The dinosaur SONOS refuses to connect to cutting edge NAS

W

I have  searched the various  posts gogin back to 2017. 

Current SONOS app is unable to connect to True NAS.

Steps taken to remove the problem

  1. Set up dedicated user on TrueNas for sonos
  2. enabled SMB1 CIF server on WIndows 10
  3. Removed SMB2/3 on freeNas (and then reinstated)
  4. Given full permissions on the  mount pint (Plex) via True NAS ACL

Steps I will not be taking

  1. Reinstalling windows
  2. Creating a “sonos” user on windows

If anyone has experienced similar issues and has a working solution based on the facts above  I would be glad to hear it. 

Please do not ask a plethroa of “fact finding” questions  about other services /users connecting to the TrueNAs mount point /datapool - they can. This is a SONOS specific issue which the tech guys consider is beneath their attention.

 

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.

18 replies

Corry P
Userlevel 7
Badge +18

Hi @welshmanofsteel 

Welcome to the Sonos Community!

I don’t have any personal experience with TrueNAS, but the only step you’ve missed out that I know you’ll need is enabling SMBv1 on your NAS drive for Sonos to access it.

If your shared folder is in Plex, you can add Plex to Sonos as a source - thus negating the need for setting up SMB. You would need internet for your music to play, however.

Perhaps someone in the community who has used TrueNAS can help?

"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." - Albert Einstein
W

Many thanks - I had set up SMB 1 on freenas as well as added the aux parm.

Plex streams music freenas/ Sonos - but that is a hack. The lazy folk in Sonos dev team need to wake up and recognise that true home Nas setups are going to be a deal breaker for their product

E

Many thanks - I had set up SMB 1 on freenas as well as added the aux parm.

Plex streams music freenas/ Sonos - but that is a hack. The lazy folk in Sonos dev team need to wake up and recognise that true home Nas setups are going to be a deal breaker for their product

I really don’t think the lack of proper NAS support will bother too many Sonos customers. The target market is millennial types most of whom don’t have a music collection and just stream their music from Spotify, Apple Music or whatever. They have no need for a NAS to serve up music.

I got my QNAP NAS working with my Sonos speakers by installing BubbleUPnP server on the NAS and creating OpenHome renderers for the Sonos speakers. All that involves is ticking a checkbox. That gives me proper gapless playback from the NAS and means I can also use alternative apps to control the Sonos, not just the Sonos app.

bockersjv
Userlevel 7
Badge +21

The lazy folk in Sonos dev team need to wake up and recognise that true home Nas setups are going to be a deal breaker for their product

Wow, with such a motivational post I’m sure developers are skipping their way to work to fix this, just for you. 🙄

A

Current SONOS app is unable to connect to True NAS.

Maybe not, but it does work fine with NAS devices that support SMB1 - I have it working on SMB1 on a sacrificial NAS as I write. I have also had it working on a Synology using SMB1 in the past, although it’s now locked down.

So it would appear that it does work with SMB1 on a real NAS, you’re just having problems getting it to work with True NAS. Perhaps you should be looking for support in the True NAS forums rather than here, as it doesn’t sound like a Sonos issue.

 

A

I really don’t think the lack of proper NAS support will bother too many Sonos customers. The target market is millennial types most of whom don’t have a music collection and just stream their music from Spotify, Apple Music or whatever. They have no need for a NAS to serve up music.

Well, quite… It has become clear that, for years now, NAS users are not the target market for Sonos, and NAS facilities are very unlikely to be improved, IMHO.

You’ve found a way round it, I have my own preferred solution and there are also other options that some forum users recommend.

I think that we just have to accept that Sonos is no longer the ‘goto’ company for NAS users and move on - in whichever way works best for each individual.

Stanley_4
Userlevel 7
Badge +22

I realized long ago the corner Sonos had painted themselves into on SMB. I don’t think fix for them will be cheap or easy and may be a long time coming.

My solution is using a dedicated Sonos NAS, or even cheaper a NAS to SMBv1 gateway. Either runs well on a Raspberry Pi Zero W. https://stan-miller.livejournal.com/

Someday Sonos will make the change but for now I have my music without putting my main NAS at risk from SMB v1 problems for under $50.00.

W

@bockersjv - it’s not my role as a customer and an investor in SONOS to motivate a lazy dev team.

 However as an investor I can rasie it  during shareholders meetings.

 Too many customers role over and simply accept the bullshit the corporations pump out.

Looking at the chat rooms here SMB is a major issue this company refuses to  address.

I do not ask SONOS to remove SMB1 and switch off their “older” units. Instead, myself and the myriad of other users wanting to use NAS as NAS is intended to be used  - natively and not via third party  hacks, is SONOS to support  support additional SMB protocols. 

The scale this topic has reached, the  resolute silence and the manner in which SONOS shut the conversations down,   makes me think that SONOS is abusing SMB1. By  adopting the later, more secure  protocols, is going to remove that power to abuse. By abuse I think in terms of how other corporations abuse their access in order to “harvest” more information than we think they are already harvesting and selling onwards for profit. 

A

@bockersjv - it’s not my role as a customer and an investor in SONOS to motivate a lazy dev team.

 However as an investor I can rasie it  during shareholders meetings.

 Too many customers role over and simply accept the bullshit the corporations pump out.

Looking at the chat rooms here SMB is a major issue this company refuses to  address.

I do not ask SONOS to remove SMB1 and switch off their “older” units. Instead, myself and the myriad of other users wanting to use NAS as NAS is intended to be used  - natively and not via third party  hacks, is SONOS to support  support additional SMB protocols. 

The scale this topic has reached, the  resolute silence and the manner in which SONOS shut the conversations down,   makes me think that SONOS is abusing SMB1. By  adopting the later, more secure  protocols, is going to remove that power to abuse. By abuse I think in terms of how other corporations abuse their access in order to “harvest” more information than we think they are already harvesting and selling onwards for profit. 

The lack of later SMB support has been raised numerous times on this and earlier platforms, and I don’t recall Sonos ever closing down any of those threads - however critical.

It has been suggested many times that the problem is the lack of memory on earlier units. It seems the most likely reason and, if so, Sonos cannot do anything about it without killing off old units. If it were a viable option, they’d have probably done it by now. It is very disappointing that they didn’t base S2 on a newer version of the kernel, though. At the same time they could have massively increased the number of tracks and store capacity - but they chose not to, 

As has already been mentioned, people who stream from a NAS are (according to Sonos) a tiny percentage of their customer base. I don’t use any of the streaming services - I’ve tried some of them and found them lacking for classical music - so all of my listening is via a NAS. I’ve had to accept that Sonos couldn’t care less whether or not I walk - not only am I in a tiny minority, but because I find Sonos inadequate for my particular purposes I’m unlikely to buy many (? any) more units. I don’t like their throwaway approach to tech, either.

If you’re concerned about security, there are options available to you. I use a sacrificial NAS. @Stanley_4 uses a gateway. @Kumar uses an Echo device successfully. My backup plan is a Chromecast Audio into the back of a Play 5, which can then feed all other Sonos devices. This can also play high res file and can handle all of my files - not just a subset.

As for your suggestion that Sonos is deliberately enforcing obsolete protocols in order to harvest our data, I don’t know what to suggest…. but I doubt that your assumption is correct.

K

 @Kumar uses an Echo device successfully.

I am happily ignorant about this SMB stuff, but I use the Echo for its album art features for streaming services. Some time after I started using my Echo Show 5 for this, I learnt how to set up an app on a Raspberry PI that can serve music from a USB stick plugged into it, and play it on Sonos via the Echo Show 5 with voice commanded start, and also with album art. This set up also plays higher bit file formats that Sonos does not, but I don’t know if that is making any difference in sound quality.

Presumably, I am not exposed to security issues. I tend to not bother about these where my home audio kit is concerned, and I don’t really care if the world learns about my music preferences. 

PS: One does need Sonos kit with a line in jack for this.

Stanley_4
Userlevel 7
Badge +22

There is a lot of good discussion on why not a newer SMB in some of the older topics, I believe that was even a bit from one of the Samba developers.

Short answer the newer Samba is bigger, the newer Samba needs a newer Linux kernel that is bigger, the S1 generation of Sonos gear is out of memory and they have to remove features to add anything new/bigger.

A

There is a lot of good discussion on why not a newer SMB in some of the older topics, I believe that was even a bit from one of the Samba developers.

Short answer the newer Samba is bigger, the newer Samba needs a newer Linux kernel that is bigger, the S1 generation of Sonos gear is out of memory and they have to remove features to add anything new/bigger.

And their excuse for not fixing it (and the 64k and store limits) in S2 is?…...

Stanley_4
Userlevel 7
Badge +22

Time, money, skilled Linux kernel programmers and customer interest in the fix. All coming back to profit of course.

Why would Sonos spend a big chunk of money and developer time fixing something that users that really care can fix for under $50 and 30 minutes of their time?

I don’t even think Sonos could break even offering a Boost looking device (to save case design costs) that would either provide a SMB v1 NAS capability or a gateway to a NAS running other more secure protocols. That based on unofficial chats with Sonos folks when discussing the idea.

I even looked into offering such a device myself and I just couldn’t see enough market for it to be worth the effort.

You might consider that if you think it would sell. Grab a Pi Zero W (wireless) Pi 3 (wired) or a Pi 3b+ or 4 for both. Get a 8 GB SD card, a quality power supply and just follow my directions for a Gateway. Add an external USB port for a hard drive if you want the NAS version. Plenty of Sonos forums and other sites out there to sell on. You could even get someone to post a customer review of it here (but not sell it) for publicity.

K

@Stanley_4 :But what would be the advantage to @amun by doing all this over what he has in place today for listening to his owned music on Sonos?

A

@Stanley_4 :But what would be the advantage to @amun by doing all this over what he has in place today for listening to his owned music on Sonos?

Exactly - if I was going to change anything, it would be to the casting approach, which also solves the 65k limit, the store limit and restrictions on file type (e.g. hi-res files played natively). It would also mean that my reliance on my aging ZP90 would be eliminated, as my AV receiver has Chromecast built in.

As I said, for my purposes Sonos is looking distinctly lacking these days...

Stanley_4
Userlevel 7
Badge +22

I do not want the SMB v1 security issues on my main NAS! Using a secondary NAS or NAS to SMBv1 gateway eliminates that need and risk.

Been years since I messed with Plex and I preferred the Sonos music library option back then, haven’t looked lately.

A

I do not want the SMB v1 security issues on my main NAS! Using a secondary NAS or NAS to SMBv1 gateway eliminates that need and risk.

Quite… That’s why I use a sacrificial NAS for Sonos. My main NAS doesn’t have SMB1 enabled.

M

If anyone has experienced similar issues and has a working solution based on the facts above  I would be glad to hear it. 

There are plenty of examples on here of reducing to SMB1, repurposing raspberry pis/ having a second NAS or operating one as a bridge, but they weren’t appealing to me either.

I have exposed my music dataset to a jail on my Truenas box (read-only) and configured the jail with a SMB1 share for the exclusive use of the sonos user. It’s a 10 minute one-time fix and having it in the same box feels like less hassle to me than maintaining another rpi.

Terms & ConditionsCookie settings