer's who want to play them.
Other followers of this thread can be the judge who that might be.
Cheers and thanks as always for your help and constructive comments in this matter.
Regards
I agree with Ratty and these comments as well. I too, am probably playing more and more music from streaming services and less from my NAS. The problem still won't go away though. It will resurface when the first 24bit streaming service becomes available.
Page 33 / 41
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.