To address the following frequent requests to extend the Sonos use cases:
1. Using Sonos, and in particular play 1 units, as computer speakers.
2. To use a play 1 pair with/without Sub for audio as well as 2.1 video.
3. To use Sonos as bluetooth speakers just by wiring a cheap Dot to them.
4. To get the conveniences of bluetooth without having to add BT capability to Sonos.
5. To use voice control with Sonos with both Amazon and Google without being tied to possibly sluggish Sonos efforts for this.
6. To use Sonos in places where there is no internet/WiFi.
Cons
1. The issue of sync with video where uncompressed isn't supported by the WiFi set up.
2. Development cost.
3. Cannibalisation of play 5 and play bar/base sales; perhaps even of Connect.
Not a con, but this extension will not address the requirement of a portable/external, battery included Sonos speaker which is the other frequent ask. But Sonos use will be extended to places where just mains power is available, but there is no internet and/or no WiFi.
What have I missed?
Page 1 / 1
I would add to this:
1) The ability to modify the buffering delay to whatever is required between zero and 5000ms. The 'zero' option is for the case where the only speaker playing is the one to which the Line-In source is attached; Sonos could default to zero in this situation.
2) Support some form of lossless compression instead of raw WAV, to reduce the bandwidth requirements when streaming to other speakers.
1) The ability to modify the buffering delay to whatever is required between zero and 5000ms. The 'zero' option is for the case where the only speaker playing is the one to which the Line-In source is attached; Sonos could default to zero in this situation.
2) Support some form of lossless compression instead of raw WAV, to reduce the bandwidth requirements when streaming to other speakers.
More features would of course be welcome; in particular the first one above that gives the ability for a Sonos speaker that isn't a part of a Sonos group to shed this delay that is only needed for a Sonos group to be in perfect sync. Then Sonos speakers that are wire connected to Dots that in turn are grouped via Alexa tech would be in perfect sync with all other speakers: third party, Echo, and Sonos speakers - as one example of the benefit conferred by this.
Grafting a Line In on an "as is" basis to a Play 1 would however be a great start...and is all I started the first post with. And just this may have more use cases that I have probably missed.
Grafting a Line In on an "as is" basis to a Play 1 would however be a great start...and is all I started the first post with. And just this may have more use cases that I have probably missed.
Play a stereo TV program in full channel stereo.
That's my item 2. Even for 5.1 encoded movies, the physical separation afforded by two play 1 units flanking the TV compared to the three channels in one box bar/base may be quite as good if not better even with surround speakers missing in the former.
I wonder if this would have been a better path for Sonos to follow right from the start to embrace voice control. An Echo connected via line-in automatically inherits all of the native features of Echo products including phone features, automatically handles ducking correctly, automatically supports Audible, etc. and probably could have been implemented much faster. As you point out it also provides a quick path to support for Bluetooth, computer feeds, or other voice interfaces from Google or whoever providing there is a dongle available for it.
Maybe instead of the current Sonos One there should have been a Play1 mkII with line-in and a USB power plug so both the Speaker and Dot could run off a single power cord. They could simply have remodeled the top to act as a natural cradle to hold a Dot or Spot. Missed opportunity?
Maybe instead of the current Sonos One there should have been a Play1 mkII with line-in and a USB power plug so both the Speaker and Dot could run off a single power cord. They could simply have remodeled the top to act as a natural cradle to hold a Dot or Spot. Missed opportunity?
Maybe instead of the current Sonos One there should have been a Play1 mkII with line-in and a USB power plug so both the Speaker and Dot could run off a single power cord. They could simply have remodeled the top to act as a natural cradle to hold a Dot or Spot. Missed opportunity?
Any remodelling would have implicitly tied them to Amazon when there is no need to do so; a Google Home/Mini can today do all that a wired to Sonos Dot can, and do this wirelessly, except that it needs a Chromecast Audio puck wired in to a Sonos Line In to do so. A cost attributable to a Google design choice, I suspect.
And I also think that there are inherent benefits always conferred to the mic response by having the mic part kept some distance away from the speaker part; even with Amazon hardware a Dot placed at a distance from its wired speaker responds better than an Echo does.
OK so skip the cradle. A Dot or Spot wired to the line-in on a pair of Play1s + Sub would give a better user experience than the Beta Sonos skill currently does and adding line-in probably could have been implemented much faster than it took to make the Sonos One. You could also use the input on the second Play1 for your Chromecast device so you would already have Google integration as well. All the Alexa skill would need to provide are Sonos specific commands to group rooms and such. I can actually already do that using the Alexa skill for an automation system that controls Sonos such as Homeseer so the only missing element is the line-in. Now instead we have to wait for new APIs from Amazon that may or may not do what is needed and may or may not be fully utilized by Sonos and if they are there is no guessing when it might happen.
I agree. And that is just one of the benefits of line in that I have listed that would have made the play 1 a very versatile speaker. And with lack of line in, it must have have ceded market share to not just the Echo, but also to the many third party speakers bought at multiple price points to be wired to a Dot to get voice control + better sound than what even an Echo can provide. Instead of sinking resources into the Alexa integration and into the One, these could have been diverted to making the Sonos speakers even better featured than what they are now for non voice audio and video applications and protecting the existing lead there. With a line in feature available universally so that voice control can be easily added - never mind whose front end supplies that controls.
See attached photo of a desktop installation that has a MacBook, Dali Zensor 1 pair, Dot and Connect Amp. The Dot is wired to the line in on the Connect Amp, with autoplay enabled. This set up offers the full Sonos suite of capability at the desktop. It also does all that Echo/Dot can do although not released by Sonos by way of integration and it does this better. And via very stable BT connection between the MacBook and the Dot, computer audio can be streamed to the speakers as well for everything including You Tube. As a bonus, so can that from a smart phone from across the room. And if voice commands are not to be shouted at the Dot from the other end of the bedroom, that is also easily achieved by a cheap Dot installed at the bedside, Alexa grouped to the first Dot. Tomorrow if a Spot is desired there, that involves just paying the price of one and getting a video interface as well.
Now instead of this, if the play 1 had a line in jack, this would yield the same feature set for a much smaller footprint without losing any sound quality. And for about USD 500 less.
I'm similar but without the Dot in between. I have my desktop computer hooked to the Connect - then the Connect output to my powered computer speakers. Thus my computer speakers are also sonos speakers and anything playing from my desktop can be fed throughout my house on Sonos.
Right, and just because the line in is missing on the Play 1? Else you could just have these in place of Connect + computer speakers and throw in a Dot as I have done if you needed/wanted voice control.
There are almost no computer speakers that can better the SQ from a 1 pair in the near field, so there is zero compromise in that direction.
There are almost no computer speakers that can better the SQ from a 1 pair in the near field, so there is zero compromise in that direction.
Well I could have gotten a Play:5
But facts are I have always been surprised they never added an input to the Play:1. It would have solved a lot of complaints people have about all types of things like Bluetooth, airplay, whatever. As others have said - maybe they really need to prop up sales when it comes to connect but it certainly is a valid argument (all but doesn't appear it will ever happen).
But facts are I have always been surprised they never added an input to the Play:1. It would have solved a lot of complaints people have about all types of things like Bluetooth, airplay, whatever. As others have said - maybe they really need to prop up sales when it comes to connect but it certainly is a valid argument (all but doesn't appear it will ever happen).
As others have said - maybe they really need to prop up sales when it comes to connect but it certainly is a valid argument (all but doesn't appear it will ever happen).
The play 5 is too big and too expensive to use as a pair for a desktop; I am not happy with my set up, but the pieces were bought years ago, so it was a sunk cost. And either may even not sound as good as the 1 in the near field.
Propping up sales of an obsolete unit by de-featuring a new one is usually a losing strategy.
I doubt this will happen either; I can't see Sonos dancing on a dime to turn around and do this even if there was merit in this; they are good in many ways, but are not a particularly agile operation.
I have done all in my power by emailing a link to this thread to Spence at Sonos. He does read customer emails that he gets on a close to daily basis, I will say that for him.
I agree. And that is just one of the benefits of line in that I have listed that would have made the play 1 a very versatile speaker. And with lack of line in, it must have have ceded market share to not just the Echo, but also to the many third party speakers bought at multiple price points to be wired to a Dot to get voice control + better sound than what even an Echo can provide. Instead of sinking resources into the Alexa integration and into the One, these could have been diverted to making the Sonos speakers even better featured than what they are now for non voice audio and video applications and protecting the existing lead there. With a line in feature available universally so that voice control can be easily added - never mind whose front end supplies that controls.
See attached photo of a desktop installation that has a MacBook, Dali Zensor 1 pair, Dot and Connect Amp. The Dot is wired to the line in on the Connect Amp, with autoplay enabled. This set up offers the full Sonos suite of capability at the desktop. It also does all that Echo/Dot can do although not released by Sonos by way of integration and it does this better. And via very stable BT connection between the MacBook and the Dot, computer audio can be streamed to the speakers as well for everything including You Tube. As a bonus, so can that from a smart phone from across the room. And if voice commands are not to be shouted at the Dot from the other end of the bedroom, that is also easily achieved by a cheap Dot installed at the bedside, Alexa grouped to the first Dot. Tomorrow if a Spot is desired there, that involves just paying the price of one and getting a video interface as well.
Now instead of this, if the play 1 had a line in jack, this would yield the same feature set for a much smaller footprint without losing any sound quality. And for about USD 500 less.
Are you saying that the Sonos Play 1 play better than Dali Zensor 1 as well?
In the near field as at this desktop, I would say yes. At normal listening distances, the Dali pair is a shade better for coming across a little richer.
I did get an email response from the Spence address over his name, although it seems a little disingenuous - summarised as follows: We don't give the Line In even though we accept that it will give versatility of sources/options because we don't like wires and we would rather focus on the wireless side of things a la Airplay 2 etc etc.
Disingenuous because that begs the obvious question: why then was the feature provided on the play 5 that was launched a couple of years after the play 1? My guess is that it was nothing to do with liking/disliking wires, but to protect the 5 from cannibalisation.
Even if that meant not leveraging the available tech for Line In to increase the sales of the play 1 which otherwise could have been a great high end companion to the Dot from much before the Sonos integration of Alexa, with a consequent retention of some of the considerable market share it lost to Echo/Dot. And to pick up market share from the markets of both computer and bluetooth speakers, without incorporating bluetooth tech in it.
Disingenuous because that begs the obvious question: why then was the feature provided on the play 5 that was launched a couple of years after the play 1? My guess is that it was nothing to do with liking/disliking wires, but to protect the 5 from cannibalisation.
Even if that meant not leveraging the available tech for Line In to increase the sales of the play 1 which otherwise could have been a great high end companion to the Dot from much before the Sonos integration of Alexa, with a consequent retention of some of the considerable market share it lost to Echo/Dot. And to pick up market share from the markets of both computer and bluetooth speakers, without incorporating bluetooth tech in it.
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.