2. digital
  3. 1324014254

Sonos surprise

Hey guys. I just wanted to share an experience that I had, which really surprised me. On a whim, I picked up a Sonos Connect (ZP90). I wanted to try something easier. I quickly got tired of dealing with a dedicated music server and the Apple TV and everything associated with it.

Anyway, I got the Sonos unit home, connected it to my NAD T163 Pre/Pro via glass optical and did some A/B comparisons with the Apple TV rig and they sound EXACTLY the same. At this point it was a toss up as to whether I was going to keep the Sonos or return it. I played around with it last night and most of today, all the while assuming that the DAC in the NAD would be superior to that of the DAC built into the Sonos.

Well, being bored, I decided to try out the internal DAC in the Sonos, so I grabbed an IC and went to work. What do you know? It sounded a bit better. My little 685s that I have sitting in shelves actually sounded more full.

So...I got to wondering what would happen if I just pulled the NAD all together and connected the Sonos directly to the amp (HK PA5800) and switched the output to variable so that I could use the Sonos to control the volume.

What a surprise I got. The sound stage got BIG and WIDE. I was listening to the rig for a good half an hour before I realized that my sub wasn't even working.

In any case, I just wanted to share the experience. For me, it turns out that less is more. The NAD was definitely doing a job on the signal going through it.

I've found the Sonos to be a very nice compromise. To say that it is easy to use would be an understatement. I have it reading my music off of a USB drive that I have connected to my NetGear router. I just plugged the Sonus into the router and it read everything the way it should have. When I want to add music to my library, I just use a laptop with iTunes and I have my USB drive set as my iTunes directory. I rip a CD and it goes straight to the USB drive. The Sonos re-indexes the music once a day, so I don't even have to worry about it.

I also have to say that the Sonos is a very well thought out product, especially the software. Now, listening to music is as simple as pulling out my iPhone, iPod or iPad and hitting play.

The one big drawback to the Sonos is that it is only capable of playing 16 bit 48khz files, tops. Anything more and it just won't play it at all. For me, this is fine, since I get most of my music from ripping CDs and very little of what I like is available via HD downloads, most of it being standard 16/44.

Now I'm wondering if going with an out board DAC and getting my Sonos modded might be worthwhile. I'm really liking the idea of having nothing to deal with to listen to some good sounding music. Right now, my system consists of the Sonos, an amp and a pair of speakers.
tonyangel
douglas_schroeder
3,281 posts
 
Steve, my understanding is that with the stacked ESS Sabre chips doing 32 bit processing jitter is eliminated. Why, then would one want to put a reclocker in the chain before a component which does the same function?

I can understand that if one has an older DAC that might be appropriate.

Am I missing something here? Have you used the reclocker with 32 bit DACs, and if so what was the outcome?
cruz123
586 posts
 
Why, then would one want to put a reclocker in the chain before a component which does the same function?

Possibly because he sells reclockers?
douglas_schroeder
3,281 posts
 
I have no issue with Steve's recommendation of a reclocker, and I believe it would be beneficial. My question pertains to 32 bit DACs and the efficacy of the reclocker with such DACs. I have heard the Empiracle Audio gear and it is impressive; I would not desparage people from looking into it but want clarification regarding suitability with certain DACs.
audioengr
3,282 posts
 
"Why, then would one want to put a reclocker in the chain before a component which does the same function?"

Simple. It does not do a good enough job of jitter reduction. No DAC does. Dont believe all of the marketing hype.

"Have you used the reclocker with 32 bit DACs, and if so what was the outcome?"

I have used low-jitter digital sources with HDMI I2S and S/PDIF into both PWD and W4S DAC2. Big difference. Here is a web feedback from a PWD beta-tester:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ddgtl&1320430393&openflup&74&4#74

"The sound is more dynamic, voices are better delineated, everything is more vibrant. And the bass is better. That's what surprised me most. Bass seems to be tighter, crisper. I also have a bridge and felt that the Off-Ramp 5 via I2S bested the bridge in sheer dynamics and transient attack. With the Off Ramp 5 via I2S and the upgraded PW DAC, this is the best I've ever heard from my system."

Feedback from a W4S beta tester:

"With just the addition of your OffRamp 5 / I2S (even the S/PDIF) was a noticeable improvement to the present W4S system."

Its not just reclockers, any low-jitter digital source will make an obvious improvement IME. I have yet to find a DAC that does not improve with a low jitter source.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
douglas_schroeder
3,281 posts
 
Well, then, I guess it remains to be heard, which I might just do. :)
More to discover