Why Can't I listen to my music through my Computer?

Sonos would be cannibalizing their own device sales by creating computer software that can play music as a member of a Sonos system. There are mini computers that can be built or bought for considerably less than the cost of a Sonos Connect. Maybe they should charge $100 or more for the software, to help offset the loss in device sales, and make it less viable to use such a setup as a replacement to a Sonos Connect?

If all I wanted to do was stream music to my own speakers, I would just use Apple Airplay for that. I like the way Sonos speakers sound and want to use Sonos speakers for MOST of the rooms in the house. Just not the studio that already has a studio monitors and a top of the line DAC.

If you like the way the Sonos speakers sound, then why do you want to play music through the monitors? The monitors have a dedicated purpose, as does the DAC, and so do the Sonos speakers. As I wrote, those studio monitors sound vastly different than any other speaker platform. If you want music streaming from the DAC through the monitors, just do it from the DAC. You are talking about two distinctly separate functions and sounds. I've got the same setup, and I have two Play:1s in my studio. I know the Sonos are not computer speakers, and knew they never were, so my setup works just fine when mixing and playing back through either source. I want to hear the raw tracks through the studio monitors, then play them back through the Plays so I can hear how it sounds in the real world.

Thanks. After some consideration, I've ordered an extra Play 1 for the room with the studio monitors.

I still feel that it should be possible to play Sonos through at least the same computer that is running the Sonos controller. Maybe Sonos could compromise by limiting it to only one computer if there is a concern about someone just using the streaming and not buying Sonos speakers.

I do agree that the studio monitors are designed to be clinical. The sound for even the entry level Play 1's are quite musical.

Thanks. After some consideration, I've ordered an extra Play 1 for the room with the studio monitors.

I still feel that it should be possible to play Sonos through at least the same computer that is running the Sonos controller. Maybe Sonos could compromise by limiting it to only one computer if there is a concern about someone just using the streaming and not buying Sonos speakers.

I do agree that the studio monitors are designed to be clinical. The sound for even the entry level Play 1's are quite musical.

Once again, there is no current capability to send a stream through the Sonos controller. It is simply that; a controller. To enable it to stream, it would require thousands of man-hours to develop, test, release, and maintain the new capabilities. They would have to start from scratch and completely redesign the PC/Mac controller from the ground up. This would also mean a Sonos engineering team would be dedicated to this endeavor for a while, unable to work on other projects which may be more beneficial to both customers and sales. All for what? To cannibalize their own hardware? To give away for free or a nominal fee? There is absolutely no calculation of R.O.I where Sonos comes out on top with this feature. Squeezebox proved that fact, much to their own dismay.

What I can't understand is how someone with "high quality studio monitors" could baulk at simply ponying up for a CONNECT. The cost would be lost in the noise compared to that of serious ATCs...

All this talk about "freeloaders" is nonsense. Nothing is being asked for that is not already easily available elsewhere. As many have already said, there are plenty of PC software packages that can play and stream music. It does seem a bit inconvenient for the SONOS controller software not to have the capability. There are times when I just want a bit of background music through the laptop rather than a full on brace of Play 5s and a sub. What's wrong with wanting a single app that can do everything ?

Rather than creating the capability being a drain on resources as some would have you believe, I see it as a possible sales tool. There are plenty of companies who have freeware versions of their full software. Using those restricted versions lets you see what the full product can do. If this did not drive sales then nobody would do it.

As for the "they just want it for nothing" brigade, the functionality could be restricted if no SONOS players were detected by the app. Simples ! That would however totally defeat the prospect of upselling.

All this talk about "freeloaders" is nonsense. Nothing is being asked for that is not already easily available elsewhere. As many have already said, there are plenty of PC software packages that can play and stream music. It does seem a bit inconvenient for the SONOS controller software not to have the capability. There are times when I just want a bit of background music through the laptop rather than a full on brace of Play 5s and a sub. What's wrong with wanting a single app that can do everything ?

Rather than creating the capability being a drain on resources as some would have you believe, I see it as a possible sales tool. There are plenty of companies who have freeware versions of their full software. Using those restricted versions lets you see what the full product can do. If this did not drive sales then nobody would do it.

As for the "they just want it for nothing" brigade, the functionality could be restricted if no SONOS players were detected by the app. Simples ! That would however totally defeat the prospect of upselling.

Yeah, that was the theory Squeezebox had about their software zone. Turns out, people who get stuff for free don't actually drive sales, they take sales away. Hard to fathom, I know. 😉

So, limit access to existing owners or account holders at Deezer etc.and use it as an upselling tool. In fact, the service providers (for whom SONOS is a revenue stream) could be asked to contribute to any development costs.

All it takes is a bit of commercial flair.

So, limit access to existing owners or account holders at Deezer etc.and use it as an upselling tool. In fact, the service providers (for whom SONOS is a revenue stream) could be asked to contribute to any development costs.

All it takes is a bit of commercial flair.

Or even easier, don't do it at all, and let your actual product upsell folks. How's that for flair? Seems to have worked out OK for Sonos so far. Imagine, they have discovered that if don't spend a massive amount of man-hours to develop something which will cannibalize sales, you don't lose sales. It's a marketing miracle!!

As to the service providers paying for it, it is Sonos' policy to never charge fees or take kickbacks from any service provider. Access to the Sonos Music Partners program is open to any service in the world, free of charge. I highly doubt they are going to start charging for something such as this, especially when the alternative is so simple - DON'T DO IT!

Bottom line, you want a Sonos player for free. You aren't getting one for free. Buy a Connect.

Some people see opportunities, others only see limitations.

Some people see opportunities, others only see limitations.

And other people look at failed companies in the past and learn from their mistakes. There are dozens of multi-room streamers present and past, I can point to one which created a software based player. It is now defunct (except for those who keep it alive by using the - you guessed it - software based player on Raspberry Pi computers to duplicate the hardware at a fraction of the cost.) I don't know how much more textbook a case you need to tell you it is a bad idea.

I'm going to be blunt here - Sonos is not in the business of catering to people who are too cheap to buy their product, because by definition, people who are too cheap to buy their product are the very people who would exploit something like this. Giving away a Sonos software zone is not an "opportunity", it is corporate suicide.