Skip to main content
Avid Contributor II
September 2, 2016
Answered

Should I replace my hifi separates with a Sonos system?

My system comprises an all British set of separates, including a pre-amp and mono blocs. It still sounds great after twenty years, but things change and technology marches on. Whereas I used to listen to CD's, I now stream my music via AirPlay. A Cambridge Audio DAC is the interface between the hifi and Apple TV. I'm considering selling the whole system and replacing it with Sonos kit, principally for music but also to integrate and upgrade my TV sound. My question is, should I expect the Sonos units to be truly comparable to the high end hifi I've known for years?
    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.
    KumarAnswer
    September 2, 2016
    My system comprises an all British set of separates, including a pre-amp and mono blocs. It still sounds great after twenty years, but things change and technology marches on.
    Another angle on this: I don't know what make these separates are, but I know of one make - Quad - that is brilliant in supporting their kit for decades. Their UK service set up in particular, is excellent and can run a check on all electronics ever made by Quad and bring it back to As New, with even a limited guarantee. I have used this service from as far as India, and I know people from EU that also have nothing but praise for Quad service.

    The reason I say this is that from a sound quality perspective, there has been a lot less audible progress than one might think. Depending on what and how good the passive speakers are, of course. Where Sonos has added features is in making a lot more music easier to access and to play. There may therefore be a case to keep this set up, and add just a Sonos front end in the form of a Connect. You could also add the cheaper Chromecast Audio, but having used both I think the easier to use Connect - even just the few control buttons that the Connect has - easily justifies the higher price when use over a few years is taken into account.

    As I said, just another point of view to take into account.

    82 replies

    Avid Contributor I
    September 13, 2016
    I'll try one for sure. I'm amazed if it doesn't put some vibration into the floor. The JL Audio box that I was using would actually shake the glasses in our dining room cabinet on some tracks when it was cranked up. The floor just added a lot of resonant coloration that unfortunately didn't cancel out the node at my listening position.
    September 14, 2016
    The Sub may well shake those glasses without causing the floor to move! Worth a try.
    Avid Contributor I
    September 16, 2016
    A week in... OK I have decided that unless I need (I don't) a single speaker in say my bathroom, then I am done with play 1 purchases. The 5 continues to massively impress. Midrange is exceptional, bass nice and taught and a good thump. I'm guessing this is the benefit of an active system, I'm beginning to understand what some of the fuss is about. However, I heard a devialet phantom during the week, and it's on another planet if you're an audiophool. Seriously though, it's mighty impressive but relatively the same value delta over a passive system. Can it really be down to just that..?

    In other news, I ventured into the what hi fi forums after about a year away, and the vitriol and intellectual arrogance was so depressing. Don't bother unless you have a wicked sense of humour....
    September 17, 2016
    I heard a devialet phantom during the week, and it's on another planet if you're an audiophool. Seriously though, it's mighty impressive but relatively the same value delta over a passive system. Can it really be down to just that..?

    I have given up listening to new kit that is aimed at creating dissatisfaction with what one has at present but I wonder what these differences could be, and in what way they will show up on a frequency response graph of enough granularity.

    One possibility is that something like the Devialet goes a lot louder, but I doubt that is all there is to it. If that was so, at identical levels, it would sound the same, and I doubt that to be the case. The other possibility is that it adds its own coloration to the sound, and in doing so has frequency responses that depart from the source signal. In which case, is it less hifi than Sonos/others that have a flatter response? I suspect the latter to be the case, but can't be sure. Of course, the different sound may be a preference for some, no denying that either. And the differentiated looks and the brand associated bragging rights.

    As to active systems, they have a lot of new digital and signal processing tech in them that allows for matching/exceeding the best that passive systems can deliver, but at lower price points and in smaller boxes, that are also less in number. Not much has changed where passive systems are concerned in the last couple of decades. There is a reason why there are almost no passive tech based pro studio monitors.
    Avid Contributor I
    September 17, 2016
    Mostly agree, but you can't deny the benefit of voltage and current. The opposing firing bass driver is simple physics that conventional manufacturers have been trying to mitigate with £££s for decades. A phantom goes as loud as you'd need, with considerable slam. Just like real life then, the real question is why bother. I didn't, but the play 5 is definitely less real, good a it is.
    September 17, 2016
    So how do you think this more real thing would show up in a frequency response graph? Or in any other instrument that is not subject to pyschoacoustics in the way that nature designed the human brain to be susceptible to?

    Voltage/Current = power delivery = higher sound levels. Not higher fidelity, unless by fidelity you mean the ability to go as loud as an orchestra. But then I have heard of no kit that can come even close to equalling the palpable experience of an orchestra, heard live. Or even a small jazz combo, live in an intimately small club. All home audio is a pale copy of that.
    September 17, 2016
    And don't get me wrong, the Devialet may be more real than the 5, beyond just louder, while still remaining a watered down version of real.

    What I am trying to understand is how would even this "more real" be visible in a frequency response graph.
    Avid Contributor I
    September 17, 2016
    You're right (in only my opinion of course) on one point, that is power is louder, and nothing comes close to the real thing, which is why I gave up chasing that ghost. However, trying to make a simple FR graph correlate to what you hear in your room on a Tuesday evening is an impossible and pointless task, and pointless. The only measurements worth making are a frequency response map of your room. SPL meter, test tones, a tape measure and a pen; or a bit of hardware and software to measure it for you. Frequency response graphs are as relevant as £5k / metre cables.
    Avid Contributor I
    September 17, 2016
    The devialet probably has less distortion, that's what you're paying for. It's evident when comparing for example a B&W 602 S2 with the ATCs. The louder (more realistic) you play, the bigger the gap.
    September 17, 2016
    The devialet probably has less distortion, that's what you're paying for. It's evident when comparing for example a B&W 602 S2 with the ATCs. The louder (more realistic) you play, the bigger the gap.
    I am not so sure that louder = realistic is all that it is about. Going by what you say, if one was to sit with a good dB meter in a concert hall or a jazz club, and use that reading to set the same sound levels at home in the listening position, the listening experience should be replicated. Particularly where a jazz club is concerned, obtaining the same sound levels will not be a huge challenge for home audio kit with enough power. But there is no kit I have heard that comes even close to the real thing. What then is the gap coming from?

    And my question remains: if a frequency response graph is a worthless gauge of speaker sound quality in a room, what is a good one? All I know for sure is that a human and his/her subjective opinion is just that, subjective and therefore far from good enough.