With the Play:1 my previous chart became obsolete and I had to make some adjustments at the low end. So here we go again.
The biggest difference is not which player you buy, but whether you want to spend the money to get two players per room. And then, whether you want to add a SUB. It's also quite clear that you should get a Playbar if there is a TV that could use better sound. A Playbar will also replace your existing stereo at the same time.
Having two players in a room makes a huge difference. Especially for the smaller Play:1 and Play:3. You configure them as a stereo pair and they appear as one Sonos zone. There are rooms like the bathroom or the kitchen, where one player is fine. But as soon as you think about the living room, you should go for two. If you watch movies on TV, a SUB is almost a must. Having said that, a SUB is the only speaker you will definitely hear in adjacent rooms, also in your neighbor's.
Play:1, Play:3, Play:5? Play:1 is mono. Play:3 is mono or (a little bit) stereo depending on the orientation you set them up. You want two of them, unless we are talking about kitchen or bathroom. Play:5 is the oldest one of them and offers line-in. That means you can connect an iPhone directly with a 3.5mm jack. Play:1 and Play:3 cannot do that. But their internals are newer and they can serve as the surround channels for movie nights.
If you have a Playbar connected to your TV, and maybe a SUB, you can build your movie theater when you need it. Collect your Play:1 from the kitchen and the bathroom and set up surround sound for the movie night, and then break it up again and put them back. It takes only a minute to reconfigure both ways.
You currently can get the bridge for free. You will only need it if you cannot through an Ethernet wire to one of your Sonos players. The bridge will connect your (invisible) Sonos network to the Internet, just as the Ethernet wire would. If you can connect all Sonos players to Ethernet, then there is a trick to switch off the wireless Sonos network.
I am not really talking about Connect:Amp and Connect anymore. Connect delivers the Sonos experience into your existing stereo, which you are likely to ditch anyway. And Connect:Amp is for those who want to keep their existing speakers.
This is one of the vowe.net pieces, which is gonna cost me money after reading.
You forgot to place a Sum(F3:F18) at the bottom! It would give everyone an indication on how much they will happily spend in the long run...
AFAIK with v4.2 you can use a Connect (or Connect:amp) to keep the back channel speakers of an existing surround setup. Or when you don't have power behind your couch.
Can I mix a Play:1 and a Play:3 with the Playbar?
Ole: if you've got enough rooms to use all these combinations at once you totally wouldn't mind the sum of their prizes ;-)
Oliver, you can only use a pair of Play:1 or a pair of Play:3 for the back channel. It is quite an investment. I recommend to use those speakers in a different room and bring them in for the movie experience. Unless of course money is not an issue.
Thx for clarification. I already have a Play:3 and soon will have a Play:1 in other rooms, so it would've been nice to be able to use these two for an instant surround setup.
But I'm sure there'll be a second Play:1 in the house, someday.
The CONNECT:AMP fits also perfectly where you've got in-walls or outdoor speakers at your sundeck, for example.
Pricey! 1800 for a proper surround setup or any of the other combinations. Exactly how good is the sound from these players compared to a normal amp / speaker combination in that price range?
I don't see how a wireless speaker set (which still needs cables for electricity, so this kind of defeats the wireless part) with a littlebit of internet magic can make anyone ditch their existing surround setup. Hmm ...
P.S.: If the "Connect" were a littlebit less expensive compared to their other solutions and included a wireless adapter (the "bridge") one could easily "try out" the Sonos experience with existing amp/speaker combinations. Most 349€ amps can stream internet and local music just fine by themselves ... "enhancing" them with an equally expensive addon seems ... unreasonable ;-)
@Sebastian: Sonos is like the iPad. You need to use it yourself to know how good it is and why you have a need for it. ;)
Sebastian, you don't want a Sonos. :-)
@Sebastian. Maybe vowe is right and Sonos is not for you. A good friend of mine was as sceptical as you are. That was four years ago. This weekend he will finally order a Sonos system: Sub + Playbar + Play:1: Thomas Lang will like that :-)
As vowe has mentioned each and every time: You will not become a Sonos fan by theorizing about it. You have to experience it yourself (sounds like marketing talk but it's true). Once you have a single Sonos component in your house you cannot go back. As vowe said: you will spend money (as one's financial situation permits) until every room contains Sonos components.
Back to my topic:
I did extensive testing comparing the following setup of the course of a couple of many hours:
(1) Denon AVR Receiver + Canton Subwoofer AS25 + Canton Karat M80 DC
(2) 2x Sonos S5 (Play:5)
(3) Sonos Playbar + Sonos Sub + 2x Play:3
I tested all kinds of music: pop, classic, bass-heavy stuff, ...
My finding was: The Playbar is absolutely on par with the Denon/Canton setup. When it comes to bass there is nothing better than the Sonos Sub I am aware of. Have somebody play Tron (movie and/or soundtrack) to you on the Sonos setup (3) mentioned above. It will blow you away.
Even 2x Sonos Play:5 where virtually indistinguishable form the Denon/Canon setup.
In some occasions the traditional speakers (Canton) sounded a notch better in others the Sonos won. Long story short: The Sonos can absolutely replace your traditional stereo setup. In my case it did. It felt weird in the beginning that the massive Canton speakers were gone: What to do with all this additional space in your living room ;-) After two days I never looked back.
A little note on the side: During that one evening when I did my thorough sound quality comparison ((1) Denon against (2) Play:5 against (3) Sonos Playbar) my wife spend time with me in the living room. Once I was done I asked here if she felt bothered by me constantly switching between the three different setups. Here answer: "I wasn't aware that you did anything". In other words: She didn't even notice the difference. Okay, she clearly didn't pay the kind of attention I naturally did, but still.
A full-blown Sonos system isn't cheap but it's money very well spend. I haven't met a single person yet who regretted buying a Sonos system.
Markus - I love SONOS, but to say that a full amp with 5.1 speakers is not better than a Playbar + sub + paly 3 means something is wrong. Either bad speakers or bad setup. I can put in a blurray of something like The Abyss or HEAT and blow away anything SONOS can put out. Is the Playbar + sub perfect for a living room or bedroom, for sure. For a home theater, no way.
I am afraid we are out of long dicks here. You win.
If they just had a device without a speaker, with an integrated bridge at a reasonable price (maybe 100€, current you get the same thing with a small amp and speaker, but lacking digital out for 199 € ... the Play:1 *g*). The Play:1 is interesting, but I just don't want to spend 400 € to get Sonos to work with my existing home theater system or throw it out and spend 1800 € on Sonos equipment to replace it ;-)
Maybe it isn't for me :/
@John: wish I could demonstrate to you in person. The Canton speakers I had got excellent reviews as did the Denon AVR. Anyway, what it boils down to is this: everyone needs to make up his/her own mind. In my case I had no trouble replacing my Denon/Canton combination (which price-wise was around 1800 EUR back in the day). The intention of my post was not to talk anybody into buying a Sonos to replace xyz it was more a personal experience report (@Sebastian asked for an option, so I gave mine). @John, let us know how your setup looks like so that I can try to asses your "blow away anything SONOS puts out" statement. Everybody have a great weekend (with or without music) :-)
@Markus: Thanks for your report. Just some hours ago a customer asked, if a SONOS 5.1 setup could replace a "normal" setup. I'll send him a link to your post. Otherwise some one could think I'll try to sell something.
And yes, I will be happy if your friend orders this weekend. ;-)
Sebastian, it isn't for you. You are invested in a different technology. That's what I like to say. If you are rich, you can first buy something else.
Will a 10 points Sonos 1500,- system sound like a (let’s say) 1500,- Dynaudio studio active + Airplay system?
I mean is 10 points = 10 general hifi sound points? Or is this measuring system inside of Sonos’ capabilities?
I never had the chance to compare Sonos to a real studio sound system.
I love the connect - it'a been a fine fit to my existing stereo which I dearly, dearly love.
I must half-curse you, though, Volker, because there's SUB-shaped hole in my savings which is seriously starting to have itchy feet!
The points are relative within the Sonos experience. 4 does not mean twice as good as 2. It just provides a ranking. It's better to buy two PLAY:1 and a SUB than to buy two PLAY:5 for instance. Or a stereo pair of PLAY:5 sound better than a PLAYBAR which is better than a pair of PLAY:3.
As soon as you rely on AirPlay, your whole experience cannot match Sonos. The reason is that AirPlay depends on an intermediary. Sonos is self sufficient. You only need to tell it what to do. But there is no iPhone, iPad or computer that delivers the sound. Sonos does it all by itself.
Careful, Andrew. SUB only works with CONNECT:AMP, and any PLAY*. Not with CONNECT.
I checked sonos.com (which I should have done before). The system is really flexible! BUT the required app looks too much like 2007 design with glossy marbles. I’m not able to bear this ugly UI despite the good technical implementation.
I cannot disclose everything I know. But I suggest you save your money and come back later.
I'll have an eye on Sonos ;-)
I should have thought of that. the SUB has obviously no idea of the crossover frequency it should use. Even if that was configurable, there would be no way for the sub to react to changes in the volume of my main stereo, resulting in a mismatch.
I stand corrected, and my purse is no longer itching.
Kai Schmalenbach on Wonderful :: Magical Piano at 21:16
Thomas Lang on Wonderful :: Magical Piano at 20:26
Hubert Stettner on Outlook.com can now import all your Gmail data at 19:53
Andreas Braukmann on Wonderful :: Magical Piano at 17:45
Johannes Matzke on Outlook.com can now import all your Gmail data at 20:35
Manfred Wiktorin on Outlook.com can now import all your Gmail data at 02:17
Sascha Westphal on Outlook.com can now import all your Gmail data at 20:58
Christian Just on Outlook.com can now import all your Gmail data at 18:33
Daniel Neumann on No reverb :: the Wikidrummer at 17:41
Stephan Herz on Presentations do not have to be boring at 23:17
Oliver Regelmann on Presentations do not have to be boring at 22:34
J Yongsinka on My perfect picture frame at 14:03
Thomas Meier on Six to four at 11:58
Volker Weber on Dyson Forte at 18:34
Jason Hook on Dyson Forte at 18:24
Tobias Vogel on Dyson Forte at 15:10
Volker Weber on Dyson Forte at 12:39
Sascha Langfus on Dyson Forte at 12:37
Jörg Hermann on Dyson Forte at 11:52
Manuela Schöder on Dyson Forte at 10:44
Jörg Oyen on Dyson Forte at 10:40
Max Könnings on Six to four at 08:18
Andrew Magerman on Sehr schön in braun at 20:41
Volker Weber on Dyson Forte at 12:48
Ingo Seifert on Dyson Forte at 12:29