What happened to the Sonos app? A technical analysis

Just to inject a dose of reality here: 99 out of 100 Sonos product owner/users (including me) have only the vaguest clue what you tech-savvy folks are talking about.

I grew up with an all-in-one RCA Victor phonograph - a turntable in a box with a tube amp and loudspeaker tucked in up front. I had a transistor radio with a knurled wheel on one side to turn it on and adjust volume, a knurled wheel on the opposite side to ‘tune’ the station. It brought me baseball games (Mel Allen called the Yankees, The Ol’ Professor was their manager and they just kept on winning) and Top 40 AM radio.

Over the years I went from there to a more ‘sophisticated’ phonograph in a suitcase (a KLH Model Eleven) to various more or less ‘audiophile’ amps, loudspeakers, turntables, tape decks, cd players.

At no point did I need to become an electrical or recording engineer to listen to music. I never wanted and still do not want to become a software engineer or coder in order to listen to music. It’s supposed to just work, without a lot of fuss.

When music playback commenced its transition from CDs to music raining down from streaming services and stored on local ‘drives,’ most of us approached the new medium with trepidation. Because it seemed we would have to learn and master a whole bunch of stuff when all we wanted to do was flip a switch and play recorded music. And we feared we’d start buying stuff and never figure out how it works.

Sonos has succeeded thus far by providing music for dummies like me. Their active loudspeakers sound pretty decent and don’t take up lots of space; setup is even easier than hooking up amps and speakers and turntables; most of all the ‘controller’ requires no special training or skill and is simple to use.

Hundreds of thousands or perhaps a million or more of us derived considerable pleasure listening to music living in the Sonos universe.

Or that was how it was until early May, when Sonos decided it was time we all got ‘courageous’ and marched us off to the Brave New World as Sonos chooses to define it.

I don’t know why or how Sonos screwed this up so badly. I don’t know what digital wizardry might be required to get things working as well as they did in April 2024 again. But I do know if things don’t return to normal pretty quickly, Sonos probably will not survive.

Because there really were no other ‘user friendly’ digital music playback options for people like me when I bought my first Play1 way back when, and then expanded my system to include multiple pairs of newer and more elaborate Sonos speakers. Most Sonos owner/users are people just like me who built expanded Sonos home networks the same way.

But there are other options today. We aren’t going to stick around forever if Sonos doesn’t address our needs. We’re not here because we enjoy a technical challenge or want to ponder the economics of Sonos’ business. We’re here to listen to music. If Sonos doesn’t grok that real fast, it’s likely going to be ‘hasta la bye bye.’

If I follow what you are asking, in the AV world, then Linkplay is probably the most visible and up to date example. While they sell their own software and hardware under the WiiM brand, they also license the software, hardware and custom design to 3rd parties. You would likely be surprised to find where their hardware and software has ended up.

Some Linkplay 3rd parties are nothing other than a re-skin, some offer additional enhancements to try and differentiate. The mobile app from multiple brands work across different brand hardware. Some 3rd parties have gone further and locked the hardware/software to only work with their brand.

As box shifters they have an additional problem with making their system accessible by customers. The devices contain IP they don’t own and have access to protected content services so they’d find their supplier contract cut off if they made it accessible. Dolby aren’t going to sit back and go that’s fine if Sonos made access to their devices available to everyone again. Content providers won’t have happy smiles as every Sonos owner gets the Sonos specific access keys which makes decoding their content trivial.

I doubt it was happy parties between Tidal and iFi when iFi’s tidal connect code was published online. That became the basis for many open source Tidal Connect implementations, which is why they are a bit hit and miss and keep breaking when Tidal change things. In reality Tidal probably benefitted even though they never officially support it.

On the flip side, if you look at companies who’s hardware/software is subscription based, Roon stand out as an obvious example of a company providing hardware, an OS for Intel Nucs and server software which anyone can poke around in. Volumio is similar. nVidia provide all the tools you need to access their OS or build your own Linux OS for an Nvidia shield TV.

The audio world is slowly being dragged kicking and screaming into the modern age, but most audio only brands have this huge problem that they operate in an insular box shifting world still, but because they just sell players not the content they need to try and lock you into their hardware system.

The next couple of years could be interesting for audio device independence. The CSA/Matter/Chip (whatever they are calling themselves this week) foundation are starting to look into an Audio specification for Matter. They already have a Video casting specification and Amazon have added it to 2024 Fire TVs.

A request was raised to provide a modern Audio casting specification, including things like multiroom support. If it is done right, then instead of choosing which manufacture system will lock you in, you buy any device with Matter audio support. Sonos are a member of Matter, I wouldn’t call them a significant player when you look at the other companies involved who are also content providers and/or have far deeper pockets and bigger ambitions.

I agree and there is no reason anyone should need to be. Sonos have failed their ease of use and just works when people need to start digging around in networks, buying new WiFi access points or routers.

They use the same underlying technologies and specifications as everyone else, which haven’t changed significantly in 10+ years. Not everything that was acceptable when they started back in 2005 is still acceptable on a modern network/internet and networks have evolved.

Sonos haven’t evolved, got complacent and are now being squeezed from all sides without a significant unique selling point anymore imo. As a result they’re in a crowded market and rather than trying to carve out a USP again, are just releasing me too products into already crowded markets. Neither the Ace headphones, the rumoured Android media player or the new Arc scream must buy products.

I think it makes no difference to the top 4 streaming providers (excluding China) ie Spotify, Amazon, Apple, YouTube Music whether their service works with Sonos natively or not.

Unless they can stand out with a unique selling point, integration, ease of use… then the price premium they charge isn’t worth it.

I started out with Sonos back in 2007 because after 2 years and being my own tech support for slimserver, initially enjoying the fiddling, I wanted something that just worked all the time. The extra £100 per endpoint vs a squeeze player + amp was a no brainer vs the cost of time I spent fixing my slimserver or dealing with broken plugins.

Fast forward to a couple of years ago and I looked at the Arc + Sub + Era 300s for a HT setup. The price premium and sound quality wasn’t worth it vs the competition and multi room for the HT setup wasn’t worth sacrificing features and audio quality for.

Even the Amp + Sub mini which will only work with Sonos are a difficult justification these days when alternative receivers/amps with better room correction + Sub will run rings around them for less money.

The most cost realistic Sonos speakers these days come from Ikea, anything Sonos branded has an increasing number of alternatives for similar or less money.

To throw in another related topic, why have Sonos quietly introduced the web app and with no way to disable it and no multifactor account access. This is not acceptable in todays world.

I can see my Sonos unit have setup permanent sessions with AWS EC2 instances for remote access

My guess, the main overriding reason would be saving money. It is the replacement for the desktop controller applications.

Someone will have convinced senior exec it is a cheaper and better solution than having individual desktop applications to maintain.

It is another poorly implemented and badly executed solution for a problem the majority of users never had. For the majority of users it adds another unnecessary dependency on the cloud services.

The desktop Mac app has been updated a few times since the new primary app went live, including this week. If the web app was to replace the desktop app, I don’t see why they would bother giving ongoing attention to the desktop apps (the Mac app, don’t forget, received very little attention for years). 
I don’t understand your point about dependency on cloud services. Most of the apps on your phone depend on cloud services and when implemented properly aren’t even noticeable. You wouldn’t be talking about cloud services at all if Sonos had got it right first time, in the same way you won’t be talking about it when they fix it.

Why can’t sonos let us run webb app on safari browser, it fails something about wrong screen size formatting or similar

I only have pc at work

I certainly would be talking about/considering cloud service dependence for my audio devices, the same as it is a significant consideration and something I don’t want as a requirement for my smart lighting, heating or other smart home devices to require.

My heating and lighting was specifically chosen because it all works, including the phone/tablet controls without internet access. For my audio devices, while streaming services obviously won’t work, there is no valid beneficial to the buyer reason why local audio playback and control should stop.

There is a big difference between phone/tablet apps for local device control using cloud services for additional functionality and apps depending on cloud services to operate. A requirement of Apple HomeKit devices and Matter is for local operation without internet access. A large number of German designed smart home devices are designed for operation without a hard dependency on cloud services.

There is no reason for apps which control in home devices to have a hard dependency on cloud services for local control. That is a different use case to an app which is a local interface to an online only service.

The old app would only notify if it couldn’t login to my Sonos account, but wouldn’t stop working for local control. Moving between Sonos systems in different locations the app would handle the change in devices around it and display what it found.

The direction the new app is going is looks to be putting hard dependencies on the availability of Sonos cloud services and preventing operation if those external  dependencies fail.

We clearly have different use cases for apps on our phones/tablets, apart from apps designed to access online only services, most of the apps I use operate the same without continuous internet access, the majority of their online calls are for ad/tracking/logging which are blocked by my pihole and have zero impact on the apps operation.

On my Mac, I’m running Safari v17.5 (17618.2.12.111.5, 17618) and the web app is working fine here. 
What screen resolution do you have your Mac display set to?

i was trying to use it on iphone

I think they are referring to Safari on their phone, which the Sonos web app is not designed for, there is the new mobile app for that (and we know how well that is working out).

Sonos has loyal, but somewhat older and somewhat complacent user base. Rich enough to buy speakers and having the space and housing to place them around but not willing to invest in becoming “tech savvy” as some of them call using a manual.

They share the last point with a new set of users, but not the first points. My kids only use headphones/Airpods with their phones. The Sonos speakers in their rooms do not get any use - only the bathroom speaker is used by them. When they move out there first housing will be shared and so the headphones will still be used. I do not see them buy any speakers or having the housing to place speakers. I think Sonos saw this demographic to and it scared the living daylights out of them.

I can see the move by Sonos to the headphones and more web based orientation. I still disagree with how they handled the introduction of the new app and the missing consideration they gave to their current user base. It seems the move to the cloud does not go lightly with a large percentage of the current users whose networks are not perfect.

Introducing the app in an unfinished state and dropping http and SMBv1 access to music libraries at almost the same time as introducing the new app only compounded the problem, again forgetting the current user base.

Understood. It wasn’t clear as you mentioned a PC at work. I get it now.

But it could be designed for as a double check, might be useful, as i have duplicate systems, any idea how i combine them

My playbar is stuck in the 2nd one on its own..

I would suggest unplugging them all and the router, and close the app. Then turn the router back on, let it reboot fully, then turn the speakers on one by one, letting them reboot before moving to the next. Start with the Playbar, then sub, then surrounds. Then reopen the app.

Forgive me if you’ve done this already!!

Thanks Rhonny i’ll give it a go, without looking at webb app i had no idea i had duplicate named systems, i just kept trying to add surrounds and playbar could no longer find them, all was fine till i did this weeks update. My guess is the 2 x play1s as surrounds didn’t update properly till i power cycled playbar, then ran update again, then i lost the playbar in this 2nd system.

So sonos thinks i have 2 homes with 2 systems?

Could be! 

I’m trying to think what happened when I had that issue, after adjusting my network some months ago. I had a duplicate too. I’m pretty sure it just needed either a power cycle OR the sub and surrounds needed re-adding to the Arc. Whatever I did, it then righted itself, removing the duplicate.

Try power cycling first. If that doesn't work (which I’m hopeful it will), maybe go to Disconnect Sub and Disconnect Surrounds, then then try adding the Sub and Surrounds back on once more.

@paulrw you accidentally created two Households. (Or the app did, who knows?).

You need to factory reset the “lone” device, then Add it to the existing household.

If you want to confirm this diagnosis first, use my app “Phonos Plus” for iOS that will show you the household ID that each device is attached to. You will find them to be different on the “lone” device.

Hi @paulrw

This would normally be correct, but in this particular case it is something weirder going on. Please do NOT reset any products. I’ll get back to you on your thread:

Is it not a the same Playbar showing as a duplicate? That was the impression I had, rather than a second unit?

Edit: In any case, I will defer to Corry!

Try setting the browser to run in Desktop Mode. It may work better but generally it's not a great experience unless you like scrolling and waiting for things to appear and scrolling again etc…. Even the queue for example.

@106rallye: Those ‘older and complacent users’ have been the Sonos target market for quite some time and will continue to be a lucrative sector into the future. For one thing, today’s young buyers will be tomorrow’s ‘older and complacent users,’ as sure as the sun will rise in the East and set in the West. 

For another, young people do want to emerge from their smartphone/earbud/headset bubbles now and then and use loudspeakers. There’s this thing called a ‘party’ even us geezers remember.

And for another, ‘older and complacent users’ build homes, sometimes they have multiple homes with multiple rooms, and want speakers in some or all of those rooms. My wife does architectural and interior design work and clients want sound systems. She has often suggested Sonos as a practical, unobtrusive and cost-effective solution. Believe me, after this experience, that ain’t happening anymore.

I don’t think there’s any way to spin or sugar coat it. The past few months have tarnished the Sonos brand in a big way; and I cannot imagine a scenario in which it will prove to be a positive for the Sonos bottom line.

The top system has 2 x play1 and sub in it (these were bonded to playbar on update)

The bottom system just has the playbar in it

No devices are duplicated, but they can’t see each other across systems.

The sub still works with playbar but i can’t control it in app, it’s really messed up i think.

All devices appear in iphone app, but if i move play1s to the same room as playbar, crazy stuff happens, playbar loses tv sound and i have to reboot tv. Mrs wasn’t happy she was in middle of coranation street

On iPhone I’ve done this:

1. Using Safari, login at play.sonos.com and save login info to iCloud

2. Once the page opens, tap Aa on address bar and from menu select Website Settings >  Request Desktop Website. Tap Done.  (This will load that website as the required desktop version in the future.)

3. Tap on Share icon and tap Add to Home Screen. Give the icon a name. 

4. Start controlling Sonos using that Home Screen icon. (It remembers the session quite long but log in again if asked, Safari should ask whether to use the stored login info.) 

Turn iPhone landscape to see a better view. 

On iPad, it’s been enough to add the website via the Share > Add to Home Screen. The page layout is fine as is. 
 

The key is the desktop website view and Safari allows to define that setting by website unlike Chrome which has a global setting.

We might at least agree on your last sentence: Sonos has totally mismanaged this.