Hub, or from the title (often not visible to folks looking at your post) you mean a Boost.

The Boost is obsolete, no longer being sold so I’d not recommend one.

Are you seeing the “poor link” in the Controller App or from your Router?

Have you tried the Sonos suggestions for improving the WiFi connection?

https://support.sonos.com/en-us/article/improve-your-sonos-products-wifi-connection

Worst case you might try wiring one of your Sonos to the router but then you’d need a clear channel (there are only 3 at 2.4 gHz) for the Sonosnet in addition to the one your router is using.

Thank you for your reply.  I have been fiddling with the suggestions and trying to find something that works reliably.  This will take some more research, and hopefully Sonos will keep improving their App so the situation will stabilize.

when it works the Sonos 5 speakers are great!

My guess is some sort of wifi interference , which might also impact the signal generated by the BOOST, which is essentially just another (hidden) WiFi signal. 

I used to use a Boost because the Beam in our bedroom used to keep dropping off the system. 
Recently though TalkTalk sent me an Eero router so I reset the system and it all works well now without the Boost.

You can pick them up on EBay usually around £20. 

Given that Sonos has stopped making (or selling)  the BOOST at this point, I suspect they’re not really necessary. You get the same effect from running an Ethernet cable to any non-surround, non-Sub Sonos speaker.

WiFi interference is a fare question,

I have never had a problem with my wifi TV, computer or phone that all connect to the same router and all share the same wifi world with the other WiFi devices such as:

Google Nest Protect smoke detectors

Netatmo weather station

Why is only the Sonos system susceptible to other devices when other hardware is not?

Probably as it does things most network devices don’t. Not only does it need an uninterrupted connection to the stream (either the outside world, or a local library) due to its nature of a stream of music with relatively small buffers, and the fact that it is needing to maintain synchronization across all Sonos devices. I’m not sure how frequently that occurs, but assume it happens many times per second. That, by itself, is something few other devices do. It’s part of networking ‘standard’ operation, it just isn’t used by many devices, so isn’t kept as rigorously as other standards tend to be. 

If you’re interested, there are likely courses near you with regards to networking, which will provide greater insight into the process most people just assume ‘works’, and the complexities, and constant modifications that occur in a typical network, depending on both internal and external influence. 

Bruce

Thank you for your reply. I understand that you are saying that the Sonos sound system is more demanding / sensitive than typical devices.  Regardless, a typical home does have other WiFi systems as a fact of life. 

I can unplug my weather station easily, and I will try that, but I cannot unplug my smoke detector system.  My home is simple; what about people with WiFi connectivity to lighting and security systems and devices like their refrigerator? There are more and more WiFi devices coming on the market all the time for the “smart home”, and they are will all be competing for service.

Again, thanks for the information and advice.

I fear I am not a network engineer either, but I’ve worked in online gaming long enough to have a passing familiarity with networking…by no stretch an expert’s knowledge, unfortunately. But I don’t have any issues with random devices on my network, from Sonos, to Ecobee, to my oven, to ‘smart’ plugs, to a smattering of Philips Hue, to half a dozen computers, phones, tablets, TVs, content sources, and game systems. 

The average (all?) network has addressing available for 255 devices on a single subnet. It would be a challenge to get that many devices connected to a network. I have south of 70 in my system, but that’s a guesstimate, I switched modem/router last weekend, and didn’t check to see. 

All manufacturers of devices that are clients try to match the possibilities inherent in the network spec that work well for their devices, with as much ease as possible. At the same time, network device manufacturers seem to want to make things as easy for their users as possible as well, even to obscuring some things in the network spec. As an example, T-Mobile blocks my ability to set reserved IP addresses in their network devices. While for the vast majority of their users, it likely is a ‘good thing’, it frustrates me, as an ‘advanced’ user. I want the full capabilities offered by network specs, T-Mobile doesn’t want to confuse users. 

As I suggested, there are other resources, which come from more knowledgeable people than myself, about networking. Even online. I’m certainly not suggesting you become a full fledged network engineer with qualifications, but a little more knowledge about what is being used in your home may help. It certainly has helped me in some ways. 

That 255 limit is common on consumer gear, it is what used to be called a Class C network, with a mask of 255.255.255.0. It is now called a /24 with the CIDR (see link below) notation. There are a couple reserved addresses in the range.

Higher end gear offers different mask / CIDR choices giving you larger possible networks. Not much real-world need for that for most folks and there are down-sides to using larger nets. Some folks pick a Class A “because” and with 16,777,214 Hosts per Network some things are painfully and unnecessarily slow.

https://www.auvik.com/franklyit/blog/what-is-cidr/