Hi there,
wolfsonbob. Thanks for posting! Would you mind starting us off by
submitting a diagnostic report and replying with the confirmation number? This will give a little more data for me to advise on next steps. In most cases when a player is in another building from the main Sonos system the signal with severely degrade. This is normally addressed by running an Ethernet drop to the other building from the main network.
The "Roving" ZP80 appears to have dropped out at present, but I submitted a diagnostic anyway, #1998374721.
Running Ethernet to the outbuilding is not a solution. If I wanted to run more wires to that building, I'd wire the speakers out there to an amp and ZP80 in the house! No. If you can't help me to establish a wireless connection, just say so.
The outbuilding (let's call it a gazeebo) has power. It's outfitted with speakers and an amp. I would like stable signal to be provided by a ZP80 ("Roving"). The gazeebo is about ~50' from the house wall. The nearest ZP80s inside the house, "Living Room" and "Master Bedroom", are upstairs and ~20' from that wall, so ~70+' from the gazeebo. The "Bridge", the only wired component, is 15'-ish from both Living Room and Master Bedroom, so the Bridge-to-Roving distance is pushing 90'.
I can easily place another Bridge just outside the house wall in a well-covered location 50' from the gazeebo. It would have line-of-sight to the ZP80 in the gazeebo. Can you tell me if that would be likely to extend my Sonos network to give the gazeebo good coverage?
If not, I'll try switching the whole shebang over to a Standard network, though I've always understood that to be an inferior solution to the Sonosnet/Boost mesh network. I know I can get good WiFi to the gazeebo.
I went out and restarted the Roving ZP80 in the gazeebo. Once it showed up in the controller, I ran another diag, #189013722. Please let me know if you see a way to get good strong signal to the gazeebo.
Here's the latest matrix. Looks better than the one I captured yesterday.
I’d consider a BOOST as opposed to another BRIDGE. I think you would benefit from SonosNet 2, rather than the current SonosNet 1 provided by the BRIDGE.
Note that WiFi isn’t like infrared, it isn’t true line of sight. All that means is that their is less material in between to absorb radio signals.
I’d consider a BOOST as opposed to another BRIDGE. I think you would benefit from SonosNet 2, rather than the current SonosNet 1 provided by the BRIDGE.
Not to the Roving ZP80. It only talks SonosNet 1.0.
Airgetlam - are you suggesting replacing my existing Bridge with a Boost, or saying to add a Boost outside in order to extend the mesh network to the gazeebo?
I don't know the difference between a Bridge and a Boost. Please enlighten me as to the differences.
I do know that all of this stuff is radio, and not line-of-sight. I do know that walls and floors matter. It wasn't necessary to point that out.
I am a long-long-time Sonos customer, since before Bridges even existed. In that time there was only Sonosnet and when Bridges were first offered they were advertised as (a) a way to provide the wired connection and free up a ZP80, and (b) a way to extend the mesh network to the nether realms of your house.
But what with all that Sonos has changed in both function and terminology, I'm not sure if Bridges (or Boosts) still serve an extending purpose, and if so whether they'll do a good job at 50', no obstructions. That's the question I'm ultimately asking.
Can anyone provide clarity?
ratty - Thank you. That was a helpful bit of info. I didn't know there was a 1 and 2, and that old devices were limited to 1.
BOOST is a BRIDGE on steroids. It talks SonosNet 2.0 and has increased interference rejection, e.g. from nearby RF kit.
SonosNet 2.0 is based on WiFi 'n' hardware and can exploit MIMO. It has better range/resilience than 1.0. AFAICR only the first products -- ZP100, ZP80, BRIDGE (maybe DOCK?) -- were limited to 1.0. A 2.0-capable node will converse with a 1.0 node in 1.0.
Based on your matrix signal strengths I'd say that a BRIDGE or BOOST, if placed somewhere about midway to Roving, should act as a wireless relay.
ratty - OK. Can I test this out by moving one of my ZP80s (e.g. Kitchen) to where I would put the added Bridge (or Boost)?
How should I see the matrix change if it does work? Is there any up-to-date doc on how to read the matrix? I've searched the web and only found stuff that seems to be old because it mentions terms that don't appear to be used in the matrix at this time.
Can I test this out by moving one of my ZP80s (e.g. Kitchen) to where I would put the added Bridge (or Boost)?
Yes, try it.
How should I see the matrix change if it does work? Is there any up-to-date doc on how to read the matrix? I've searched the web and only found stuff that seems to be old because it mentions terms that don't appear to be used in the matrix at this time.
Give it a few minutes to settle down. You should see Roving make an active connection to the ZP80 (and vice versa), rather than directly to the wired BRIDGE. Hopefully the matrix cells to/from the ZP80 will be yellow..
There's no official doc on the matrix. It's part of the internal diagnostics. The colours in the left column reflect ambient noise conditions. The colours in the body denote active (not blocked) wireless tunnels in the mesh.
I moved Kitchen to the proposed location of a new Bridge, and after a good while now, in party mode, the matrix is this:
Am I wrong in interpreting it to mean that Roving is connected via Living Room, and Kitchen is connected via Master Bedroom? So Roving is not connecting via Kitchen, as hoped.
You're correct. Kitchen has a lousy connection to Bridge, which is why Roving is preferring Living Room.
For Roving to go via Kitchen would mean three wireless hops: Roving -> Kitchen -> Master Bedroom -> Bridge. This is more 'expensive' than two hops via Living Room. STP works to minimise the cumulative path cost back to the root (or wired secondary in this case: Bridge).
