Music Library Limit 65k


This is both an idea and a problem ... the 65000 limit on tracks is frustrating to some users like myself. Please remove it.

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.

467 replies

Userlevel 5
Badge
Hi Luuk. Not a solution but a workaround is to let Sonos index m3u's instead of the mp3's. Anders Forslund (Ramses800 on the forum) has a great idea about this that actually works, but needs planning.. http://forums.sonos.com/showthread.php?t=16126 BR, Johan
Thanks Johan. I am aware of this solution but it has its limits. I haven't quite decided yet whether I shall go down this path or start deleting tracks I rarely if ever play (problem: difficult to decide, if only because my taste changes over the years).
When will the hardware / software be updated so I can see ALL of my music and not just the first ~65,000 tracks. Memory is cheap and this is painful! Going on years now this problem has existed! This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Will Sonos resolve the track limit issue???.
Badge
The idea part of this request could be to develop a new Sonos bridge which has an expandable memory slot. Either SD card or a USB thumb stick. This idea would remove the built in memory limit of the Sonos devices.
I imagine an SD card or USB stick won't cut it. For speed, the index is probably kept in RAM, storage devices like SD cards are too slow.
Userlevel 6
Badge +14
Can't see why it would necessarily be too slow - it would be interesting to see the size though. My SD card is fine recording full1080P video so they're not all slouches.
Badge
@Jgatie: I definitely do not agree. I have a Seagate Dockstar running Linux off a thumb stick for the last 2 years and a Raspberry Pi running Linux off a Class 8 or 10 SD card. They are both doing more that just indexing music and they respond to cli commands without delay. Obviously if I am running processor intensive tasks the response slows a bit. But in the case of this Sonos idea, it's only storing an index of meta data.
That's because they all have RAM, which is where all the processing takes place, and where the data is loaded when you need fast access (like a music index). The access time for RAM is many thousands of times faster than SD cards, which is why the hash table index is stored in RAM, and why the amount of RAM is the limit for the Sonos index, not the amount of storage. I guarantee you the Sonos index is loaded in volatile RAM when Sonos is running, and is only written to the SD storage for use on bootup. This is basic computer science.
Badge
@jgatie: You sure are argumentative and quick to chime in on this issue that doesn't impact you. I hardly call 128mb and 512 mb much memory but ok. Either way the web servers are pulling the pages from the SD card and web performance is not an issue. @sonos: If SD card performance is slow then give me an SD card slot and a place to insert laptop memory on a bridge. Then you can load the index off the SD card and into the laptop memory for faster performance.
I'm sorry you feel I'm being "argumentative and quick to chime in." Next time, I'll simply let you believe in something which is not true. No skin off my back.
Badge
This is an idea forum where we present ideas for voting. Not a place to condescendingly put other users down.
You are correct. I shall remember this whenever I feel the urge to call someone "argumentative and quick to chime in" after they try to help define the ideas presented so they better reflect the Sonos architecture.
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled My current library is in excess of 80,000 and growing. What plans do Sonos have to increase their storage capacity or will it always be limited to 65k.
Seriously, memory is cheap and yet this player is limited. I just bought a play:3 and I'm considering not buying any more components. 65,000 is not a large amount given how much memory you can have at home now - our libraries are bigger than sonos imagines.
Userlevel 1
And after two years I bought my Sonos system that limit is still there... They say that one year for a digital system is like 10 years for a human being, so you made me lose 20 years of my life waiting... For the record my library is about 180.000 tracks. Do I really have to throw away almost two third of it to keep using a Sonos system? Come on Sonos you can do better than that!!!
Just installed Sonos system in my house only to discover the 65k limit:( Now I feel stupid to have recommended this to my music friends. Sad to see that Sonos have not done anything for two years about this. Back to looking for a good system...
Userlevel 1
I don't get it ... doesn't Sonos WANT people with LARGE music collections to use and promote their products? Wouldn't these people (myself included) be the ultimate ambassadors and promoters of their kit? How can this still be an issue? Regardless of the reasons for it (bad design decision in the past, using 16-bit ints over 32- or 64-bits, or a memory limitation), there needs to be some sort of statement from Sonos about this, no?
I don't get it ... doesn't Sonos WANT people with LARGE music collections to use and promote their products? Wouldn't these people (myself included) be the ultimate ambassadors and promoters of their kit? How can this still be an issue? Regardless of the reasons for it (bad design decision in the past, using 16-bit ints over 32- or 64-bits, or a memory limitation), there needs to be some sort of statement from Sonos about this, no?
The "statement" from Sonos is the status applied to this very thread - "Under Consideration." I don't know what else they can say until that status changes; maybe "Still Under Consideration" is what you'd like to hear?
Userlevel 1
I don't get it ... doesn't Sonos WANT people with LARGE music collections to use and promote their products? Wouldn't these people (myself included) be the ultimate ambassadors and promoters of their kit? How can this still be an issue? Regardless of the reasons for it (bad design decision in the past, using 16-bit ints over 32- or 64-bits, or a memory limitation), there needs to be some sort of statement from Sonos about this, no?
No, I'd like to see them actively work on this rather worrying issue and release an action plan or some sort of official statement on this. That'll always be the best way to keep the bs at bay. Either this is very hard or impossible to change due to some unforeseen limitation they've built in to their products, or they're unwilling to do it because they don't believe it's worth it. Either way, they need to tell us, their customers. There's no way I will endorse and recommend Sonos to those of my friends that also have large music/audio collections knowing this limitation is still unaddressed and with no plans to fix it.
I don't get it ... doesn't Sonos WANT people with LARGE music collections to use and promote their products? Wouldn't these people (myself included) be the ultimate ambassadors and promoters of their kit? How can this still be an issue? Regardless of the reasons for it (bad design decision in the past, using 16-bit ints over 32- or 64-bits, or a memory limitation), there needs to be some sort of statement from Sonos about this, no?
I'm sure Sonos is shaking in its boots because of your lost endorsement.
Userlevel 1
I don't get it ... doesn't Sonos WANT people with LARGE music collections to use and promote their products? Wouldn't these people (myself included) be the ultimate ambassadors and promoters of their kit? How can this still be an issue? Regardless of the reasons for it (bad design decision in the past, using 16-bit ints over 32- or 64-bits, or a memory limitation), there needs to be some sort of statement from Sonos about this, no?
Of course they're not. Why would they care if they lost the sale of a system to a competitor.
I don't get it ... doesn't Sonos WANT people with LARGE music collections to use and promote their products? Wouldn't these people (myself included) be the ultimate ambassadors and promoters of their kit? How can this still be an issue? Regardless of the reasons for it (bad design decision in the past, using 16-bit ints over 32- or 64-bits, or a memory limitation), there needs to be some sort of statement from Sonos about this, no?
Your thinking is simplistic; it's a lot more complicated than that. If Sonos targets a minute market (collections > 65k) instead of concentrating their limited manpower and budget on something which has a larger market, then the ROI goes down. Nothing exists in a vacuum, and if Sonos forsakes a small market in order to infiltrate a larger one, it is good business, and although losing your endorsement is unfortunate, they gain far more than they would have in keeping it.
I don't get it ... doesn't Sonos WANT people with LARGE music collections to use and promote their products? Wouldn't these people (myself included) be the ultimate ambassadors and promoters of their kit? How can this still be an issue? Regardless of the reasons for it (bad design decision in the past, using 16-bit ints over 32- or 64-bits, or a memory limitation), there needs to be some sort of statement from Sonos about this, no?
Jgatie, good insight. Does SONOS have a process for customers to request an enhancement? Many companies have what they call an RFE? A consumer oriented company must have such a process.
I don't get it ... doesn't Sonos WANT people with LARGE music collections to use and promote their products? Wouldn't these people (myself included) be the ultimate ambassadors and promoters of their kit? How can this still be an issue? Regardless of the reasons for it (bad design decision in the past, using 16-bit ints over 32- or 64-bits, or a memory limitation), there needs to be some sort of statement from Sonos about this, no?
This is the forum for requesting enhancements.
Badge
I don't get it ... doesn't Sonos WANT people with LARGE music collections to use and promote their products? Wouldn't these people (myself included) be the ultimate ambassadors and promoters of their kit? How can this still be an issue? Regardless of the reasons for it (bad design decision in the past, using 16-bit ints over 32- or 64-bits, or a memory limitation), there needs to be some sort of statement from Sonos about this, no?
The curious thing is that whenever someone requests an enhancement, two forum users in particular are very quick to call such requests foolish. Whether or not this is in fact the case is besides the point; such comments do not belong here and I cannot for the life of me understand why Sonos will accept this behaviour.