Reduce idle consumption energy level (currently around 5W)


Userlevel 2
Badge
Sonos devices on average consume about 5 watts each if idle. Having 5 sonos devices around this means 25 watts on average idle consumption. Over a year this is about (25x24hx365) 219 kwh. In Germany where 1 kwh is about 0,30 Euro Cent this then means about 70 Euro (about 100$) just to maintain an idle system. This is just too much and could easily be reduced. Looking at the environmental aspect this gets even more critical: There are around 2.5 million Sonos devices around. This adds up to 110,000,000 kwh or 110 million kwh.

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.

121 replies

Userlevel 1
Agree particularly for the sake of greener environment. Sonos should implement sleep mode in all its players. Their cases are quite hot to touch even when idling for whole day. In the mean time, I can only use timers to switch all Sonos players off before I go to sleep and switch back on in morning.
Maybe you can add some sort of power down update, or add switches to your latest models. When I first set it up, I kept pulling out the mains plug!
Userlevel 2
+1 Some sleep mode would make sense. May be it's possible to implement some "wake on LAN" function that one can en-/disable. So I can decide wether I want "instant on" with higher idle consumption or less consumption at the cost of longer "boottime"...
Userlevel 3
Badge +1
This is a concern when expanding the Sonos family in an household:
Userlevel 2
Badge +1
Initially I thought I was being stupid by unplugging my Sonos Connect after a listening session, but now I can see this is a common concern. If (or when) I buy an addition unit, the issue will become even more significant. As with a previous poster, I have noticed how warm the unit gets even when not "in play mode". This surely must reduce the MTBF
Userlevel 1
Just another deal breaker 😞
It really must be possible to reduce the standby power consumption. This is the one thing that I don't like about Sonos so far.
Userlevel 2
Badge +1
I disconnect most units when not used
I agree, an on/off switch or power down mode is needed. I just had my Play5 replaced because my the connector broke from pulling the plug in and out so many times. Now I have an on/off switch at the Receptacle.
Userlevel 1
Until Sonos has implemented power down and sleep modes in all their player models (not sure whether all existing hardware models support the features), right now the best improvisation is to use a programmable electronic timer (mechanical one is too noisy) at AC power outlet. This way you can avoid material fatigue and trouble in pulling and reinserting the plug regularly (not all AC outlets come with switch particularly those two-pin US sockets). If the features can be implemented in firmware/software of all Sonos media player models, then they should be included in next release of software update. It is the same issue as full support for Apple AirPlay protocol (without resorting to unnecessary use of Apple Airport Express). Sonos product developers should learn to take users feedbacks seriously no matter how much more knowledgable on products than the users. Remember Apple has learned the hard way.
I only use my Play5 for a few hours a day and right now manually unplug it if not in use to avoid the high standby usage. At the very least, there should be a way to turn off the WiFi on the unit if you don't use that as that surely would result in some standby savings.
Userlevel 1
totally agree to the topic starter. But I do not think a wake-up funtionality would maintain the convenience nor rock-solid reliabilty of the product. Just look at all those airplay speaker for 500$ and above and read about the connectivity issues they have all the time. A compromise also supporting recent hardware may be a timer or scheduling service Sunday to Saturday. For example anyone with a job is 40 to 60 hr a week away from home. You know those things which are predictable could easily configured and save energy and money highly appreciated!
Userlevel 4
Badge +6
I agree. In the meantime I suggest using some remote control power switch outlets (Funksteckdosen). I suggest the Fritz!DECT 200 (expensive but it shows energy consumption): http://www.amazon.de/AVM-FRITZ-DECT-intelligente-Steckdose/dp/B00AQ9E77M/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1373051791&sr=8-1&keywords=dect+200&_encoding=UTF8&site-redirect=de&tag=maxrev-21&linkCode=ur2&camp=1638&creative=6742 With this you are able to control the outlets through your smartphone/tablet and you are able to add on/off-switch-plans. It supports google calendar as well. If this is too expensive you can use a usual remote control outlet and combine it with a Gateway so you are able to switch them with an app: http://www.amazon.de/s/ref=sr_nr_p_n_availability_1?rh=n%3A340843031%2Ck%3Alan+gateway+433%2Cp_n_availability%3A419126031&keywords=lan+gateway+433&ie=UTF8&qid=1373051887&_encoding=UTF8&site-redirect=de&tag=maxrev-21&linkCode=ur2&camp=1638&creative=6742 There are apps available called "SteckerChecker" or "PowerSwitch" to control multiple outlets through your smartphone/tablet.
I, too, have concerns with the power consumption and also being bathed in WiFi energy while asleep. I would feel much better if I could sleep the units overnight or on demand. It's really the only concern I have with the Sonos system.
Userlevel 4
Badge +6
Inspired by this post: http://forums.sonos.com/showthread.php?p=201482#post201482 If the Sonos bridge does not obtain an ip or the bridge is offline for 30 minutes then the other Sonos will go to "deepsleep".
Userlevel 2
Badge +1
I also find Sonos devices to be quite wasteful. What I finallly did was buy timers that switch off all Sonos components during the night. It's slightly annoying (you have to maintain the timers) and not optimal, but it's better than nothing. The disadvantage is that in the morning I find all my devices ungrouped and playlists forgotten.
Userlevel 1
When connecting the Sonos devices exclusively to wired switches the built-in WiFi support may be disabled automatically or by an option in the GUI. This would save lots of energy. The unit itself may also be switched to low-enery mode when it's not working and waked up on LAN requests.
Userlevel 6
Badge +4
When playing music my P:5s use ~15W and 8W on stand-by (as measured by a power consumption meter).  Anything that consumes 50% of operational power when in stand-by is not in stand-by or is from a company that does not really care about it's corporate social responsibility or it's consumers' energy costs or where all this wasted energy comes from or goes to.  When operational and with Play units operating without wired ethernet, the Bridge uses 3W and this is the maximum amount of energy I would expect any Sonos product to consume when then the amplifiers are not being powered but the SonosNet is running; I have no knowledge of Sonos' other products so cannot comment on P3, P1, etc but would like to know if anyone has reliable consumption figures (how about you Sonos? - are you prepared to publish your own data?).



I would like my Sonos products to have a couple of power-down states, from the current stand-by through to being in a 'fully off' situation that requires a user to press a button on a Player that turns on the unity and sends a WOL packet for re-connection.  In this way a Sonos device could operate with very, very low consumption.  An intermediate state would be a situation where a software 'WOL' could be operated from a controller via a Bridge.



Come on Sonos. I'm sure there is much more that can be done with the software.  If people are prepared to spend money on timer-switches they care about power-consumption.



I hope you take this up.
I too agree completely. Constantly powering on and off via switches etc defeats the object of the system somewhat. I have speakers mounted quite high up with hidden power sockets.



I am interested in both reducing standby power costs as well as wifi radiation whilst asleep.



I would have thought it would be simple enough to tell all the units to go into receive only mode (listening only) . Once a unit which is wired into the LAN is triggered from a controller, it would wake up and send signals to all the others to wake up. As the CT  100 etc are being phased out, it means that ALL other controllers are going to go through the router etc.



This could be improved by sending specific signals so only specified units would wake up as required.



Also a general timed option to shut down would be good. This is how I have my general wifi set up. I can always override it manually if necessary.



I understand the mesh approach, so maybe if a unit is required to be on as it needs to be for "hopping" to a distant unit, this unit would stay on. To implement wouldn't be so hard as IF a unit was told to be active and then loses a signal it could broadcast to all other units which were switched off as they would STILL be in listening mode.
Userlevel 1
So far there are following suggested features to reduce idle energy consumption:



-- Stand-by or listen-only mode during idle to maintain network connection and wake up when necessary.



-- Programmable timer built into firmware to shut down and power up any player at specific times programmed by users.



-- Mesh network connections must be maintained in wireless network for music distribution from centralised media depositories (NAS or computer).



-- When network module is in operation to maintain wireless network connection for music distribution, all digital amplifiers can be powered down when they are not in use.



To cater to all new/old models of player without resorting to change in hardware, I suppose the least intrusive and cheapest way of implementing the features is to move all networking functionalities from all players to the bridges. Namely all players connect only to bridges but not other players to establish connections within wireless network. Few bridges form a backbone wireless network to route music data and wake-up alerts to the players. These bridges can be powered on all the time but not the players, one of the bridges is connected to router for Internet access through Ethernet link. Obviously bridge consume far less energy than player. Players must be positioned carefully for good sound reproduction but not the bridges, thus ensure better signal transmission and network coverage.



So all hardwares can be maintained as before except firmwares for bridge and player must be updated to support extra power saving features. Bridge should be bundled with every purchase of players as it is no longer optional item. Same as before, few players can share a single bridge.
Presumably all devices in the network can see each other via other devices? So a wake on LAN signal can be received by any device in range of the controller and then propagate from there, this would mean waking the entire network up even if you only wanted music in a single zone but that would be good enough in my book. The devices not in use after the wakeup could go back to sleep after some time out.
So far there are following suggested features to reduce idle energy consumption:



-- Stand-by or listen-only mode during idle to maintain network connection and wake up when necessary.



-- Programmable timer built into firmware to shut down and power up any player at specific times programmed by users.



-- Mesh network connections must be maintained in wireless network for music distribution from centralised media depositories (NAS or computer).



-- When network module is in operation to maintain wireless network connection for music distribution, all digital amplifiers can be powered down when they are not in use.



To cater to all new/old models of player without resorting to change in hardware, I suppose the least intrusive and cheapest way of implementing the features is to move all networking functionalities from all players to the bridges. Namely all players connect only to bridges but not other players to establish connections within wireless network. Few bridges form a backbone wireless network to route music data and wake-up alerts to the players. These bridges can be powered on all the time but not the players, one of the bridges is connected to router for Internet access through Ethernet link. Obviously bridge consume far less energy than player. Players must be positioned carefully for good sound reproduction but not the bridges, thus ensure better signal transmission and network coverage.



So all hardwares can be maintained as before except firmwares for bridge and player must be updated to support extra power saving features. Bridge should be bundled with every purchase of players as it is no longer optional item. Same as before, few players can share a single bridge.





I had thought the timer would be to put it into standby, reduced power for most components and to keep the Wifi in as low a state as possible. Minimal polling back etc, but enough to enable wake on wifi.



I switch off my WiFi in my house at night and sleep noticeably better. With the Sonos, I'm walking around to power things off which is a pain.



Also I switch off my dect so using an AVM dect system wouldn't help me either.



Also why do we need to add extra components, controlled through different systems, when I'm sure a simple Software solution could be found, especially at a time when people are seriously looking at reducing vampire/ standby power to a minimum.



Many systems already reduce WiFi power as well as Dect power automatically. AVM are an example of this.
Userlevel 4
Badge +6
So far there are following suggested features to reduce idle energy consumption:



-- Stand-by or listen-only mode during idle to maintain network connection and wake up when necessary.



-- Programmable timer built into firmware to shut down and power up any player at specific times programmed by users.



-- Mesh network connections must be maintained in wireless network for music distribution from centralised media depositories (NAS or computer).



-- When network module is in operation to maintain wireless network connection for music distribution, all digital amplifiers can be powered down when they are not in use.



To cater to all new/old models of player without resorting to change in hardware, I suppose the least intrusive and cheapest way of implementing the features is to move all networking functionalities from all players to the bridges. Namely all players connect only to bridges but not other players to establish connections within wireless network. Few bridges form a backbone wireless network to route music data and wake-up alerts to the players. These bridges can be powered on all the time but not the players, one of the bridges is connected to router for Internet access through Ethernet link. Obviously bridge consume far less energy than player. Players must be positioned carefully for good sound reproduction but not the bridges, thus ensure better signal transmission and network coverage.



So all hardwares can be maintained as before except firmwares for bridge and player must be updated to support extra power saving features. Bridge should be bundled with every purchase of players as it is no longer optional item. Same as before, few players can share a single bridge.





Ok, I missunderstood the point.



As long Sonos is not able to solve the problem, you could use usual remote outlets. Those does not produce any radiation as they are only passive receivers. e.g.:

http://www.amazon.de/Intertechno-Funksteckdosen-fach-Set-IT-1500/dp/B0054IPASK/



Since last year there is a gateway available as well to control them through an app, but the gateway has not much range and the app is really crap. But maybe in the future it will become better.
Userlevel 2
Badge
... 110 million kwh roughly produce 66, 000, 000 kg co2 emmissions. Every single year. Just for having some SONOS devices idle...
So Stefan, do you advocate having them off totally or as low a power standby as possible. My experience with off totally, which becomes an inconvenience, is that most people give up on it so leave it on . How many people actually switch off their TV's at the socket, their satellite receivers etc.