The Sonos Brexit and pragmatic ways past it

Show first post
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.

570 replies

E
Userlevel 2
Badge

here’s a post on another thread where I described for under  £35 per play:5 you can have groups and stereo paired speakers using chromecast ...

“ok, so here’s a thing. take a gen 3 chromecast (£25), add an hdmi splitter (£8) , plug chromecast into splitter, plug audio cable from splitter into sonos play:5 , turn on autoplay 

You can now cast to the chromecast, and play music on the speakers. You can also add each chromecast to a speaker group .

And with a little bit of lateral thinking you can cut the audio cable to each speaker to have only L and R wires active, so you have a stereo pair

So, for just over £30 you can “fix” your sonos 5 speakers to use the latest streaming tech. 

Which begs the question - why can’t sonos produce such a device and keep the play:5 speakers working indefinitely - after all the “puck” wouldn’t cost *that* much to make. If they were to offer this at cost, I’m sure that most Sonos owners would be delighted at the forward-thinking and customer support of this premium brand and not the PR disaster it has become.

I have been responsible for my family purchasing 10k+ of sonos gear. I will not be doing so going forwards, and neither will they. Such a shame”

 

Totally brilliant. I wanted to give it 20 thumbs up. So instead I bump it.

Very sad that this could not be done by Sonos.

 

 

chickentender

here’s a post on another thread where I described for under  £35 per play:5 you can have groups and stereo paired speakers using chromecast ...

“ok, so here’s a thing. take a gen 3 chromecast (£25), add an hdmi splitter (£8) , plug chromecast into splitter, plug audio cable from splitter into sonos play:5 , turn on autoplay 

You can now cast to the chromecast, and play music on the speakers. You can also add each chromecast to a speaker group .

And with a little bit of lateral thinking you can cut the audio cable to each speaker to have only L and R wires active, so you have a stereo pair

So, for just over £30 you can “fix” your sonos 5 speakers to use the latest streaming tech. 

Which begs the question - why can’t sonos produce such a device and keep the play:5 speakers working indefinitely - after all the “puck” wouldn’t cost *that* much to make. If they were to offer this at cost, I’m sure that most Sonos owners would be delighted at the forward-thinking and customer support of this premium brand and not the PR disaster it has become.

I have been responsible for my family purchasing 10k+ of sonos gear. I will not be doing so going forwards, and neither will they. Such a shame”

 

Totally brilliant. I wanted to give it 20 thumbs up. So instead I bump it.

Very sad that this could not be done by Sonos.

 

 

@User533936 - Just for clarity, when you refer to “hdmi splitter” are you talking about an HDMI-to-Composite/RCA breakout converter (shown top)? If paired with an RCA-to-StereoMini (shown below) sending that to the 3.5mm stereo line-in of a Sonos Play5 and similar. Or for pairing, running just a mono cable from the respective L/R RCAs out of the adapter?
(That’s the kind of crap I used to have to do for guerilla webcasting setups using all manner of hardware in bizarre configurations. Fun stuff. :) ) 

 

K

@User533936 : your lateral thinking bit around the Chromecast video puck may not be such a good idea; a pitfall I can see just now is making sure that the jacks suit this trick with different jacks with different black insulator rings that are there to separate the channels. Or to not separate this, for mono jacks. I would not do this in a hurry and instead would wire a stereo cable to the kind of splitter in the @chickentender posted picture using appropriate jacks at the Sonos end suited to the nature of line in jack/s of the 5 or the Connect/Connect Amp, as the case may be. And let the 5 pair stereo thing be done by Sonos software; with the Connect/Connect Amp your lateral thinking isn't needed anyway.

And to answer your question as well as for @edamame about why Sonos can’t - won’t, more accurately - make such a device - what's to stop anyone from buying a bunch of them for a couple of hundred bucks, wiring them to third party speakers, and getting all the multi room Sonos features while blowing away the Sonos top line? IMO, that is a legitimate reason for them to not do this. The same reason why they will never introduce a cheap Port even if the costs justify a low price. What they should be doing - and I have suggested this to them as have some others - is to make the cheap device, but rig it to work only with Sonos “dumb” speakers, connected to each other via ethernet cable and not audio cables. But that is to cope with future Brexits more elegantly, doesn’t help this one.

K

@train_nerd

I just got around to seeing the excellent and balanced video, thank you. He echoes what I now think, and even have suggested to Sonos more than once this week about the lessons learnt about separating the computer from the durable.

More reinforcements and learnings from the video, that apply to the group on this thread:

  1. Multi room in sync may not be as important as Sonos would like you to believe. How many times do you really need/use that feature? He says in his case - once a year. 
  2. In any case, fifteen years ago, only Sonos could do this, now there are many that can.
  3. Use this lesson not just for audio, for all that comes with smart, web enabled interfaces. Else suffer the same consequence for every durable in the home as more and more of them are given web enabled smarts that are physically bundled into the durable like a fridge/TV/microwave/washing machine. Big takeaway there, IMO.

Bottom line, and there I am in full agreement - he says that the practice of dumping the durable just because the smart part can be made smarter is now being shown to be unsustainable given the perceived state of the planet in AD 2020 - even if it is affordable. I suggest this is something to be very aware of for every purchase in the future, not just of audio products.

And of course, this supports the ethos of this thread.

As an aside: I cannot believe that anyone that isn't insane is going to sell a smart car with driver assist features of different assist levels made in a way that the entire car becomes a legacy product after five years, when a more advance assist module becomes available. 

Or, no one sells smart houses where houses have to be dumped because smarter devices are available. What he says is just drilling this thinking downward to the smart durable level.

chickentender

@User533936 : your lateral thinking bit around the Chromecast video puck may not be such a good idea; a pitfall I can see just now is making sure that the jacks suit this trick with different jacks with different black insulator rings that are there to separate the channels. Or to not separate this, for mono jacks. I would not do this in a hurry and instead would wire a stereo cable to the kind of splitter in the @chickentender posted picture using appropriate jacks at the Sonos end suited to the nature of line in jack/s of the 5 or the Connect/Connect Amp, as the case may be. And let the 5 pair stereo thing be done by Sonos software; with the Connect/Connect Amp your lateral thinking isn't needed anyway.

And to answer your question as well as for @edamame about why Sonos can’t - won’t, more accurately - make such a device - what's to stop anyone from buying a bunch of them for a couple of hundred bucks, wiring them to third party speakers, and getting all the multi room Sonos features while blowing away the Sonos top line? IMO, that is a legitimate reason for them to not do this. The same reason why they will never introduce a cheap Port even if the costs justify a low price. What they should be doing - and I have suggested this to them as have some others - is to make the cheap device, but rig it to work only with Sonos “dumb” speakers, connected to each other via ethernet cable and not audio cables. But that is to cope with future Brexits more elegantly, doesn’t help this one.

Good points. Technically speaking, the physical split (in order to allow just one Chromecast to control a full stereo pair) could be done with two separate RCA-mono to 3.5mm-mono cables like this one, ran to each speaker from L or R RCA channels. Full contact on the tip/sleeve of the 3.5 plug will make sure the speaker is getting the mono signal completely. I’d not use shorter length on either side though - cables should remain the same length, one left coiled at the Chromecast/Adapter, the other ran over to the second speaker. Theoretically don’t see any reason why it wouldn't work just fine. A bit janky/messy, but certainly cheap.

 

K

Technically speaking, the physical split (in order to allow just one Chromecast to control a full stereo pair) could be done with two separate RCA-mono to 3.5mm-mono cables like this one, ran to ran to each speaker from L or R RCA channels.

There you have lost me. One chromecast audio can deliver a stereo signal via a multi jack identical at both ends to one 5 unit that can then deliver stereo music when paired with another 5. For it to do this for Connect, it just needs separate left and right jacks at the Connect end. Turn this kind of jack around and use it with the splitter to use the Chromecast video with a 5 unit. With Connect, the cable will have two jacks at both ends.

chickentender

@train_nerd

I just got around to seeing the excellent and balanced video, thank you. He echoes what I now think, and even have suggested to Sonos more than once this week about the lessons learnt about separating the computer from the durable.

More reinforcements and learnings from the video, that apply to the group on this thread:

  1. Multi room in sync may not be as important as Sonos would like you to believe. How many times do you really need/use that feature? He says in his case - once a year. 
  2. In any case, fifteen years ago, only Sonos could do this, now there are many that can.
  3. Use this lesson not just for audio, for all that comes with smart, web enabled interfaces. Else suffer the same consequence for every durable in the home as more and more of them are given web enabled smarts that are physically bundled into the durable like a fridge/TV/microwave/washing machine. Big takeaway there, IMO.

Bottom line, and there I am in full agreement - he says that the practice of dumping the durable just because the smart part can be made smarter is now being shown to be unsustainable given the perceived state of the planet in AD 2020 - even if it is affordable. I suggest this is something to be very aware of for every purchase in the future, not just of audio products.

And of course, this supports the ethos of this thread.

As an aside: I cannot believe that anyone that isn't insane is going to sell a smart car with driver assist features of different assist levels made in a way that the entire car becomes a legacy product after five years, when a more advance assist module becomes available. 

Or, no one sells smart houses where houses have to be dumped because smarter devices are available. What he says is just drilling this thinking downward to the smart durable level.

Agreed. This is all quite the “teaching moment”. I was talking with my dad about all of this earlier today. He doesn’t have any Sonos (not for lack of me extolling the perceived virtues of the system many times in the past) but as we chatted that’s the one thing that becomes clear. He has the moment when he realized his lovely Nest doorbell will meet this fate in the not-so-distant future and as he put it “wow, yeah, it never occurred to me that I’d have to upgrade that.”
IoT has another think coming… coming soon. Coming now.

K

@chickentender  actually that is what he said: IoT is at - or at least should be at - a turning point that this event has surfaced. I wasn’t sure the jargon would be known to all.

chickentender

Technically speaking, the physical split (in order to allow just one Chromecast to control a full stereo pair) could be done with two separate RCA-mono to 3.5mm-mono cables like this one, ran to ran to each speaker from L or R RCA channels.

There you have lost me. One chromecast audio can deliver a stereo signal via a multi jack identical at both ends to one 5 unit that can then deliver stereo music when paired with another 5. For it to do this for Connect, it just needs separate left and right jacks at the Connect end. Turn this kind of jack around and use it with the splitter to use the Chromecast video with a 5 unit. With Connect, the cable will have two jacks at both ends.

I’m speaking only to speakers in this instance, not a Connect, and really only if the intent is to use that speaker as a truly dumb speaker only, e.g. an active monitor. With the HDMI/RCA breakout, the left/right channels could be ran each separately via mono cable to a pair of Play5s, one taking left, one taking right. Now you have a physical stereo pair that is controlled/fed by Chromecast on the adapter. No changes need to be done in Sonos app for the Play5s except make sure they’re both on and Line-in enabled and at the same volume. (Can the Play5 line-in be set to auto-sense like the Connect can? I’ve never owned a Play5.)
It’d be messy, but it should work. 

K

In only partially a lighter vein - someone should arm Greta Thunberg with a briefing note about this stunt and point her at Sonos. She will go ballistic and Sonos will be in even deeper doo-doo:joy:

K

@chickentender : All Sonos line in jacks are functionally identical. The 5 just has a multi jack, to save space, I guess.

chickentender

@chickentender  actually that is what he said: IoT is at - or at least should be at - a turning point that this event has surfaced. I wasn’t sure the jargon would be known to all.

I’m going to give this a watch. Sounds like he’s on our page. :)

Ken_Griffiths

 

@Ken_Griffiths : Per @Ryan S , there WILL be a legacy app for legacy systems. That should take care of the inadvertent updating nightmares and sweats. It will however not address it for those that have come to this fork before us, that locked themselves out to retain CR100/classic blue etc. Those will continue to need special handling.

My thoughts here Kumar are that Sonos will only support the 'official' current two versions of their software, going forward, which seem to be currently referred to as a 'Legacy’ and/or ‘Modern’ setup and anyone choosing to stay on earlier versions of the software will not be supported by Sonos Customer Care.

I seem to recall that was the case mentioned in the CR100 thread and that people made their own choice to lock-down their systems and standstill. I don’t see how their own chosen course, will have any bearing on what now seems to be planned in May… a clear line will be drawn (hopefully) and then all of us, on both sides of any divide, will continue to receive Sonos support and any updates necessary to meet their support requirements. I just cannot see Sonos providing assistance to those that decline to use the latest updates, whether that be a legacy system update, or a modern update. However, like all things, we will have to wait and see what May brings.

K

@Ken_Griffiths and everyone, to clarify: In my quote above I did not intend to convey that “special handling” will in any way be by Sonos - it refers to the special handling being given to their systems by the referred users themselves just now, that will have to be continued by these users. if they do not continue that, the system may end up inadvertently updated to the legacy app version, with consequent bricking of the CR100s and the like. But not, mystifyingly, of the CR200 - ref back to the @Meezer posts here.

Eddie the Eagle
Userlevel 3
Badge +4

@Eddie the Eagle : If the stock keeps falling one of the big tech guys may see opportunities in replacing what looks like inept management even now. One can only stay optimistic and trust that they will also see the merit in keeping the installed base as satisfied as is feasible as a foundation stone for keeping sales and business growing under new management.

well, I was thinking, I work in a US multinational company too (on NYSE) and there is this huge focus on free cash flow nowadays, more than ever, free cash flow indicates your future stock price and health. Now I was wondering how healthy Sonos` free cash flow is nowadays and how this will be affected by the fact that their unique selling point is in danger. There is an enormous amount of users vocal on this forum and as we can clearly see, not always acting rational but very emotional and impulsive and they represent probably only 0,0001% of Sonos users world wide. How would the doom scenario look like if, because of this, their cash implodes and investors are not willing to add any ?

To say that his style is unorthodox would be something of an understatement, but it obviously works for him.
K

Another knock on @Ryan S : When I create topics, I leave the Tag thing blank, because I am clueless on what that is about. If it is something that will add value, please fill in whatever words there you think will serve best.

K

@Eddie the Eagle :Having been involved in US based M&A activity, I know a little about this. You are right about free cash flows being the most important aspect, but the thing that a buyer looks at above all is what he can expect as sustainable free cash flows for the next 5-15 years, and determines his buying price band based on that. And for that he sees what these have been in the recent past, but while doing future based scenarios, he throws in what he expect these to be once he is in charge of running the business, bringing what he believe are his superior managing capability as well as opportunity for leveraging a collaboration with what assets he already has. So present state of the cash flows is important, but only as a starting point to project the future ones.

Obviously, the lower the stock price, the lower the cost of acquisition, and the lower that projected future cash flows then need to be, to justify the acquisition. But, it is always about expectations of future cash flows. So as long as this future is perceived to not be damaged seriously, there will always be buyer interest. But what the buyer will then do to maximise these after the buy, may or may not be good for us. One can only hope that interests align. 

And from the above, you can understand why more acquisitions are a failure than are successes. Lots of forward looking comes into it, that can go wrong. And usually does.

U
Userlevel 2
Badge

  • chickentender : yes, any hdmi converter / extractor  / splitter. The first box I  got was actually an hdmi->vga adapter . It just happened to have a 3.5mm audio out and I thought “ohhhh, chromecast plugs into hdmi .. grab the audio, line out into play:5

    And it worked. Sweet. The grouping is a bonus, stereo “pairing” was the icing on the cake. Others have pointed out better ways of pairing rather than cutting wires :)

R
Userlevel 5
Badge +7

Sage commentary about recent events and the path forward by a guy I respect Leo LaPorte, The Tech Guy.  Watch video at timeline: 56:30 thru 1:05:30

https://twit.tv/shows/the-tech-guy/episodes/1663?autostart=false

Speaks for itself.

 

 

Yup, separate the (relatively) durable functionality (big screen, speaker, refrigeration! etc ) from the rapidly changing Internet-facing functionality.

Since the durable stuff is expensive to build while the non-durable (disposable) stuff is cheap to build, this approach works logically and financially.

So, my TV was purchased to act as a dumb screen taking inputs from elsewhere. My focus on purchase was buying the TV with the best screen/visuals for the money, while ignoring the ‘smart’ functionality. Sure, I used the smart functionality initially a little, but quite quickly plugged into it a 3rd party streaming gizmo that was cheap enough to be disposable and replaced every few years.

 

If I was the person running Sonos I’d hopefully be learning a big lesson from this current episode around customers’ expectations that durable-looking goods should indeed endure. If they don’t endure, then in the future a bunch (maybe a *lot*) of those customers won’t buy quality, expensive durable-looking goods (Sonos) but will buy inexpensive disposable alternatives instead...

For example, a couple of weeks back Google sent me a free Nest Mini, normal cost $49, which works well enough. There’s a couple of locations where I have Play:1s used for low-level background radio for 99% of the time that could easily be replaced by something like a Nest Mini when the time comes. Not as nice as a Play:1, but for 99% of time good enough. And if they needed replacing after several years ownership because the techs become old-hat, then at $49 each it’s not the end of the world. It’s not just about the money: it simple seems ‘wrong’ to be lobbing a hefty speaker into the trash when the internals all work just fine.

 

In Sonos shoes I’d be trying to get ahead of the curve on this and (if necessary) re-architect the product lines to ensure that durable-looking purchases, such as weighty speakers, are able to endure. By that, I mean I’d be looking to mimic the ‘smart’ TV approach above: by all means sell speakers with built-in streaming tech, but ensure that once that on-board streaming tech becomes outdated that customers will be able to retain the speakers as networked speakers, by using ‘off-board’ streamers for example.

Separate the more durable, ‘stable’ functionality from the non-durable, rapidly changing stuff.

Folks here are looking at using cheap stuff like Echos and Chromecasts that can be plugged into (older) Sonos speakers or other devices possessing line-in sockets, but in Sonos’ shoes I’d be looking at addressing this customer need themselves by offering their own low-cost streaming devices that can be connected to Sonos speaker networks, ie. not physically plugged in, so not requiring line-in sockets. As has been mentioned numerous times here already, Amazon & Google’s pricing has indicated the absurdity of Sonos’s pricing for its Connect/Port type devices. NB an off-board Sonos streaming device of the type I imagine would need to be a fraction of that legacy pricing.

This ‘vision’ has Sonos positioning itself as a vendor of high quality, durable networked speaker systems that insulates you from fast-changing Internet-facing tech for as long as possible. This ‘insulation’ enables you to spend freely on high quality speakers secure in the knowledge they will endure, while knowing there’s a means (at reasonable future expense) of addressing the aspects of the system (such as Internet-facing, streamers, voice) that’ll date more rapidly and have a shorter lifespan.

 

Sonos would way it’s already followed this vision, and up to a point it has, and that’s allowed it to build a large customer base over the years, but clearly this current episode says that its customers have expectations that Sonos isn’t now meeting.

I don’t think Sonos’s backtracking this past week adds up to much yet, most likely a PR sticking plaster exercise, but we’ll see. My guess is that Sonos doesn’t do anything along the lines I’ve tried to outline above - changing product lines to recognise the need for a separation of durable and less-durable functionality - and just carries on with what it’s done previously. If so, I’d expect customers to become increasingly wary of adding to their Sonos systems, or embarking on new substantial purchases of Sonos kit, while at the lower end for Sonos to continue to face an onslaught from Amazon and Google (+Apple). Sonos to go ex-growth and the future most likely being a steady decline.

I think they have a shot at a different path but they need to act swiftly and boldly else the moment will pass.

F
Userlevel 2
Badge

 

For clarity, as long as I keep them all in one connected system, Sonos won’t “force update” the non-legacy bits on me?

Another question -- what about the windows/android/iOS “controllers” -- do I have to do something to prevent them from getting updated in some way that will bork their compatibility with my “Legacy” system?

I will be watching the adventures with Roon, the Node2i and other options with great interest ...

I agree about the thread - it is first class. Thanks Kumar. It’s interesting to me to learn how much flexible good value audio components there are around now compared with when I bought my first Play:5. I know that I can stream from my NAS in any number of ways but future streaming services concern me a bit.

While many products mentioned support services such as Spotify etc. I’ve seen very few that mention TuneIn Radio. if I lost that I’d be unhappy, so I’ve been digging out the URLs for the stations that I listen to the most and adding them manually to the controller app; I’m pleasantly surprised how many of them work.

That brings up another concern: ultimately we’re at the mercy of the controller app. I hope we don’t lose any of the functionality the it currently has.

see the message regarding chromecast - you don’t need the sonos controller app ;)

Technically this is true but in practice you need more than one app to cover all the services that the Sonos app delivers in one.

I am in the UK and here is my real-world example: I can stream from the TuneIn app to Chromecast Audio and then via line-in to Sonos. However BBC UK radio feeds have been pulled from TuneIn (these feeds are still available via Sonos at the moment). So to stream, say, BBC Radio 4 I need to use the BBC Sounds app as well.

Then to play my library music from my NAS or from Plex I need a third app. It’s too bitty and just won’t get used.

airforceteacher
Userlevel 6
Badge +15

 

A minor point, but I don’t want to have to switch off iOS automatic updates for all of the 100+ apps on my iOS devices, just to prevent the Sonos app from updating. Sonos needs to provide a legacy iOS app, separate to the one which is acquiring new features.

 

100%  This is my big worry.  Hopefully if they don’t someone will reverse engineer it and come up with a third party app for legacy users. I have a ZP80 and a ZP100 I’m not quite ready to replace.  Had they announced this before the price increase, I’d have recycled and pulled the trigger.  Announcing this change after the price increase feels dirty to me.

 

However, there’s definitely a “where else would I go?” feeling.  AFAICT from reviews, everyone else’s whole house audio solutions are far inferior to Sonos, either due to controller issues, lack of sync or network stability.

K

Technically this is true but in practice you need more than one app to cover all the services that the Sonos app delivers in one.

 

Don’t most of us that prefer a variety of sources prefer the native app over the Sonos app? In the main, we pick a service as much for its distinct interface as anything else; using the standardised Sonos app brings all to pretty much the same cosmetic level, nullifying this reason for the choice. That’s another reason that takes people away from a One Sonos approach.

C

@Ryan S  Want to make some friends out of this?  When the dev’s reinvent the Legacy Version, bring back the full featured Desktop controller.  One of SONOS earlier debacles.

 

C
Userlevel 6
Badge +14

 

 

  AFAICT from reviews, everyone else’s whole house audio solutions are far inferior to Sonos, either due to controller issues, lack of sync or network stability.

I have a system running at the moment with a Sonos Beam, 2 chromecasts (2 of which are connected to BT transmitters), a Google Nest Hub, a logitech internet radio and a Roberts S1 speaker.  All playing different streams without any issues - all controllable from an android app, a dedicated controller remote, and a linux PC web-browser (and by voice with Alexa deviices - including the Fire TV - when required). 

Impossible on the clunky sonos system now or in the future.

J
Userlevel 6
Badge +5

Many thanks Kumar for starting this thread.

Like others on here, I locked down to 8.4 in order to continue using my 3x CR100s - they still work a treat by the way and are in daily use.

Thus, I am perhaps not best placed to advise those who are in this unfortunate situation as to the ways forward but If it helps at all, I can confirm that after nearly 2 years, Napster and Google Play Music (the only streaming services I use) still work perfectly. Others on 8.4 have confirmed that the likes of Spotify and Amazon also still work so the hope is for those that remain in legacy mode that this will continue for some time yet.

Aside from a couple of Play:1s, all my kit is legacy so in my case, I have two choices:

  1. Open my system up to Sonos and allow new software updates (but lose my CR100s), then come May remain on legacy and just hope that Sonos sticks to its word and continues to provide bug fixes and updates to allow continuous access to streaming services if Napster etc. change any of their protocols.
  2. Stay as I am and see what happens

Option 2 is my preferred course at the moment but I am stuck if Napster changes anything….

As a geeky type, I am interested in looking at the PI solutions.

There was a user here several months ago who was beta testing some PI box that they had put together to achieve some solution. I can’t remember who or what it was and the forum search is of no help…..

But I’m sure that if someone made such a box that was maintained by an open source community, that could stream from all the well known music services and then present itself to Sonos as a music source, people would buy in to that.

Finally, I suppose if I was in the situation that pretty much everyone else here seems to be in (that is, they have a mixture of modern and legacy), then my plan moving forward would to be to stay in legacy mode until streaming broke or some killer feature came along that I couldn’t live without. 

I have to say that in nearly 2 years at 8.4, I have never seen a new feature that has even slightly tempted me to move forward…….

 

 

 

Terms & ConditionsCookie settings