Sonos vs mainstream brand soundbar

[ackieboy]

I have a Sonos Play 3 and bridge, which I like. I was going to get the Sonos soundbar so that I can have radio or networked music playing through it when the TV is not on.

However the Sonos bar is £600 and you can get a soundbar that matches any TV on the market for less than a quarter of that, most of which are Bluetooth compatible.

I now have Google Play Music on my phone, which I can throw over to the speaker using Bluetooth.

As such, what is the benefit of having an integrated networked music system such as Sonos over the bog standard Sony / Samsung / LG soundbar?

 

[Sam Gangee]

Read what Chris of Lucid AV has to say:-

//www.diynot.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1939426#1939426

//www.diynot.com/forums/audio-visual/networking-1930s-house.395607/#3047352

 

[ackieboy]

That's helpful, thanks.

 

[Lucid]

<SNIP>... the Sonos bar is £600 and you can get a soundbar that matches any TV on the market for less than a quarter of that, most of which are Bluetooth compatible.

As such, what is the benefit of having an integrated networked music system such as Sonos over the bog standard Sony / Samsung / LG soundbar?

If all you ever play is web-sourced music streams, and if you're asking these sorts of questions where your main concern is price, then my guess is that the benefits of Sonos are lost on you. Just go buy a cheap soundbar.

 

[ackieboy]

<SNIP>... the Sonos bar is £600 and you can get a soundbar that matches any TV on the market for less than a quarter of that, most of which are Bluetooth compatible.

As such, what is the benefit of having an integrated networked music system such as Sonos over the bog standard Sony / Samsung / LG soundbar?

If all you ever play is web-sourced music streams, and if you're asking these sorts of questions where your main concern is price, then my guess is that the benefits of Sonos are lost on you. Just go buy a cheap soundbar.

I'm not that bothered about price, it's value that I'm interested in, and we're talking about a 3x price differential between options.

I play web-sourced music streams & radio, music from a networked storage device, and then sound from the TV / movies etc.

I like the Sonos stuff that I do have, but I don't know what the exact benefit is over a bog-standard soundbar - it's easier to link things up, for sure, but I'm not convinced I am getting proper hi-fi quality sound if all I'm playing is digital music without a DAC, and I doubt I'll ever use the features of playing songs in every room in the house at the same time.

However I am speaking from a position of almost total ignorance (as I'm sure you can tell). What is it that justifies paying 3 times as much for Sonos?

 

[Sam Gangee]

I'm not convinced I am getting proper hi-fi quality sound if all I'm playing is digital music without a DAC

Quite right. All that you'll hear is a horrid buzzing noise. You have to convert it back to analogue for listening.

 

[ackieboy]

As I say, total ignorance.

What I am getting at is that I do not believe the digital music stored on my NAS is the same quality as, for example, the original CD would have been, and any product that takes this source, over a wireless network and plays it through a component where amp, speakers and whatever else is needed to make 1s and 0s into noise are in the same box is not going to be "hi-fi" quality.

As such, I don't see how sound quality can be the justification for Sonos.

If I'm wrong then feel free to tell me.

 

[Sam Gangee]

Ultimately, the source quality is the limiting factor, of course. Anything less than, say, AAC (lossless) at 256 kbps is not going to sound very nice to the discerning ear. Above that, you get diminising returns and the sound quality becomes very subjective. I have friends who refuse even to listen to CDs because (they say) they can hear artifacts.

So choose the source material according as your personal needs.

After that, not a lot can go wrong with 1s and 0s until they reach the DAC. It's imperative to have a good quality DAC. After that, the audio amplifier is the prime consideration, followed by the loudspeakers and the resistance of the cables connecting the loudspeakers.

I would imagine that all of this is taken care of in the Sonos equipment. It's going to be as good as you can get for the money. But audio is a very subjective experience and many "golden eared" people are able to convince themselves that something doesn't sound as good as something else. If you are like that, you'll need to hear the equipment working in your own room.

There are also other aspects that money can buy:-

1. Reliability.
2. Aesthetic appearance.
3. Ease of use.

 

[Monkeh]

What I am getting at is that I do not believe the digital music stored on my NAS is the same quality as, for example, the original CD would have been

That depends entirely how you store the music. I have bit-perfect copies of my CDs (which consume substantially less space).

and any product that takes this source, over a wireless network and plays it through a component where amp, speakers and whatever else is needed to make 1s and 0s into noise are in the same box is not going to be "hi-fi" quality.

It can't be hi-fi because it's all in one box? Nonsense.

Note I have absolutely no knowledge of the performance of Sonos equipment.

 

[Lucid]

There are so many ways to approach this.

I understand what you're saying about value; but value is very subjective. Then there's the contradictions that you're "concerned that you aren't getting Hi-Fi quality" and yet you are listening to web streamed music and are considering a £150 soundbar as an alternative. You can't have your cake and eat it. No soundbar, no matter how good, is Hi-Fi quality. End of story. If you want Hi-Fi quality then you're not going to buy a soundbar; not one at £1000, or £400 and certainly not one at £150. It really is that simple.

So what it comes down to is the acceptable compromises you're willing to make to meet your expectations and your budget.

The Sonos soundbar is on a level with soundbars at £300-£400 for sound quality. The balance of the value is in the fact that it has a £280 Sonos Connect embedded inside.

If you were to spend £300-£400 on an equivalent sound quality sound bar then you'd be looking at Q Acoustic M4 or Canton D50 or Yamaha YSP1400. These are a country mile ahead of the £150 soundbars for sonic quality, but probably have fewer features because they're aiming at a different market.

What else could your £600 buy?

A budget Hi-Fi system comprising amp with remote and stereo speakers.... Marantz PM5004 or Pioneer A20 for around £150, and either Monitor Audio BX2 (£279) or Dali Zensor III (£300). That leaves £150 to buy cables, speaker stands, some form of optical to stereo DAC for the TV output, and something to accept a streamed/networked audio feed for music...... even if you do the streamed music thing with a Raspberry Pi you're still looking at £70-£80 and you get an ugly pile of lillt boxes that still needs a another DAC to sound any good.

A home cinema kit is another option. Streaming may be possible if you get a receiver with networked features but whether it would handle the range of audio files or be as easy to use as the Sonos is doubtful.

 

[ackieboy]

There are so many ways to approach this.

I understand what you're saying about value; but value is very subjective. Then there's the contradictions that you're "concerned that you aren't getting Hi-Fi quality" and yet you are listening to web streamed music and are considering a £150 soundbar as an alternative. You can't have your cake and eat it. No soundbar, no matter how good, is Hi-Fi quality. End of story. If you want Hi-Fi quality then you're not going to buy a soundbar; not one at £1000, or £400 and certainly not one at £150. It really is that simple.

So what it comes down to is the acceptable compromises you're willing to make to meet your expectations and your budget.

The Sonos soundbar is on a level with soundbars at £300-£400 for sound quality. The balance of the value is in the fact that it has a £280 Sonos Connect embedded inside.

If you were to spend £300-£400 on an equivalent sound quality sound bar then you'd be looking at Q Acoustic M4 or Canton D50 or Yamaha YSP1400. These are a country mile ahead of the £150 soundbars for sonic quality, but probably have fewer features because they're aiming at a different market.

What else could your £600 buy?

A budget Hi-Fi system comprising amp with remote and stereo speakers.... Marantz PM5004 or Pioneer A20 for around £150, and either Monitor Audio BX2 (£279) or Dali Zensor III (£300). That leaves £150 to buy cables, speaker stands, some form of optical to stereo DAC for the TV output, and something to accept a streamed/networked audio feed for music...... even if you do the streamed music thing with a Raspberry Pi you're still looking at £70-£80 and you get an ugly pile of lillt boxes that still needs a another DAC to sound any good.

A home cinema kit is another option. Streaming may be possible if you get a receiver with networked features but whether it would handle the range of audio files or be as easy to use as the Sonos is doubtful.

Thanks for the response.

I have not in any of the posts above said that I am "concerned that you aren't getting Hi-Fi quality" with a Sonos soundbar. My point was that since NEITHER the Sonos soundbar or an alternative soundbar can possibly give hi-fi sound (if it is even achievable from the digital music archive I currently have, which I doubt), I did not understand why the Sonos was so much more expensive.

You have now pointed out exactly why to me (ie the Sonos is equivalent to a £400 soundbar in quality, plus the Sonos network technology), so now the choice is between those options, and whether the Sonos connectivity is worth £250 to me, which it probably is given the quality of the user interface compared to what a ball-ache Bluetooth can be.

 

[Sam Gangee]

Nice to see that you felt Lucid's reply was worth posting twice!

I would point out, however, that such practice is generally frowned upon because:-

1. It uses up additional server space that someone is paying for.
2. It can't be edited by the originator.
3. It forces readers to scroll down more than necessary.
4. Pointless because it's already there for all to read.