This has been requested in so many other threads before. Not sure how to respond appropriately.

Though it is up to Sonos to work with ideas like this, I do not think Sonos is about stuffing rooms full with speakers. There’s an app that already does part of what you ask, so technically more than what Sonos offers now is possible. We might disagree about if this really is desirable though.

Sounds like good idea on paper. However, consider room size and shape. The room on the left would make a good layout but what about the room on the right? Also, you must factor in doors and windows. Not to mention furniture. Just adding more speakers doesn’t guarantee an improved immersive effect. Then again you could possibly hang speakers from the ceiling or have speakers on stands positioned around the space. Just some thoughts 

Sounds like good idea on paper. However, consider room size and shape. The room on the left would make a good layout but what about the room on the right? Also, you must factor in doors and windows. Not to mention furniture. Just adding more speakers doesn’t guarantee an improved immersive effect. Then again you could possibly hang speakers from the ceiling or have speakers on stands positioned around the space. Just some thoughts 

 

 

The room on the left can have the 2 additional Era 300s.

The room on the right can have the 2 additional Era 300s, if the consumer wants them. It’s all about choice and giving the consumer that choice.

Also, if Sonos truly and firmly stand behind their TruPlay, then any room configuration or architectural setup would be ok.

Plus the extra sales make stockholders happy. Most corporations only care about that over what actual consumers want or wish for. Allowing 2 more Era 300s make all involved happy.

So…which separate channels would these two extra Era 300s convey? Are there two Dolby Atmos channels being sent by TV or music streaming services that are currently not picked up by existing Sonos home theatre setups?

​@GuyinPA75 

Your Comment

• Also, if Sonos truly and firmly stand behind their TruPlay, then any room configuration or architectural setup would be ok.

Unfortunately (and you’re not the first to think so) TruePlay will not cure all “sonic ills” in a space. In fact (although very rare) there are instances where the room acoustics are better without TruePlay enabled.

TruePlay requires sound waves that can bounce off walls and ceilings within a reasonable range. The diagrams above were not meant to illustrate a TruePlay sounding; but questioned where to place additional speakers as proposed by the original OP.  

Back to your comment….

TruePlay will have a lesser impact in a large open concept space than in a space similar to the diagram above on the left. Simply put...you can't TruePlay a cathedral .

These requests always boil down to the same thing:  How many separate, discrete channels can be wirelessly supported while still allowing the audio to be synched with the video?  Each channel needs two things, a buffer sufficient to resend bad or missing packets without stuttering and dropouts, and enough bandwidth to handle the stream plus any overhead needed for error correction/timing packets. 

Right now, the buffer for audio synched with video is 30ms, which is on the bleeding edge of being perceptible by the average human eye (I’m very sensitive to lip sync problems, and I can just barely see it).  So how many more wireless channels can the system handle before the bandwidth limit and/or adverse wireless conditions cause too many reliability issues for the small buffer to overcome?

Only Sonos knows the answer to that, and considering they shelved these configurations when they shelved the streaming box, it doesn’t look like the answer is favorable to the OP’s wishes. 

Too lazy to look it up but Atmos has something like 30 channels, so yes Sonos isn't able to map each Atmos channel to a speaker.

However that is as intended by Dolby in the Atmos system, the following is very condensed and simplified, might even have it a bit wrong...

The artist maps sounds to Atmos channels and maps the channels to locations within the Atmos space. The playback system then maps the Atmos channels it is given to speaker locations in your room.

While more speakers seems like a good idea the issue is getting them in the proper position to match the Atmos channels, the channel locations can change from track to track so that isn't a solution. Having enough speakers at enough locations in your room to make the mapping process more accurate is a solution but the processing power needed as well as the bandwidth to distribute the mapped audio is an issue.

Atmos is a far more complex system than the old 5.1 - 7.1 or 9.1 systems where necessary speaker locations were built into the system. If you are serious about doing Atmos right reading the Dolby documentation is the place to start, it isn't easy reading but worth the effort if you want to go beyond "Sounds Good" and seek the best possible sound, while avoiding falling off the audiophile cliff into endless spending and made-up words.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolby_Atmos

That is a very helpful article, far more readable than the Dolby documentation this search finds.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=dolby+atmos+documentation&ia=web

Basics:  https://professional.dolby.com/gaming/gaming-getting-started/dolby-atmos-documentation

Speaker count/placement: https://www.dolby.com/about/support/guide/speaker-setup-guides/

I wasn’t actually asking how Dolby Atmos works… I was saying is adding two more Era 300s going to magically find sound that isn’t already being heard. The answer is no.

Just how immersive do you need from a mass market consumer audio system? If you want full immersion, get a Dolby Atmos cinematic professional to fit a non-Sonos system.

(Satisfying a very niche audience with the investment needed to ensure four surrounds work seamlessly is unlikely to delight shareholders.)

Find sound, as you say, no, but more speakers/locations might improve the Atmos ability to position sounds where the artist intended.

From the first link:

There is a limit of 32 objects total (including bed channels) that can be transmitted over HDMI to an AVR, soundbar or TV. 

Traditional multichannel audio is utilized in Dolby Atmos; these channels are referred to as “Bed” audio. Bed configurations can range in width from Stereo to 7.1.4.

The Arc Ultra provides 9.1.4, the 300s I can't find a similar number for, alone or bonded to an Ultra.

So possibly adding two speakers to the sides of the listening space could add to Atmos location imaging, how much would be interesting and how the improvement versus intruding on the room's space traded off. As above, the bandwidth and processing power issues would have to be considered too. Probably most important, would it be profitable for Sonos to develop, produce, sell and support this.

Since I couldn't even find spots for a single pair of 300s it is not an option here.

Let’s look at what we know and don’t know.

We know:

The ability to add more speakers to a HT setup exists, because the API is being used by 3rd party apps to add separate fronts.

The ability to add more speakers to a HT setup was planned, because leaks of the streamer box feature set included adding more speakers.

Both the streamer box and the features leaked were shelved, or the streamer was shelved and features like adding extra speakers were never brought to market.

The current buffer of -30ms is right on the edge of perceptibility for lip sync problems (around -45ms average).

We don’t know:

What other speakers besides separate fronts are allowed in the API.

What other measures were tried, i.e. CEC video sync, in the streamer box to allow a larger buffer with no lip sync problems (Note: this would mess up things like gaming), and were they successful.

Reason(s) why the streamer was shelved, which may or may not include the inability to reliably support more wireless speakers/channels.