Hi all, I'm currently moving from high rise condo to a house. Currently, my (small) living room set up is 2 play 1s, sub, and a turntable, which has been great for when I just want to have a drink and spin some jazz alone or have a small group of friends over where listening to music is the focal point (I put critical in quotes in the title because I understand the difference between that and audiophile "critical" listening).
I plan on expanding to a full sonos 5.1. I'm not huge on movies, but my wife is and I imagine kids will enjoy it in the future.
For people who are equal home theater/music enjoy-ers, what's the solution? Is having music playing from rear speakers (especially for music where stereo separation is a part of the experience) as enjoyable for you? Do you just physically move play 1s in front of you in the instances where you are focusing on music? Is it easy on the app itself to go from 5.1 to 2.1 and back?
I've heard people say listening to music on full mode is great, but that seems ideal for party settings.
Answered
"Critical" Music Listening and Surround
Best answer by Kumar
AjTrek1 wrote:
Sonos is great sound but not audiophile.
What audiophile criteria other than psychological ones does Sonos not meet for listening to stereo music?
To the OP: if you cannot separate the two applications to two rooms, consider starting with just a bar/base for HT alone, that may well be enough for movies, leaving the 1 pair + Sub silent. If it isn't, cross the bridge of adding surrounds later. Since it is a little over the top to have two Subs, and pesky to switch one back and forth, you may have to decide where it adds more value and leave it bonded there almost permanently.
1 person likes this
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.
I'm relatively new to Sonos. I got three play 1 over a period of months, two setup as a stereo pair which I really enjoyed. Then I finally got rid of my old CRT TV and eventually got a Playbase for the new tv and 4K blue ray player, pricey but great for both music and TV. Eventually I got around to setting up 5.1 which really adds to watching the TV.
With the surrounds set to full music does sound great but personally I would be happier if could turn the playbase off for the times I want to sit down and listen to an "album". I can sit either side of the room so having a stereo experience would be more enjoyable for me. Having said that I am getting a lot of value out of watching Netflix and the occasional 4K movie in surround so I am not about to unpair the surrounds any time soon and I didn't consider myself a movie guy. 😃
With the surrounds set to full music does sound great but personally I would be happier if could turn the playbase off for the times I want to sit down and listen to an "album". I can sit either side of the room so having a stereo experience would be more enjoyable for me. Having said that I am getting a lot of value out of watching Netflix and the occasional 4K movie in surround so I am not about to unpair the surrounds any time soon and I didn't consider myself a movie guy. 😃
"I saw the Stooges and the MC5"
1 person likes this
Hi BDix...some of the following you probably already know. I'm just going to break-it down a bit more.🆒
To answer your Title question....No having surrounds play music is not for critical listening. When was the last time you went to a concert and the band or artist was behind or to the side of you :? You could move the surrounds to front but to me that's a hassle and the sound stage is way less than accurate with Playbase/Playbar still in the middle.
To explain..Sonos as a full DD5.1 HT setup with Playbase or Playbar, sub and surrounds (Play 1 x 2 or Play 3 x 2 or Sonos One x 2) offers the following settings for music:
_Surrounds set as ambient with Playbase/Playbar at Full.
_Surrounds set to Full Stereo with Playbase/Playbar slightly diminished.
Back to critical listening: Sonos is great sound but not audiophile. Nor is it the best DD5.1 HT sound system. What Sonos offers on both counts is wireless whole-house convenience that's expandable and can integrated with 3rd party speakers or a stereo unit with speakers. You can also (for some Sonos components) utilize line-in option. The sound for both HT and music is above average and will satisfy all but the most demanding 99% of time (IMO).
My HT setup is Playbar, sub and Play 3 x 2 for surrounds. In the same area for Music I have Play 5-2nd Gen x 2 with sub.
I hope this helps. Cheers!
To answer your Title question....No having surrounds play music is not for critical listening. When was the last time you went to a concert and the band or artist was behind or to the side of you :? You could move the surrounds to front but to me that's a hassle and the sound stage is way less than accurate with Playbase/Playbar still in the middle.
To explain..Sonos as a full DD5.1 HT setup with Playbase or Playbar, sub and surrounds (Play 1 x 2 or Play 3 x 2 or Sonos One x 2) offers the following settings for music:
_Surrounds set as ambient with Playbase/Playbar at Full.
_Surrounds set to Full Stereo with Playbase/Playbar slightly diminished.
Back to critical listening: Sonos is great sound but not audiophile. Nor is it the best DD5.1 HT sound system. What Sonos offers on both counts is wireless whole-house convenience that's expandable and can integrated with 3rd party speakers or a stereo unit with speakers. You can also (for some Sonos components) utilize line-in option. The sound for both HT and music is above average and will satisfy all but the most demanding 99% of time (IMO).
My HT setup is Playbar, sub and Play 3 x 2 for surrounds. In the same area for Music I have Play 5-2nd Gen x 2 with sub.
I hope this helps. Cheers!
Together Everyone Achieves More = T.E.A.M.
AjTrek1 wrote:
Sonos is great sound but not audiophile.
What audiophile criteria other than psychological ones does Sonos not meet for listening to stereo music?
To the OP: if you cannot separate the two applications to two rooms, consider starting with just a bar/base for HT alone, that may well be enough for movies, leaving the 1 pair + Sub silent. If it isn't, cross the bridge of adding surrounds later. Since it is a little over the top to have two Subs, and pesky to switch one back and forth, you may have to decide where it adds more value and leave it bonded there almost permanently.
BDix wrote:
when I just want to have a drink and spin some jazz alone or have a small group of friends over where listening to music is the focal point (I put critical in quotes in the title because I understand the difference between that and audiophile "critical" listening).
I have lived in the audiophile wonderland of rabbit holes that go nowhere useful for ten years as some basis for saying that there is no difference in the two kinds of listening you refer to above, and you are selling the kind you do short for no valid reason if music is a focal point of both.
And sounding even better when alone late at night after couple of drinks. My all time number one audiophile tweak, that.
Unless you are referring to audiophile "critical" listening as when music is just used as a test signal for running a rig that tries hard to look the bridge of a starship.
Silverthorn wrote:
With the surrounds set to full music does sound great but personally I would be happier if could turn the playbase off for the times I want to sit down and listen to an "album". I can sit either side of the room so having a stereo experience would be more enjoyable for me.
Hi Silverthorn
When budget permits (assuming you have the space) you might consider two Play 5's in the front area. They have a decent low end which can negate the use of a sub.
Cheers!
Kumar wrote:
AjTrek1 wrote:
Sonos is great sound but not audiophile.
What audiophile criteria other than psychological ones does Sonos not meet for listening to stereo music?
So in effect you’re saying that if you can’t touch it then one’s sense of hearing is psychological. Additionally, by that reasoning using Sonos Trueplay is a waste of time because it’s all psychological? By that reasoning those that can surmise when a motor cars engine isn’t running properly by listening to it are having a psychological episode.
I could go on for days citing references where one’s sense of hearing is a definitive factor. But wait...that’s all psychological.
Granted not many today know the difference between the sound of CD and that of a vinyl recording. Many don’t know that Dolby originally (still today) referenced a Noise Reduction Technology for magnetic tape recordings. Even so many claimed they couldn’t discern a difference with Dolby NR on or off so it must have been all psychological to those who claimed they could.
As great as Sonos speakers sound if it is your opinion that the technology used to get music to a Sonos speaker (OTA) is just as good as a comparable wired speaker in terms of materials and electronics then so be it. Therefore, Sonos if you’re listening bring on BT in your next redesign as the degradation in sound doesn’t occur...it’s all psychological :8
Cheers!
There is a very important definition problem here that needs to first be addressed, I realise. When you say " Sonos is great sound but not audiophile", a debate about this claim needs the term "audiophile" used in it to be well defined. I look forward to getting that baseline established by way of this definition if this discussion is to not meander into a waste of time. What is your definition of "audiophile" in the context of that claim?
Sonos employs more advanced tech - that of active speakers - than that in a typical wired passive speaker. But that isn't the point. Unless you are saying that because Sonos gets its music wirelessly it cannot be as good for sound quality as a wired speaker, all other things being equal. Are you saying that? Then we should debate just this bit too, once we are past the first definition.
That done, my question is what, in your opinion, is missing in - let's say a 5 pair + Sub - compared to an audiophile stereo system. Wired signals?
Moving on to psychological reasons I mean things like:
1. Price
2. Reputation among "audiophiles", or lack of it
3. Appearance and lack of "audiophile" demanded eye candy like VU meters
to name a few.
I also completely fail to understand the logic in your leap in accusing me of saying that using Trueplay is a waste of time being psychological. Or that assessing the state of tune of an engine by listening to it is a psychological phenomenon. Neither of the two are. One possibility for this disconnect is we are operating with two different definitions of the word "psychological". Mine is this, from a dictionary: "affecting, or arising in the mind; related to the mental and emotional state of a person". What has that go to do with either Trueplay or engine tune assessment by ear? The first is to do with room response DSP, the second is a ear/brain skill developed over time.
Sonos employs more advanced tech - that of active speakers - than that in a typical wired passive speaker. But that isn't the point. Unless you are saying that because Sonos gets its music wirelessly it cannot be as good for sound quality as a wired speaker, all other things being equal. Are you saying that? Then we should debate just this bit too, once we are past the first definition.
That done, my question is what, in your opinion, is missing in - let's say a 5 pair + Sub - compared to an audiophile stereo system. Wired signals?
Moving on to psychological reasons I mean things like:
1. Price
2. Reputation among "audiophiles", or lack of it
3. Appearance and lack of "audiophile" demanded eye candy like VU meters
to name a few.
I also completely fail to understand the logic in your leap in accusing me of saying that using Trueplay is a waste of time being psychological. Or that assessing the state of tune of an engine by listening to it is a psychological phenomenon. Neither of the two are. One possibility for this disconnect is we are operating with two different definitions of the word "psychological". Mine is this, from a dictionary: "affecting, or arising in the mind; related to the mental and emotional state of a person". What has that go to do with either Trueplay or engine tune assessment by ear? The first is to do with room response DSP, the second is a ear/brain skill developed over time.
AjTrek1 wrote:
As great as Sonos speakers sound if it is your opinion that the technology used to get music to a Sonos speaker (OTA) is just as good as a comparable wired speaker in terms of materials and electronics then so be it.
One way to debate constructively is to narrow its scope down to just this intriguing bit quoted.
Are you then also suggesting that sound quality from Sonos speakers would improve if they were to be wired via their LAN ports?
My reason to not have another debate over the larger subject is because this has been done in this forum years ago in many threads, probably to the death. Two threads that I started years ago are linked below for anyone interested in more of the audiophile phenomenon/disease. There must be many more.
https://en.community.sonos.com/what-to-get-228989/sonos-now-a-high-end-audio-system-contender-30281
https://en.community.sonos.com/advanced-setups-229000/high-end-thinking-and-audiophiles-43979
If there are any rebuttals to any specific points in those threads, the place to offer these is there, I suggest.
And here is one that should clinch the argument that Audiophile now includes Wireless, now that audiophile brand Dynaudio offers it:-))
https://en.community.sonos.com/music-culture-the-industry-228997/dynaudio-wireless-systems-6768084
https://en.community.sonos.com/what-to-get-228989/sonos-now-a-high-end-audio-system-contender-30281
https://en.community.sonos.com/advanced-setups-229000/high-end-thinking-and-audiophiles-43979
If there are any rebuttals to any specific points in those threads, the place to offer these is there, I suggest.
And here is one that should clinch the argument that Audiophile now includes Wireless, now that audiophile brand Dynaudio offers it:-))
https://en.community.sonos.com/music-culture-the-industry-228997/dynaudio-wireless-systems-6768084
I don’t know how you expected that comment to be interpreted other than to say that classifying Sonos speakers not to be akin to Audiophile speakers is nothing but psychological babble. Then in another post you say that you were equating psychological to reference:
1. Price
2. Reputation among "audiophiles", or lack of it
3. Appearance and lack of "audiophile" demanded eye candy like VU meters
to name a few.
By the numbers:
How you equate Price as a psychological is beyond me. Price is very tangible. It’s higher, lower or equal to a comparable product. By the same reasoning differences in price doesn’t necessarily mean a better or lessor product.
As for Reputation when a speaker garners such it’s not overnight. It’s deemed as such by individuals who have extensive listening experience. By the same token a speaker can lose “Audiophile” status due to changes in manufacturing techniques and materials which influence sound reproduction making a newer model less desirable versus its predecessor for critical listening.
Regarding Appearance_I’ve never seen a speaker (since that’s what we are discussing here) with a VU meter. Granted there are some speakers on the market with some unique visually aesthetic designs but that does not qualify them as audiophile.
So my question (now that you’ve provided your explanation) just what were you trying to convey in your original post if not to say that Audiophile listening is psychological? One has to be careful as to when and how they interject terminology in a seemly random (possibly condescending) manner.
Audiophile listening is a comparative analysis. What subtle nuances are heard in one speaker that cannot be discerned in another? Whether you agree or not my Definitive Technology BP30’s IMO outperform my Sonos Play 5’s. I’m sure there are other speakers that will outperform the Def Techs.
Audiophile listening can’t be defined in a “box” as you would seem to have it. It’s a very real listening experience that not everyone can enjoy and/or appreciate.
The Dynaudio speakers you reference (and I might say in a somewhat antagonistic manner) appear to be very promising when delivering sound in a wireless mode. However, given the fining tuning that can be had I’d be hesitant to place the Play 5’s in the same category (Focus 20 XD) as being audiophile. See attachment.
I’ll not say anymore in this post. As far I’m concerned our opinions have been expressed regarding “audiophile”. Suffice it to say that at the end-of-the-day we can agree to disagree on certain points.
Cheers!
1. Price
2. Reputation among "audiophiles", or lack of it
3. Appearance and lack of "audiophile" demanded eye candy like VU meters
to name a few.
By the numbers:
How you equate Price as a psychological is beyond me. Price is very tangible. It’s higher, lower or equal to a comparable product. By the same reasoning differences in price doesn’t necessarily mean a better or lessor product.
As for Reputation when a speaker garners such it’s not overnight. It’s deemed as such by individuals who have extensive listening experience. By the same token a speaker can lose “Audiophile” status due to changes in manufacturing techniques and materials which influence sound reproduction making a newer model less desirable versus its predecessor for critical listening.
Regarding Appearance_I’ve never seen a speaker (since that’s what we are discussing here) with a VU meter. Granted there are some speakers on the market with some unique visually aesthetic designs but that does not qualify them as audiophile.
So my question (now that you’ve provided your explanation) just what were you trying to convey in your original post if not to say that Audiophile listening is psychological? One has to be careful as to when and how they interject terminology in a seemly random (possibly condescending) manner.
Audiophile listening is a comparative analysis. What subtle nuances are heard in one speaker that cannot be discerned in another? Whether you agree or not my Definitive Technology BP30’s IMO outperform my Sonos Play 5’s. I’m sure there are other speakers that will outperform the Def Techs.
Audiophile listening can’t be defined in a “box” as you would seem to have it. It’s a very real listening experience that not everyone can enjoy and/or appreciate.
The Dynaudio speakers you reference (and I might say in a somewhat antagonistic manner) appear to be very promising when delivering sound in a wireless mode. However, given the fining tuning that can be had I’d be hesitant to place the Play 5’s in the same category (Focus 20 XD) as being audiophile. See attachment.
I’ll not say anymore in this post. As far I’m concerned our opinions have been expressed regarding “audiophile”. Suffice it to say that at the end-of-the-day we can agree to disagree on certain points.
Cheers!
AjTrek1 wrote:
It’s a very real listening experience that not everyone can enjoy and/or appreciate.
Based just on that judgement, agreeing to disagree would certainly be the most appropriate thing to do.
Digressing into some fun and games for others here - while the OP comes back with questions if any - on the fertile subject of audiophile foibles:
Under a cartoon: " The two things that really drew me to vinyl were the expense and the inconvenience."
For this and many more hilarious cartoons in the same vein, type - audiophile cartoons - in Google and look under images in the returned search. Every day deserves its share of laughs and there are plenty to be had here for those that have some acquaintance with that world.
To be fair, the community does know how to laugh at itself, as this link shows:
http://www.ultrahighendreview.com/audiophile-cartoons/
Under a cartoon: " The two things that really drew me to vinyl were the expense and the inconvenience."
For this and many more hilarious cartoons in the same vein, type - audiophile cartoons - in Google and look under images in the returned search. Every day deserves its share of laughs and there are plenty to be had here for those that have some acquaintance with that world.
To be fair, the community does know how to laugh at itself, as this link shows:
http://www.ultrahighendreview.com/audiophile-cartoons/
AjTrek1 wrote:
Silverthorn wrote:
With the surrounds set to full music does sound great but personally I would be happier if could turn the playbase off for the times I want to sit down and listen to an "album". I can sit either side of the room so having a stereo experience would be more enjoyable for me.
Hi Silverthorn
When budget permits (assuming you have the space) you might consider two Play 5's in the front area. They have a decent low end which can negate the use of a sub.
Cheers!
I've tested two Play 5's VS. 1 Play 1's with a Sub and the latter is much better - at least in a bigger room and provided you use Trueplay.
My solution für TV/Music: Connecting the TV via Sonos:Connect with the 1 Play 1's and the Sub. The sound is great, I don't miss Surround with this setup. But there is one disadvantage: You have to connect all the components via network cable and switch, otherwise there are audio dropofs. So it isn't the smartest solution.
It would be perfect if you can turn of the Playbar / Playbase / Beam when listening to music!
FromThis is 1 month old but I'll add to it.
I have a dedicated music room with a 5 way active horn speaker system in there..
We have a den room and I had two Sonos Ones in there as a stereo pair.
I really enjoyed the stereo sound for casual listening. I had them quite far apart. Great separation..
I'm trialling a Beam using the Ones as rears..
The TV sound is much improved and of course great for films.
The stereo sound is only okay'ish.
It's basically all front speaker / beam.
There's a bit of course stereo separation going on but not much at the front.
It would be nice to easily switch between the two setups. As I can sit either way that would work nicely.
I need to play with positioning more but I've def. lost something from the usual seat.
Uodate, just made the volume of all 3 units the same for music - much better.
I have a dedicated music room with a 5 way active horn speaker system in there..
We have a den room and I had two Sonos Ones in there as a stereo pair.
I really enjoyed the stereo sound for casual listening. I had them quite far apart. Great separation..
I'm trialling a Beam using the Ones as rears..
The TV sound is much improved and of course great for films.
The stereo sound is only okay'ish.
It's basically all front speaker / beam.
There's a bit of course stereo separation going on but not much at the front.
It would be nice to easily switch between the two setups. As I can sit either way that would work nicely.
I need to play with positioning more but I've def. lost something from the usual seat.
Uodate, just made the volume of all 3 units the same for music - much better.
AjTrek1 wrote:
So in effect you’re saying that if you can’t touch it then one’s sense of hearing is psychological. Additionally, by that reasoning using Sonos Trueplay is a waste of time because it’s all psychological? By that reasoning those that can surmise when a motor cars engine isn’t running properly by listening to it are having a psychological episode.
I could go on for days citing references where one’s sense of hearing is a definitive factor. But wait...that’s all psychological.
How in the world is Trueplay psychological? It corrects for room anomalies, using DSP to ensure a flatter, truer repsonse.
Psychological things that make audiophools drool are touchy freely things that do nothing to the sound, like thick faceplates, solid metal knobs, thick cables, etc. Also things that actually degrade the sound, like SET tube amps with 10% distortion; you should hear the fools rhapsodise over their flea-watt SETs, it’s hilarious. There are very expensive speakers which have absolutely no intention of flat response. At least Stereophile measurements show the story, if their silly subjective reviews don’t. Most of the audiophile press doesn’t even bother with the objective measurements, because they’re expensive to perform, and their audience doesn’t have the technical expertise to understand them, nor the intelligence to care.
Kumar wrote:
Digressing into some fun and games for others here - while the OP comes back with questions if any - on the fertile subject of audiophile foibles:
Under a cartoon: " The two things that really drew me to vinyl were the expense and the inconvenience."
For this and many more hilarious cartoons in the same vein, type - audiophile cartoons - in Google and look under images in the returned search. Every day deserves its share of laughs and there are plenty to be had here for those that have some acquaintance with that world.
To be fair, the community does know how to laugh at itself, as this link shows:
http://www.ultrahighendreview.com/audiophile-cartoons/
Under a cartoon: " The two things that really drew me to vinyl were the expense and the inconvenience."
For this and many more hilarious cartoons in the same vein, type - audiophile cartoons - in Google and look under images in the returned search. Every day deserves its share of laughs and there are plenty to be had here for those that have some acquaintance with that world.
To be fair, the community does know how to laugh at itself, as this link shows:
http://www.ultrahighendreview.com/audiophile-cartoons/
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.