Zp 24/96

I can't believe I'm reading this thread. Seriously.

I will definitely hold off on buying a Sonos system for my house (or shop elsewhere) until they can get this major problem resolved.

As an otherwise happy Sonos owner all I can presume is that the hardware is seriously flawed with regard to hi-res propagation.

This thread has been going for around three and a half years and, apart from the moderators deeply defending the kit, there has been no response from Sonos (that I am aware of).

In the intervening period many competitors have released products that support 24/96 or 24/192 and Sonos have been left standing still.

As I said in my opening para, all I can presume is that it's a hardware problem. Sonos have been pretty good in releasing software updates and including suggestions made on this forum. For them not to have 'gone hi-res' points to something much more fundamental.

It's such a shame they decline to ever comment on this. I for one, would be first in the queue to buy a 'ZP90HD' should it ever be released, and I don't think I'm alone in this. As more and more content becomes available in hi-res (e.g. Radiohead's new album in 24-bit on 7digital today) so Sonos will find themselves isolated unless they catch up.

COME ON SONOS!

Oh please don't get me started. I think the bottom line is that the system as configured can't support hirez material. Also, and this is a huge part of the Sonos business model, is compatibility. If the older units can't support HiRez and Sonos brought out a unit that could then the whole house compatibility model, to some degree goes poof.. Unfortunately the only solutions right now are to use a different product for hirez play back. I'm 100% sure Sonos is looking at a solution, it's just how to implement it and keep the seamlessness of a Sonos system intact, and to not obsolete older units. I'm not sure that's possible, I think a compromise is the only way to get it to work. Maybe as mentioned before a HiRez zone player that will play all formats, 24/96 and better. A customer going in would know that this unit would be the only one that could play Hirez, the others in the house couldn't. Those that didn't care about Hirez playback wouldn't need to get the new player thay could just stick with what they have or if adding zones could just buy standard def versions. Heck this could be a new source of revenue I think a bunch of folks would upgrade at least one of their ZP's to the new higher performance versions , those that either don't care or don't want to wouldn't have to. I just wish Sonos would let us know, ie yes we are working on it, or no it'll never happen. Of course I doubt that'll happen. And lastly and I've had this argument before and with my new found spirit of moderation I'll just add that I think that HiRez support should not be looked at as a feature, but as an improvement in functionality, just as when Sonos first came out it couldn't play ALAC files. ie cross fading is a feature, hirez play back is a function.

Ability to play 24bit/96 files (like the competition: slimdevices transporter)


After reading this Thread several times and doing a bit of "research" (see: http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/415361/24bit-vs-16bit-the-myth-exploded ) I come to the following conclusions:

1) Do it if it doesn't take resources away from other high priority projects. I am not convinced that Hi-Res files really can be discerned by most/all ears.

2) Certainly, the ability to play their Hi-Res files via Sonos without a conversion is a benefit to some...

It's hard to fathom the veiled (and not so veiled) threats of some here to abandon their Sonos system if this feature is not implemented. It's still the best whole house, multi-zone music player at any price.

This thread has been going for around three and a half years and, apart from the moderators deeply defending the kit, there has been no response from Sonos (that I am aware of).

Wrong!

Firstly, all of the user moderators on here are users first. Any opinion they give is as users. There opinion is worth no more or less than any other users in that respect. Also, there have been just as many users who are NOT moderators arguing against hires support.

Secondly, those who actually read and understand the posts properly will realise that the moderators who have posted are not against hires. At least 3 out of the 4 of us have actually stated on at least one occasion that they would like Sonos to support hires.

Anyone who interprets this differently either hasn't read all of the posts properly, or is blinded by their own biases and indignation.

What myself and some of the other people have defended Sonos for is that there are very good commercial reasons to support why they've not done this yet. These reasons are often ignored or even denied by those clamouring for this feature.

We have also defended Sonos against unreaslistic views and expectations including the view that this feature should be considered as more important than any other (without any useful evidence to suggest why) and the expectation that Sonos should make a specific comment about this feature request, when they have a policy of not commenting on future developments (a practice shared with most other vendors).

It's such a shame they decline to ever comment on this.

Thirdly, They have already commented. They have, in the past, acknowledged the feature request and said that it has been pushed into their Product Management. I believe I have even seen statements that there are no immediate plans (but that was some time ago).

I just wish Sonos would let us know, ie yes we are working on it, or no it'll never happen.

Realistically, what more can they say? They can say, at any point in time, whether there are currently plans or not, but that's about it, and that information becomes outdated within a few months.

Basically until they are actively developing this, Sonos themselves won't know. Until this happens you will not get a definitive response one way or another. That's simple common sense.

It's simply unrealistic to expect a vendor, any vendor, to make definitive statements on potential future feature enhancements.

'll just add that I think that HiRez support should not be looked at as a feature, but as an improvement in functionality

Which, in reality, is indistinguishable from "a feature".

Cheers,

Keith

Well said ErikM. My sentiments exactly.

I think Sonos have an excellent offering (and business model), but as an owner I'm concerned that it's not going anywhere.

Beugie, I'm not sure that I agree with you, but I don't think we're far apart on this.

Majik...Take no prisoners!! It's this kind of tone that I am referring to. I don't disagree with what you are saying, but I take umbrage at the way you say it. I HAVE read the posts, I DO understand, and I am NOT blinded by my own indignation.

Sonos have a business model, and customers who buy into their ethos can rightly expect product development and enhancement.

I think the ipod dock was a complete waste of development time, because *I* don't have an ipod, but I don't go on about how it shouldn't have been done. I just don't need it, but I respect that others may.

I would like hi-res though...

Majik...Take no prisoners!! It's this kind of tone that I am referring to.

I responded in the same "tone" as you posted. Are you suggesting that you are allowed to adaopt such a tone and I am not.

I don't disagree with what you are saying, but I take umbrage at the way you say it.

And I took umbrage at the way you levelled accusations at specific users, accusations which were unnecessary and untrue.

I HAVE read the posts, I DO understand, and I am NOT blinded by my own indignation.

Explain, then, why you felt the need to single us out in your criticism.

You started this argument, not me.

Actually don't bother trying to explain as I am going to end this before the usual gang of troublemakers escalates this into a bigger argument just so they can start taking pot-shots at me. Please don't bother to continue this pointless argument as I will not respond.

Let's get back to the topic at hand:

Sonos have a business model, and customers who buy into their ethos can rightly expect product development and enhancement.

Even if that is true, there is no reasonable expectation of a specific feature request.

Like almost all commercial companies, Sonos has a limited resources for development and develops features
based on priority. Part of this priority will be driven by market demand. If they think a specific feature will drive significant sales of more equipment then you can be sure it will be given priority.

I could point at half a dozen features that Sonos doesn't yet have and glibly say that "Sonos is being left behind" because of them, but that doesn't make it true.

There's a number of people who, very reasonably would like Hires support. I have stated that I am one of them and I will repeat it again. However, I don't feel that I have the right to expect Sonos to develop this, or any other feature as a priority, if at all.

And, as ErikM says, I think there is a very real problem in creating a hires player in that the majority of people would expect to be compatible with the other components in some way (and commercial success is built on what the majority of your market wants).

I already suggested one way in which they might do this earlier in this thread. It's a way which is pragmatic, doesn't leave existing customers out in the cold, and which fits with their reported product development strategy. But if Sonos do develop something like this, don't expect them to tell you about it until they have something close to launch.

Cheers,

Keith

I think its kind of funny that the #2 posted topic here is not of interest to the manufacturer. In any case, if you gotta have hi rez, just go Squeezebox Touch or Olive. They both have Apple Apps now. Hell, my $69 media player connected to my TV will do 24/96. There are plenty of other options people! I gave up on this topic long ago, no love here. Just move on to something else.

Enjoy that new crossfader boys. Whee.....

😛

Hi Majik,

just want to set the tone of this reply to "calm", so please don't think I'm attacking you. If anything I'm supporting you, hopefully.

Firstly, all of the user moderators on here are users first. Any opinion they give is as users. There opinion is worth no more or less than any other users in that respect.

I think the moderators here are in an unenviable position, one that Sonos are responsible for putting you in. I'm sure you feel that what you've said above is true, however the fact remains that for an *official* company forum, Sonos keep a VERY low profile here. Unlike many other official forums, who will generally place employees or other official representatives as moderators on their forums, Sonos don't do that, in fact they rarely respond at all, apart from in some cases of technical support.

What that means is you guys who have the word "moderator" under your usernames become, rightly or wrongly, the de facto Sonos representatives here, you clearly are in a position of authority that the rest of us aren't, so, whether you want it or not, when you guys say something people pay more attention and when you argue yay or nay on a subject people believe, again, rightly or wrongly, that you have some additional insight into the workings of the company (which I don't believe you do, correct me if I'm wrong).

So when people ask for a feature to be added and you or one of the other mods argue against it (or in one case state, quite categorically, that nobody can hear the difference between 16-bit and 24-bit audio anyway, so there's no point supporting hires, I don't think that was you though), people are going to take it as Gospel, because they have no other source from the company themselves and they have no one else to target their frustration at, so you get it.

Like I said, I think you're in a very unenviable position, you are, for all intents and purposes, representing Sonos here, because they won't represent themselves, but you have no official info to present to the rest of us and no real responsibility but you are the only conduit for people to vent at.

Furthermore it doesn't help that Sonos absolutely refuse to comment on future development at all. I understand the reasons for it and on the whole I think it's a good thing but, in a case such as this, when people are repeatedly asking for a feature to be added the stony silence from Sonos is going to make those people feel like they aren't being listened to, so once again they round on you as the only visible point of contact with the company. Even the occasional acknowledgement of "Yes, we're listening." would go some way to mollify some feelings.

I don't know what the answer is to that though but I do know one thing, I wouldn't want to be a mod here, the phrase "sacrificial lamb" springs to mind...

But you do a great job here and rarely get thanked for it, so, from me, thank you!

whatever