Nobody has a guess about newer SMB versions, there was hope of something with the S2 release but nothing changed.

Easy way to do a share from your NAS without risking SMB v1 on it is a NAS to SMB v1 gateway. Here is how to do it on a Raspberry Pi, a Zero W will be good enough.

https://stan-miller.livejournal.com/357.html

There are instructions there for an SMB v1 Pi server too.

I’ve used an odorous hc1 with open media vault to set up a dedicated NAS for my music. It’s the only device on my network with smb1 also better than PC on all the time

It's a clever workaround, but setting up a second home server with insecure settings shouldn't be the way to solve this. Sonos needs to fix this. I posted this in a similar thread as well, but will spread the word in the hope someone at Sonos is listening.

Sonos is lazy and irresponsible for not fixing the insecure method to add a media library. Sonos requires SMB v1 which is long considered outdated and insecure. This is not some fringe use case, adding a media library is a core functionality of any home streaming system.

PLEASE Sonos, show us you care about user security and fix SMB support for the music library.

+1 to hoping for and requesting a fix

I've been reading a lot of the other threads abount SMB. This situation that Sonos requires insecure NAS access is unchanged for years already. Sonos has been completely silent about it.

Like Stanley contributed above, people were hoping the S2 update fixed NAS support, but it didn't. Sonos just doesn't seem to care at all about people that have their own media files(*).

It's sad, very sad. Bluesound can be an alternative but more expensive, and many of us have a lot invested in Sonos gear already.

(*) I and many others do, because not everything we listen to is on streaming services and the quality of  local files is higher often higher (lossless) than streaming (lossy).

FWIW, I’ll add my voice to those asking for an update to SMB. While trying to set up a new Synology DS220j NAS device, I ran into the “serverstack” error -- which it turns out was something of a red-herring. I found a forum post that led me to Synology’s DSM Control Panel > File Services > SMB > Advanced Settings where I set Minimum SMB Protocol = 1 (Eureka!) Bad news is that the same post included warnings from other users about the security risks posed by SMB1. I’ll continue to research safer ways to connect to my new NAS but SONOS, if you are listening, please fix this.

Thanks for what is otherwise a fantastic system.

-Mike

Hi Mike, unfortunately Sonos has proven time and again that they just don't care about supporting local media files on a NAS. Tough luck for us.

The workaround that Stanley posed (a hack which includes a separate server on a pi or similar board) seems to be the best and most secure way to deal with Sonos's insecure SMB implementation. But you need to be quite tech-savvy.

It’s a way, but should be totally unnecessary in what is meant to be an easy to use  home audio system. I found the easiest way was just to dedicate a cheap NAS to Sonos, and only put important data on more secure devices.

Having read many posts on the subject over the years, it sounds like the older kit couldn’t run more modern kernels. It’s therefore particularly disappointing that they didn’t base S2 on something more up to date and sort out the problem once and for all.

When I first bought into Sonos it was an expensive but slick option for streaming local music. However, over the years Sonos have let it slip big time, and I now regard it as purely a legacy system, on borrowed time. If I had to replace it, it wouldn’t be with other Sonos kit, although I have intermediate fall-backs in place ;-)

That's another variation on the theme, both require a second (insecure) server of some kind just for Sonos.

I'm using Plex these days which I had running on my home server already.

Yes, that’s right - the Sonos NAS (an LG) is sacrificial - it has no important data on it.

I set a Plex server up on my Synology NAS. Using the PC (web) version of Plex, everything seemed OK. I can’t remember whether it had folder support, though. However, the Plex version for Sonos was very restricted - effectively useless for my purposes.

I prefer casting to the Plex approach, but for convenience it does require Chromecast capability. You can get away with casting direct to the Sonos hardware, but it’s not ideal.

I’ve come to terms with the fact that Sonos just doesn’t cut it any more for NAS users, so am prepared to move to whatever works best for me. @Kumar has some interesting solutions if you’re interested in voice control - I’m not, personally, but it does seem to be increasingly popular ;-)

Hi @amun, I’m not sure when you tried Plex but for me it's integrated in the Sonos app as music source. If you used it years ago, maybe you could give it another try.

I do have a slightly a more powerful setup than a NAS I admit. My setup is a home server (Intel based) with OpenMediaVault and Plex installed. The server holds my music library, video files, and several other things. I already had Plex running on it as my mediaserver and love it. I also have a PlexPass subscription which enables rich metadata for music libraries, as well as the wonderful and beautiful PlexAmp app.

In Sonos you can add your Plex server as media source. It then integrates into the Sonos app as source, similar to Spotify. This setup works fine for me and is stable.

So via Plex, playing local media ambums from my server/NAS to Sonos works well. It serves FLAC up to 44.1/16bit and higher resolutions are automatically converted by the Plex server. While I prefer the richness and beauty of the Plex and PlexAmp apps over the basic Sonos integration, it works just fine (similar to Spotify). Casting from Plex to Sonos doesn't work, but I don't use that (only to Chromecast).

No thanks, I'll pass on the microphones everywhere, eavesdropping on every conversation in my house ;-)

So no cell phone, or land line?

Getting off-topic (this was about bad SMB support), happy to discuss privacy in another thread or forum.

If you have a NAS now the SMB v1 gateway is the cleanest solution. If you don’t have a NAS and just need your music on one then the dedicated to Sonos NAS is the way to go.

The Pi option really is pretty simple and inexpensive if you use a Pi Zero-W (the W is important, don’t get a plain Zero) or any Pi that has an Ethernet port. Lots are available used too.

Setup is simple enough: Live Journal or https://stan-miller.livejournal.com/

A neat side effect of using a Pi is that you can run a user developed Sonos Controller on it and access that controller from anywhere you can do a VNC connection to your Pi.

http://pascalopitz.github.io/unoffical-sonos-controller-for-linux/

Why is it difficult to SONOS to upgrade the system to SMBv2 or higher? Is that because of license fees or something? 

Je suis tout à fait d’accord avec Morrison, Sonos n’est pas une petite épicerie du coin quand même !
Je constate que beaucoup de personnes ont le même problème.

The consensus currently is that on the legacy products, there is not enough space available to update the Linux kernel to one that can accept a higher version of the SMB version. There is some hope that now that there has been a split between legacy (S1) and newer devices (S2) with more memory, the engineers will be able to add a newer version of SMB. So far, it appears they’ve been chasing bugs in S2, I have hopes that we might see something in the next large version change, so 13, not 12.x

Files on PCs and Macs, the first ever Sonos feature, can be played without SMB. Only NAS users are affected, and I assume that the % of those users is too tiny for Sonos to spend any engineering effort on it any more. See also: Desktop app Setup features.

The technical reasons for SMBv1 are very well documented in many other threads.

I just hope Sonos takes care of this, and includes an end to the 65k limit. This would open up a better use case for me.

With S2 and the great promise of updates they could do it, but haven’t wanted to. Perhaps as the other posters suggest they may never do it because they feel it not important enough. 
 

I've found my solution to the problem.

As background: my home has over 7 zones, most with built in speakers driven by Connect:Amps. I also have a new Amp, connected to my TV via HDMI. We love music and my family uses Sonos every day.

As it turns out, Sonos' strategy to grandfather legacy (S1) devices creates an opportunity for me to re-evaluate my choice of multiroom platform. Sonos is a nice system but not without flaws. The Amp has improved power and sound quality which is good. But S2 is a huge disappointment, with negligible improvements over S1, still no high-res, SMB, etc so key issues remain unsolved. I don't like the direction Sonos is going and certainly won't spend several thousands of euro's to upgrade my house to the next generation Sonos system if it's going to be like this.

But these are now things of the past (for me). My Bluesound Node 2i streamer was delivered today! I have to say I'm over the moon, this will feed my Marantz amp in the living room, the other zones in the house will follow. Our Sonos gear will be on ebay shortly.

Sorry to leave you all on the forum, best of luck! Bye

Not quite.

As background: my home has over 7 zones, most with built in speakers driven by Connect:Amps. I also have a new Amp, connected to my TV via HDMI. We love music and my family uses Sonos every day.

Bluesound Node 2i supports a maximum of 5 zones.

I thought Bluesound supported more than 5 zones? 

You are mistaken, Bluesound supports 64 zones with wired connection and 16 wireless. More than enough for me.