Skip to main content
bubbascant
Avid Contributor I
July 31, 2018

New BEAM/Sound quality?

  • July 31, 2018
  • 12 replies
  • 1015 views
With the new BEAM talking all about "sound", don't you think it's time Sonos, to add .wav and hi-res file playback capability to your products? If all you're concerned about is streaming, and there's no regard for people with higher quality files, then let's dispense with the Sound Quality invested in BEAM per the email solicit I just received which is shown below. Hey, I think Sonos is a decent product (despite the two plus years of constant drop-out problems, not totally figured out yet), but come on, let's get real. If you can't get Wave and Hi-Res files as part of the system, then really all you care about is streaming and Alexis and that's where your product is, and will continue to go. Giving up support for the dock (which can play wave through a classic iPod if it's docked), is inexcusable - especially if you don't support it in the last iPods sold (which you can still get in 120GB model from Apple as of July 2018) in not being able to play wave. Just one man's opinion who cares deeply about music quality as your solicit email below talks about. How about it Sonos members? Is it just me??

To be honest…
Before you first heard your favorite album or watched your favorite movie, a team of artists worked together to produce something that accurately conveyed a singular artistic vision. With every product we make, we endeavor to make sure you experience that vision in all its integrity. Simply put, we don’t put our “stamp” on what you hear from your Sonos speakers.

“The sound of music or a great movie should be transmitted into your home as pure and honest as it can be.”
—Giles Martin, Sonos’ Sound Experience Leader

During the process of creating Beam, our new soundbar, we consulted with sound creators like Oscar-winning film remixing engineer Chris Jenkins (Mad Max: Fury Road), and top tier music producers like Manny Marroquin (Rihanna, John Mayer), to help us fine-tune the home listening experience.
    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.

    12 replies

    Show previous replies
    bubbascantAuthor
    Avid Contributor I
    August 1, 2018
    Agreed, but then they produced for "mono" straight through most of their career right through the White Album. Only Abbey Road, Yellow Submarine and Let It Be were "stereo" so that doesn't mean people don't enjoy their stereo versions - and in fact, it's what's played on any streaming service. Mono should really be the only true format to listen to most of the Beatles but stereo rules the day. While 5.1 might not be the original intent, there have been numerous albums done in 5.1 for the specific purpose of the format. Even the Grammy Awards started a category in 2005 for best surround sound. In my personal Abbey Road tour back in 2012, we listened to several 5.1 Beatles songs in the control room that were in 5.1, and they said they're already done and ready for release as soon as they decide to do so. As with everything "Beatles", it's a slow roll. I don't think I'll win the conversation here as you object to every point I'm making. My first and only comment was about the solicit and the fabrication of the representation of sound quality. That I should just dispense with the marketing solicit and accept it for what it is, is missing the point. Sure, I wouldn't storm Kelloggs headquarters about the amount of sugar in their product, but then they aren't sending me solicits saying "we have the best sugar out there" or some relevant rhetoric.
    So I'll leave it at this as I think I've quite made my point. I don't see defending Sonos for the marketing piece to be fair to someone who loves music and the questionable "honest" representation of what their product is. Whatever...
    melvimbe
    melvimbe
    August 1, 2018
    My first and only comment was about the solicit and the fabrication of the representation of sound quality. That I should just dispense with the marketing solicit and accept it for what it is, is missing the point. Sure, I wouldn't storm Kelloggs headquarters about the amount of sugar in their product, but then they aren't sending me solicits saying "we have the best sugar out there" or some relevant rhetoric.


    I tried frosted flakes once...they're not that great.

    Seriously though, I doubt that the small percentage of people who even know the difference between 24 bit and 16 bit are going to buy Sonos based on the marketing slogans and then be surprised that it doesn't support 24 bit. I also don't feel like a company has any marketing obligation to announce what the product doesn't do. Answer questions honestly, yet, but not volunteer the information. Bluetooth is good example. I don't think Sonos needs to market products as lacking Bluetooth, but state that it doesn't whenever asked. Likewise, Kellogs doesn't need to declare "We cause diabetes!" but they should be willing to inform the known risks from a high sugar diet.

    All that said, I do think marketing can go over the top and be misleading at time. I personally thought the initial teaser marketing for the Beam was a bit much. "You're better than this" with the implication that you would no longer need multiple remotes with the Beam gave an inaccurate impression, IMO. CEC, to me, is rather limited. The other features of controlling volume by voice, and controlling fire tv, are general features of Alexa that can be replicated on a playbar +echo dot. But again, it's marketing. Never buy a product based on marketing slogans alone.
    Danny
    Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement