Reduce idle consumption energy level (currently around 5W)
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.
Page 4 / 5
?? Were talking about idle and power consumption...
We're talking about standby power consumption.
Regulation of corporate polluters is the answer.
+1
Why no response from SONOS on this very urgent problem or even much better why still wait for a good solution
They're arrogant! They're too popular to notice that all people aren't 100% happy with the product. They don't listen. I love the speakers, but don't like the customer care + software developement at all.
At least make sure the devices remebers the group assignment and or the radio station they were plaing before they were powered off so I can use a simple timer between SONOS and the wall socket and just cut power between midnight and 6AM to save at least some energy. I really don't need 10 SONOS play wasting 4-6W when I'm sleeping.
Userlevel 4
+6
@Sonos
1.) Please realize a simple energy saving schedule so the system can be send to standby at night after all boxes are muted/paused/stopped.
2.) Or add a simple feature in the controller based on WoL that sends a sleep-command to the bridge so it disconnects all sonos boxes. The next time someone opened the controller it appears a popup "wake up sonos?" and by that the bridge becomes active again. As long the bridge is in sleep mode no Sonos box is able to connect to the bridge. After 2 minutes they should give up and go to sleep for ca 30 minutes trying a re-connect. Additionally they should wake up if I press a hardware button.
1.) Please realize a simple energy saving schedule so the system can be send to standby at night after all boxes are muted/paused/stopped.
2.) Or add a simple feature in the controller based on WoL that sends a sleep-command to the bridge so it disconnects all sonos boxes. The next time someone opened the controller it appears a popup "wake up sonos?" and by that the bridge becomes active again. As long the bridge is in sleep mode no Sonos box is able to connect to the bridge. After 2 minutes they should give up and go to sleep for ca 30 minutes trying a re-connect. Additionally they should wake up if I press a hardware button.
Does this cause problems when turning it back on?.. I always have to set up the Sonos player each time I turn it back on, which involves plugging it into the router down stairs, which is very time consuming. At the moment I don't use it for this very reason.
Userlevel 4
+6
The only disadvantage of disconnecting a Sonos is that the playlist will be deleted. If you are completely losing the connection this should be a general problem in your setup. I disconnect my Sonos in the home office every day (automatically). In the living room I leave the playbar connected to avoid long boot up times, but all other Sonos (SUB, Play:3) of this 5.1. setup are disconnected at night (automatically). And even this works perfectly. Either the playbar works alone or if the other Sonos come back, it will automatically re-group the setup. Because the playbar stays active every time the playlist is not deleted. But finally I really like to see a playlist staying active after power-off as well.
It's not difficult to put a scheduler in now is it. Please a SONOS for the sake of the environment.... Add one!
Userlevel 5
+4
For people who wire all of their players you can actually reduce the 'low power' (or 'idle') energy consumption by disabling the internal Wi-Fi hardware. For example, rather than 5W on idle it'll be around 3 to 2W instead, just by disabling the Wi-Fi hardware. It may not be much but when looked at in regards to the overall scheme of things it can add up to quite a big bit of power saving.
I've done this myself and used equipment to measure the power draw with and without this hardware enabled.
While this is not officially supported by SONOS it is not something that will damage or hinder the capabilities of your players or system, SONOS just prefer the Wi-Fi aways be on in the off chance that you may decide to go wireless with one or more players.
You can give it a shot: http://vowe.net/archives/013907.html
I've done this myself and used equipment to measure the power draw with and without this hardware enabled.
While this is not officially supported by SONOS it is not something that will damage or hinder the capabilities of your players or system, SONOS just prefer the Wi-Fi aways be on in the off chance that you may decide to go wireless with one or more players.
You can give it a shot: http://vowe.net/archives/013907.html
Userlevel 5
+4
(Along with Ed, above) I encourage Sonos and Sonos users to look at Apple TV as an example of an always-ready, WiFi multimedia device that uses less than 1W in standby mode. There's no reason my Sonos Connect should use 5-6 Watts in standby mode (I measured using a Kill-a-Watt power meter. My Play:1 also uses 5-6 Watts after being idle 3 minutes, which is more than the 3.4 Watts published by Sonos) https://www.apple.com/environment/reports/docs/AppleTV_Product_Environmental_Report_2012.pdf
The Median number of rooms in a U.S. home is 4 to 6. Five Sonos devices running 5 Watts for 20hrs/day would use roughly 200 kWh per year. At $0.10/kWh, that's $20 a year. NRDC published a related report on the hidden costs to consumers, public health, and the environment of always-on device architecture, called "Lowering the Cost of Play." http://www.nrdc.org/energy/game-consoles/lowering-the-cost-of-play.asp
Certainly, any given user has a choice whether they care about standby power use. But, when the costs are hidden and the manufacturer fails to make simple choices to be more efficient, we all pay the price by more fossil-fueled power plants running around the clock to fuel "energy-stupid" devices.
For people who wire all of their players you can actually reduce the 'low power' (or 'idle') energy consumption by disabling the internal Wi-Fi hardware. For example, rather than 5W on idle it'll be around 3 to 2W instead, just by disabling the Wi-Fi hardware. It may not be much but when looked at in regards to the overall scheme of things it can add up to quite a big bit of power saving.
I've done this myself and used equipment to measure the power draw with and without this hardware enabled.
While this is not officially supported by SONOS it is not something that will damage or hinder the capabilities of your players or system, SONOS just prefer the Wi-Fi aways be on in the off chance that you may decide to go wireless with one or more players.
You can give it a shot: http://vowe.net/archives/013907.html
Userlevel 4
+6
I've done this myself and used equipment to measure the power draw with and without this hardware enabled.
While this is not officially supported by SONOS it is not something that will damage or hinder the capabilities of your players or system, SONOS just prefer the Wi-Fi aways be on in the off chance that you may decide to go wireless with one or more players.
You can give it a shot: http://vowe.net/archives/013907.html
Thank you. This is really cool as some of my Sonos are connected through LAN. You said "if all are wired" but I think this should work if only some of them are wired, too?!
I've done this myself and used equipment to measure the power draw with and without this hardware enabled.
While this is not officially supported by SONOS it is not something that will damage or hinder the capabilities of your players or system, SONOS just prefer the Wi-Fi aways be on in the off chance that you may decide to go wireless with one or more players.
You can give it a shot: http://vowe.net/archives/013907.html
Whilst appreciated kmjy and clearly make sense as power is not being used by the receiver /transmitter. Marc and my question is why can't sonos add a simple scheduler? Whereby you choose when to power the system down and when it should come online. Now it could be this is not possible for some reason, but I don't hear sonos saying that, so why can't it be done?
I've done this myself and used equipment to measure the power draw with and without this hardware enabled.
While this is not officially supported by SONOS it is not something that will damage or hinder the capabilities of your players or system, SONOS just prefer the Wi-Fi aways be on in the off chance that you may decide to go wireless with one or more players.
You can give it a shot: http://vowe.net/archives/013907.html
Sonos realy don't care about this. They seem only interested in ways of getting more referral sales from music service provdiers. Nearly all the updates enable you to access another provider. What have they improved recently for those with their own music collection? I hit the track limit a LONG time ago. No updates from Sonos on that either. I stopped recommending Sonos some time ago, now I'm actively discouraging people because of the issues. The idea is still excellent, but they are too interested in the referral income. Possibly, the Sonos needs to keep polling the music providers for Sonos to get paid???
Rant over..
Userlevel 5
+4
I've done this myself and used equipment to measure the power draw with and without this hardware enabled.
While this is not officially supported by SONOS it is not something that will damage or hinder the capabilities of your players or system, SONOS just prefer the Wi-Fi aways be on in the off chance that you may decide to go wireless with one or more players.
You can give it a shot: http://vowe.net/archives/013907.html
Yeah, you can disable only a few players but just make sure for every wireless player you have on your network, you also have that amount of players with Wi-Fi enabled. So if you have 2 wireless and 4 wired, you can disable Wi-Fi hardware on only two of the four wired players. This is because the other two wired players provide the connection to the two wireless players.
Userlevel 4
+6
I've done this myself and used equipment to measure the power draw with and without this hardware enabled.
While this is not officially supported by SONOS it is not something that will damage or hinder the capabilities of your players or system, SONOS just prefer the Wi-Fi aways be on in the off chance that you may decide to go wireless with one or more players.
You can give it a shot: http://vowe.net/archives/013907.html
So the bridge provides only wireless for one player?
Userlevel 5
+4
I've done this myself and used equipment to measure the power draw with and without this hardware enabled.
While this is not officially supported by SONOS it is not something that will damage or hinder the capabilities of your players or system, SONOS just prefer the Wi-Fi aways be on in the off chance that you may decide to go wireless with one or more players.
You can give it a shot: http://vowe.net/archives/013907.html
The BRIDGE will provide wireless to multiple players, but they all ultimately work together to boost and strengthen each other. That's why the Wi-Fi hardware always stays on even if the player is wired, while it may not seem to be using that hardware it is working with the other players.
My suggestion in the last comment was for an 'all wireless' setup, which would not use a BRIDGE.
If you are using a BRIDGE you can disable to Wi-Fi hardware in ALL wired players.If you are not using a BRIDGE then you would have to only disable the ones that are excess to the wireless players.
Userlevel 4
+6
I've done this myself and used equipment to measure the power draw with and without this hardware enabled.
While this is not officially supported by SONOS it is not something that will damage or hinder the capabilities of your players or system, SONOS just prefer the Wi-Fi aways be on in the off chance that you may decide to go wireless with one or more players.
You can give it a shot: http://vowe.net/archives/013907.html
@kmjy
Thank you. Of course I will check the signal strength matrix to be sure that all sonos players still have enough signal. The reason why I asked is one of my players that is placed directly beside the bridge. Maybe you ask yourself why I'm having a bridge. This is because I'm using outlet switch timers and this player that is connected through cable is not powered on all the time. By that I reduce the power consumption to a minimum, but it causes an empty playlist, why I really need this feature, too:
https://ask.sonos.com/sonos/topics/default_source_when_turning_on_power
@neil
Of course you are right. I was only happy thats possible to disable the wireless. I still want a deep sleep as you said by scheduler or if cable connected through WoL. And of course it should be possible to have an option per player that allows to disable the wireless automatically if its connected to the ethernet.
Userlevel 2
(Along with Ed, above) I encourage Sonos and Sonos users to look at Apple TV as an example of an always-ready, WiFi multimedia device that uses less than 1W in standby mode. There's no reason my Sonos Connect should use 5-6 Watts in standby mode (I measured using a Kill-a-Watt power meter. My Play:1 also uses 5-6 Watts after being idle 3 minutes, which is more than the 3.4 Watts published by Sonos) https://www.apple.com/environment/reports/docs/AppleTV_Product_Environmental_Report_2012.pdf
The Median number of rooms in a U.S. home is 4 to 6. Five Sonos devices running 5 Watts for 20hrs/day would use roughly 200 kWh per year. At $0.10/kWh, that's $20 a year. NRDC published a related report on the hidden costs to consumers, public health, and the environment of always-on device architecture, called "Lowering the Cost of Play." http://www.nrdc.org/energy/game-consoles/lowering-the-cost-of-play.asp
Certainly, any given user has a choice whether they care about standby power use. But, when the costs are hidden and the manufacturer fails to make simple choices to be more efficient, we all pay the price by more fossil-fueled power plants running around the clock to fuel "energy-stupid" devices.
Very interesting. Thanks for sharing this. Have you tested the power consumption with wifi off?
Hello Neil, you may like my route around this. I have bought a set of four of the wireless operated mains sockets, they are cheap to buy from B&Q etc. and I have set all four to turn on from the one button on the little wireless transmitter hand unit and there is an off button for the channel or a master off for every thing. Turning them off like this does cause an annoying but short delay when switching on while the Sonos links up all units before it will let you open the Sonos app.
Hi Alan, I. appreciate you taking the time to share that with me, but some of my amps such as my soundbar have mains that are not easily accessible, but again I appreciate the effort. Moreover, why can't sonos put a scheduler in? They have a clock within the setup, it's not a massive leap to move from this to implement a scheduler, in fact it's all incredibly easy. Plus it's sonos doing their bit for the environment, as they shouldn't have devices permanently on.
I've done this myself and used equipment to measure the power draw with and without this hardware enabled.
While this is not officially supported by SONOS it is not something that will damage or hinder the capabilities of your players or system, SONOS just prefer the Wi-Fi aways be on in the off chance that you may decide to go wireless with one or more players.
You can give it a shot: http://vowe.net/archives/013907.html
Guys I how been having an extended conversation with Sonos support. My proposal is below on how to tackle the fact that for the majority of the time your Sonos products are not actually in use i.e. You are asleep or at work paying for your Sonos products! Please share to try and get others to swing behind this..... Assuming you agree? Now coming back to the reason Sonos do not want to power down their range. This is so music can be ascertained instantly from any of the Sonos product range. However, what I am trying to propose is an option, so customers have a choice, to set a power down schedule. By example: The system shuts down at 01:00 in the morning and comes back online at 07:00. A few minutes after 07:00 the system is back to being its fully responsive self. A disclaimer could be put in place to say between hours selected (i.e. 01:00 and 07:00) you will experience extensive delays whilst your sonos comes online. If you add multiple schedules it means you could power down Sonos during the working day. The combination of both power down options saves considerable power. - Such a proposal does not effect your current customers as it is an option. - It enables your components to have a rest. Thereby extending the life of the components, which would be another environmental tick in the box. - Your customer's save money by not paying for electricity they are not effectively using. - Sonos equipment is not burning electricity for effectively no reason at all, as these component are never used during these hours. - Your customers are happier to know their sonos systems are equipped to be environmentally considerate. - It helps promote sonos's environmental image. I appreciate Sonos development may say with such low idle power what's the issue. However, Sonos have done such an excellent job seeding their speaker range, that I and many others are now up to and in excess of 20 components. So multiply the idle power by 20! To me and what would seem many others, this is a big topic area, one sensitive with your customers, and should be an item -environmental concern- the top of Sonos's agenda.
Userlevel 4
+6
I've done this myself and used equipment to measure the power draw with and without this hardware enabled.
While this is not officially supported by SONOS it is not something that will damage or hinder the capabilities of your players or system, SONOS just prefer the Wi-Fi aways be on in the off chance that you may decide to go wireless with one or more players.
You can give it a shot: http://vowe.net/archives/013907.html
This would be ok as a first step, but Sonos must include this idea so the playlist are still available at the next morning (my most liked comment):
https://ask.sonos.com/sonos/topics/default_source_when_turning_on_power
This is the only reason why I can not use switch outlets for all my sonos. My wife would kill me if she needs to use their smartphone to add daily a new radiostation instead of pressing the button on the kitchen player. Because of that I only switch off the secondary players of a set. Example: In my living room I switch off 2x Play 3 and 1x SUB, but the Playbar stays active. By that the playlist is available all the time.. or to say as long we do not have a blackout.
I've done this myself and used equipment to measure the power draw with and without this hardware enabled.
While this is not officially supported by SONOS it is not something that will damage or hinder the capabilities of your players or system, SONOS just prefer the Wi-Fi aways be on in the off chance that you may decide to go wireless with one or more players.
You can give it a shot: http://vowe.net/archives/013907.html
Hi Marc, thanks for the like. I do agree keeping the playlists would be useful. However, I would sacrifice the availability of playlists if Sonos use this as a reason not to implement a power scheduler . Hopefully they will do both, but the power scheduler makes such sense, and I can't see why they can't do it, in fact as yet I have been given no reason as to why they can't? Thanks Marc.
Userlevel 4
+6
I've done this myself and used equipment to measure the power draw with and without this hardware enabled.
While this is not officially supported by SONOS it is not something that will damage or hinder the capabilities of your players or system, SONOS just prefer the Wi-Fi aways be on in the off chance that you may decide to go wireless with one or more players.
You can give it a shot: http://vowe.net/archives/013907.html
The same argument goes the other way around. I'm using smart outlets and my only problem is loosing the playlists. :P
So no, we need both, but of course I will be happy if they realize any of the useful ideas at all.
Finally its a shame how non-ecologically Sonos is.
Page 4 / 5
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.