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 17, 2016
    A live trumpet player is pretty loud and a big dynamic range. The only way you can replicate it is to play the recording in the same venue. Trying to recreate the ambience of the original venue in your living room is nigh impossible, since your room has its own peculiar signature. That, I think is why hi fi "fails". That's why it's a bit more than just frequency response, time delay and phasing are probably just as important.
    September 18, 2016
    Would said trumpet player - or better still, with a back up of guitar and drums - playing live in a largish living room, be completely replicable by any audio system out there, played in the same room? I have my doubts. And if so replicable, is there any objective way of demonstrating this or the gaps where it falls short? Time delay and phasing ought to also be measurable by instruments if they aren't to be just more of audiophile jargon.
    Peter Mc
    September 18, 2016
    Interesting question. I would think that if the trumpet was recorded with a close mic in an acoustically-inert environment (so no room effects were recorded), and then played back through a single speaker in any room, and compared to the trumpet played from the same location as the speaker, that someone in the next room would not be able to tell the difference. That's a fairly artificial setup, and would be harder to do for multiple instruments. Also, some instruments are not point sources like a trumpet (e.g. piano).

    Most recorded music has some sort of reverb recorded or applied afterwards. When this is played back in a normal reverberent room, the results cannot be the same. We hear a mixture of the two reverb fields (recorded and playback room).

    The other interesting thought experiment is to record instruments including their reverberation environment and play back in an inert room (i.e. anechoic chamber). Would we be fooled into thinking we're in the original recording environment? I don't think so because there would be no reflected sound off the walls like there would be in the original environment.

    Fortunately our brains are pretty good at compensating (self-deception?) and we can enjoy music despite it actually sounding artificial.

    Cheers, Peter.
    "The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to those who think they've found it" - Terry Pratchett
    September 18, 2016

    Fortunately our brains are pretty good at compensating (self-deception?) and we can enjoy music despite it actually sounding artificial.

    Peter, that is exactly it and is what I have now realised as well.

    Using the numbers just for the argument - I see something like a well set up Sonos system approximating 65% of the real thing. While the most expensive rig available, will go to maybe 70%, perhaps 75%. The gap between the two is still much smaller than the distance from the real thing, and the brain can compensate for both gaps just as easily - IF allowed to do so. Or it can focus on picking out the gap between the 65 and the 75.

    The brain/mind is an excellent slave but a lousy master.

    That said, there has been little movement forward from the 70/75% bar towards the real thing in the last few decades. While video quality has improved dramatically in the same time, although the 4K may be a plateau, and 3D, imo, sucks. Where/when will the big leap to the real thing for audio come from, is the question I have no answer to.
    Avid Contributor I
    September 18, 2016
    Peter, that's exactly the point. Good gear can make a very good copy of an instrument, providing we can mitigate room interactions (which is why it's more than just measuring frequency response). Try this, record said trumpet player in a given room, then record the speaker playing that recording in the same room.
    September 18, 2016
    Try this, record said trumpet player in a given room, then record the speaker playing that recording in the same room.
    There will be a day/night difference even given recording equipment limitations.
    But I haven't been able to obtain from anyone I have asked as to where this difference will be objectively visible. If not in a freq response graph, then where, in any other instrument measured one. After all, if the ears can hear it, any instrument invented by now should do better?
    I guess this isn't getting any nearer to the OP thread subject, so I shall make this my last digression.
    Avid Contributor I
    September 18, 2016
    I have tried it. It's surprisingly close, using my separates system, that was why I bought this ATC speakers in the first place. But, I figured that bring able to faithfully reproduce trumpets or drum kits in my house that were recorded somewhere else is pretty pointless. I concluded that Hi fi is pretty pointless, and largely a waste of money. So long as you enjoy what you hear, it doesn't matter if it's true or not. If I want to listen to real instruments, I'll pay to watch someone do it or play it myself.
    September 18, 2016
    So long as you enjoy what you hear, it doesn't matter if it's true or not. If I want to listen to real instruments, I'll pay to watch someone do it or play it myself.
    Now that - all of it - is something I can agree with 100%! Except for being a duffer at playing any instrument.
    Avid Contributor I
    September 30, 2016
    So, a month or so in. The big ATCs went last week, and I admit it was depressing. Years of researching and listening, wallet driven optimism and item mistaken gone in the back of a random passat estate. Just me and the 5s left. I've already dismissed the 1s as anything more than a hi fi kitchen speaker, as a replacement for a top flight separates not a chance. The 5s though are in a different league, and I'm really impressed. You can't beat a tightly screwed down box with multie small long throw drivers for fast response, I guess adding the active amplification is the final bit of the jigsaw because these things rock. OK, at gig levels they're not as clean as my old system, but they are much better than any passive system at the price. The guy that bought my speakers brought his NAD C370 and 540 CD player, which I know well as I had them a few years ago, and the play 5 was a better compromise. Slightly unfair as the NAD is not an amp to drive big ATC speakers, but that's the point. I'm a convert to active speakers.
    October 1, 2016
    I am a convert to the small active speakers + Sub philosophy. High and mid range can be well handled by small boxes that are easier to place in an optimum location, and the Sub does the rest. Provided it integrates well with the speakers in the manner the Sonos unit does.