Sonos Audio Quality

[blacsno]

Originally Posted by W9TR

Ken, Mike, et all;
I now have the Zoneplayer hooked directly to the router. This made a huge difference. Thanks for the tip. I am trying a variety of cables. I have a good 75 ohm digital cable made with Belden 1694A coax and that is also making a positive difference. It is now much harder for me to hear any differences, so what's left could be in my head. I'll report back after I've had more opportunity to listen.

I'm glad that I could help.

[jdandy]

I have my Sonos ZP90 connected to my router via ethernet, and ethernet connected to the MS750 music server in the main system. The ZP90 digital audio output is connected to the optical digital input on the main system MCD500 using a Wireworld Super Nova glass fiber optic cable. For streaming music from Rhapsody, LastFM and Pandora it is admittedly overkill, but I am pleased with the results. Rhapsody's higher bit rate delivers a remarkably clean, and enjoyable audio signal.

My second ZP90 is in the studio downstairs, as is the ZP120 that drives the deck speakers. I use the studio ZP90 connected to the digital input of a second MCD500 using a Tributaries digital coaxial cable. This arrangement allows me to wirelessly access the music library on the MS750 upstairs, as well as streaming audio from the Internet. While the MCD500 playing CDs directly sounds better, the overall quality of the MS750 wireless data transfer to the ZP90 in the studio is very good, and keeping it digital to the MCD500 DACs further improves the sound quality. It makes a very nice set up that is pleasant and enjoyable to listen to.

[W9TR]

Well, after a few more days of listening I'm still very impressed. I've been staying up until all hours listening and adding songs to the que - one at a time, just creating a flow of music. I've got another CR200 controller on order so I can have one in the listening room.

As you noted, Dan, not quite as good as a disc spinning in the MCD 500, but still very good. I'm highly motivated to close the gap between the ZP-90 and the MCD500 spinning the disc directly. I'd love to box up my CD collection. I've been posting in the Sonos forum, and, based on advice there, I'm going to see if there is a level difference between the ZP-90 playing a file, and the same CD played in the MCD 500. I doubt there is, but it is easy to check. That same crowd seems to think thre should be no difference between the wired and wireless option, but I can sure hear a difference, and the wired is better.

[blacsno]

Originally Posted by W9TR

Well, after a few more days of listening I'm still very impressed. I've been staying up until all hours listening and adding songs to the que - one at a time, just creating a flow of music. I've got another CR200 controller on order so I can have one in the listening room.

As you noted, Dan, not quite as good as a disc spinning in the MCD 500, but still very good. I'm highly motivated to close the gap between the ZP-90 and the MCD500 spinning the disc directly. I'd love to box up my CD collection. I've been posting in the Sonos forum, and, based on advice there, I'm going to see if there is a level difference between the ZP-90 playing a file, and the same CD played in the MCD 500. I doubt there is, but it is easy to check. That same crowd seems to think thre should be no difference between the wired and wireless option, but I can sure hear a difference, and the wireless is better.

I do hope you mean that wired is better than wireless? In network traffic size does matter...

Ken

[Poobah]

While wireless would definitely cut out any computer generated noise from the server... I connected mine via a Cat6 network, but optically from the zp90 to the Pre-processor, which I would assume would decoupler the unit from computer generated noise...

But then again, the noise still might compromise the digital function taking place in the zp90 before it's passed optically to the pre-processor. If bandwidth proves not to be an issue wirelessly, it may actually be better?

[blacsno]

Originally Posted by Poobah

While wireless would definitely cut out any computer generated noise from the server... I connected mine via a Cat6 network, but optically from the zp90 to the Pre-processor, which I would assume would decoupler the unit from computer generated noise...

But then again, the noise still might compromise the digital function taking place in the zp90 before it's passed optically to the pre-processor. If bandwidth proves not to be an issue wirelessly, it may actually be better?

Just be careful in giving wireless the thumbs up only solution. In theory they should sound the same. You were smart to put in better Cat cabling, Cat5e vs. Cat6 is overkill for the cost. Some poor soul may try wireless with microwave interference present for example. You don't to give the impression that using wired is less than a viable solution. Yet I'm trying in my head to understand how noise can be passed along in a network? It's 1's and 0's...... I do know that how CD is ripped can affect the sound. Jitter is present and a problem. Yes! itunes extracts a copy of a lossless file. This is done on purpose to avoid making a clone. Maybe here is where itunes adds the "noise"?! When I rip a lossless clone I don't ever find that "noise"....

Ken

[Poobah]

Originally Posted by blacsno

Just be careful in giving wireless the thumbs up only solution. In theory they should sound the same. You were smart to put in better Cat cabling, Cat5e vs. Cat6 is overkill for the cost. Some poor soul may try wireless with microwave interference present for example. You don't to give the impression that using wired is less than a viable solution. Yet I'm trying in my head to understand how noise can be passed along in a network? It's 1's and 0's...... I do know that how CD is ripped can affect the sound. Jitter is present and a problem. Yes! itunes extracts a copy of a lossless file. This is done on purpose to avoid making a clone. Maybe here is where itunes adds the "noise"?! When I rip a lossless clone I don't ever find that "noise"....

Ken

computer noise is present in the network cable.... that cable transfers the noise along with the 1 and the 0's to the sonus. In the case of my sonus, it's mod'd and reclocks the 1 and 0's and upconverts the signal with a quality processor to 24/96... the noise could possibly effect how the sonus processes those 1 and 0's on my end and effect the accuracy of reclocker? But to be honest, maybe it doesn't. What I'm fairly confident of though, is computer Noise could be passed like the dreaded 60hz hum, and increase system noise in general, and muddy the entire background. Wireless would certainly circumvent that, as would an optical connection.

I certainly don't claim to be any kind of an expert though..

[W9TR]

Ken,
My bad - the wired sounds better in my system. I've edited my original post to correct the error.

So far, I have checked for bit perfect playback out of the ZP-90 into the MCD-500. I have that. I have checked levels between the ZP-90 and the MCD-500. They are identical. Yet the MCD 500 sounds better to me playing the same disc as the ZP-90. I might now consider the Cullen mod to see if I can get the ZP-90 into the MCD 500 DAC sounding like the MCD 500 playing the disc on its internal drive.

[1KW]

I am beta testing new software for sonos now and they have a few nice features that I will share. One is a crossfade feature between songs which you can turn on or off. If you have a pair of S5 sonos powered speakers you can make one a left channel and another the right channel so you have wireless stereo sound which is nice if you don't want to run wires to your deck, kitchen, bedroom, exercise room, bathroom etc. . I do not get paid, it is strictly voluntary.

[W9TR]

Nice! Let us know when they start testing support for 24//96! I've got my fingers crossed they will, someday, even though it is not mainstream.