Hi Res lossless 24bit 192khz to sonos five via Line in jackplug


Userlevel 1
Badge

I would like to know if this is a good solution to play hi res files (24bit 192khz) on a sonos five stereo system.

As far as I know and read in div. threads in this forum it is not possible to stream Apple Hi-Res lossless via the Sonos app (only AAC 256).  Amazon Music Ultra HD or Quobuz/ Tidal is limited to 24bit 48khz.

Streaming from Apple Devices via Airplay is also limited to lossless (16bit 44khz).

That's why I thought about the following:

Usage of my Apple Devices (Mac or iPad) via DAC (e.g Topping DS 50 or FIIO) connect via USB and then use line in to Sonos five. I can see (via a borrowed RME ADI2 ) that I receive 24bit 192khz from my Apple devices.

My question now is: is the SONOS five directly using this stream without any further conversions, or does it convert the stream, when it is played locally via the wired connection described above (Mac-USB-DAC-jack plug -Line in Sonos five)?

Anyone using this solution already? How does it sound?

Thanks a lot,

regards tomyc


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.

32 replies

Badge +20

The Sonos line in gets converted to digital, absolutely pointless exercise doing this. You may want to look at Amazon HD or Qobuz as these are supported on Sonos natively, 24/48 is all Sonos supports.

Userlevel 1
Badge

I surely can hear the difference by using my headphones

 

Of course you can.  So put it through the Line-In and tell us how it sounds. 

I can't hear any difference to streaming natively with Sonos App. That's why I raised this question.

Best Sound to my ears is streaming with Amazon Music Ultra HD via Sonos S2 App.

 

so it is about time that Sonos integrates Apple Music Hi Res natively, but I don't know if this will ever happen… (ALAC vs. FLAC)

 

It’s not up to Sonos, it’s up to Apple.  Sonos just supplies the API, and since there are other services offering HiRes, the API is quite capable of doing it. 

I am fine with agreeing to disagree; I have found that arguing over Hi Res audio tends to be like doing so across as big a chasm as religion v science, as an example, so that is a good way to go. I will just pick and make one correction where you seem to say that low res works for me. It does, but only if you define CD format/quality as low res - which it is but only in comparison to high res in terms of bits and bytes of data it contains. But 16/44 CD quality is as good as it needs to be for me and for those that do not partake of the Hi Res audio thing.

I also know that mastering engineers master using more bits than 16/44, and I also know why they do this and that this has nothing to do my being able to get better sound quality than CD only from Hi Res audio.

I’d be fascinated to read of any controlled evaluation which conclusively proves that listeners can consistently differentiate hi-res from Red Book, given a common (hi-res) source recording. On the contrary there are tests which demonstrate precisely the opposite.

Higher sampling rates and bit depths obviously have their place in the production chain, to avoid errors and filter effects, but are unnecessary as a final delivery format.

Streaming providers are doing hi-res because that’s what consumers think they want, because marketing has convinced them so and, well, bigger must be better right?

Any “immense difference” can typically be explained by a more careful remastering for the ‘hi-res’ version. 

As for “mastering to mp3”, such a concept is surely oxymoronic? 

Userlevel 1
Badge

thx, but they are all limited to 24bit 48khz natively in the App. 

Userlevel 1
Badge

I understood that the Sonos Api is capable FLAC for Amazon Music Ultra HD, Tidal and Quobuz…

but the Sonos Api has to cover ALAC, so what is the todo for Apple? I don't think that Apple would change from ALAC to FLAC...

It’s tricky to make any comparisons between the various quality levels delivered by the streaming services. The “HD” version offered by the service might originate from a different master and will almost always skip the compressor. These versions can sound distinctly different, regardless of how they are played.

Even in the days of CD’s and LP’s there were differences between releases. In some cases it was difficult to accept that all of the releases spawned from the same studio session.

Any line only takes analog signal voltages; none can take or directly pass on a hi res digital input. And how exactly do you know what the artist intended and how do you know even then that any deviation from that is not due to the many other things that can affect the sound waves that reach your ear drums?

Reading all the preceding posts and the handwringing and tying oneself into knots is a classic example of a first world problem caused by/for gullible customers of purveyors of digital snake oil - it is amusing, and also sad because this speaks to universal human failings.

I’m not going to stoop to that level of criticism, but beauty really is in the ear of the beholder and I hear an immense difference.  It does depend on your source and system.  There’s a reason every streaming provider is jumping on the hi res bandwagon, but there will always be old schoolers who are happy with low res, and that’s ok.  As a studio musician for my whole life, I’ve seen the demands that recording artists put on the engineers to get the sound a specific way, and they definitely weren’t mastering to mp3.  Let’s agree to disagree, I wish you all best Kumar.

 

Streaming providers are doing hi-res because that’s what consumers think they want, because marketing has convinced them so and, well, bigger must be better right?

 

Bigger must be better, but ONLY if the Sonos or any other app they use has a visual indication that says that what they are listening to is bigger - there is enough hand wringing seen here on why that indication is often not there to be seen. It is like they need their eyes to tell their ears of what is the bit count in the stream they are listening to, to be sure it sounds better. Quite silly.

Compare that to HD video where any indicator on the screen that says 1080P/HD is completely redundant. 

 

Streaming providers are doing hi-res because that’s what consumers think they want, because marketing has convinced them so and, well, bigger must be better right?

 

Bigger must be better, but ONLY if the Sonos or any other app they use has a visual indication that says that what they are listening to is bigger - there is enough hand wringing seen here on why that indication is often not there to be seen. It is like they need their eyes to tell their ears of what is the bit count in the stream they are listening to, to be sure it sounds better. Quite silly.

It gets even sillier when MQA fans crave the little blue light on their decoder.

 

Compare that to HD video where any indicator on the screen that says 1080P/HD is completely redundant. 

Ah yes, but sit far enough back from the set and they all look the same: SD, HD or 4K.

Userlevel 5
Badge +11

Bigger must be better,

Of course it is, how else could they charge more for the service. 😁

Bigger must be better,

Of course it is, how else could they charge more for the service. 😁

Except many of them no longer charge extra for lossless, never mind ‘hi res’. 

It gets even sillier when MQA fans crave the little blue light on their decoder.

 

Compare that to HD video where any indicator on the screen that says 1080P/HD is completely redundant. 

Ah yes, but sit far enough back from the set and they all look the same: SD, HD or 4K.

PS: This did not go through at first writing - I find that on a large screen at recommended viewing distance, SD is not a pleasure anymore if the HD version is available. HD to 4K is not anywhere near that kind of a difference and not something I will change TVs for, and 8K will be pointless, I believe.

Appreciate your kind attitude Kumar, we all have our opinions, and that’s not a bad thing.  Take care.

If 24/192 is all it’s cracked up to be, surely you could hear the difference just by listening, no? 

Userlevel 1
Badge

I surely can hear the difference by using my headphones

I surely can hear the difference by using my headphones

 

Of course you can.  So put it through the Line-In and tell us how it sounds. 

Badge +20

thx, but they are all limited to 24bit 48khz natively in the App. 

That’s all Sonos hardware supports, nothing more,

Userlevel 1
Badge

so it is about time that Sonos integrates Apple Music Hi Res natively, but I don't know if this will ever happen… (ALAC vs. FLAC)

I understood that the Sonos Api is capable FLAC for Amazon Music Ultra HD, Tidal and Quobuz…

but the Sonos Api has to cover ALAC, so what is the todo for Apple? I don't think that Apple would change from ALAC to FLAC...

 

Sonos plays ALAC just fine, why would the API have to change?  The API isn’t playing the stream, the Sonos player is.  

Userlevel 1
Badge

So then I really don’t understand the issue what Apple has to do. Just deliver ALAC files to the API?

So then I really don’t understand the issue what Apple has to do. Just deliver ALAC files to the API?

 

That's a question for Apple.