Why Sonos Maintains a Closed Architecture

So short sighted. If you watch Sonos’ demo videos, there’s one part where there’s a separate stereo system with a ZP90 hooked up, and the presenter conveniently glosses over the issue of volume control (from the preamp or from the ZP90?). I understand not wanting to port the “Sonos experience” onto a competitor’s control interface, but even doing things the other way around would be helpful.

They don’t have to let us into their goodies, but just some sort of reliable feedback where we could see “Ok, the bedroom zone is on now (so let’s switch inputs etc on the receiver and turn off the TV) - they’re pressing volume up/down/mute on the CR200 (so let’s adjust the volume on the receiver)” etc could save us a lot of frustration, and ironically allow us to sell MORE Sonos systems.

We just picked up Sonos, and so far I think it’s great. But I really feel the reason behind the lack of support for 3rd party control is simply that they don’t have the capacity or desire to support all the various phone calls resulting from incompetence on the part of the integrator or control provider.

I think they are just not a big enough company to handle it. I’ll bet we could sell quite a few more ZP90s if they were easy to build into some type of Crestron control system. Don’t get me wrong, I respect that they aren’t over-extending their ability to support their systems. But that doesn’t mean I don’t wish it were easier to build into my typical system in addition to the stand-alone sales.

Also, “closed” is the wrong word since it’s not actively locked or blocked by use of proprietary protocols. Crestron and AMX systems are “closed”, Sonos is “difficult”.

JB—you are right about the verbage. “Closed” isn’t exactly the word. Sonos doesn’t close its protocol explicitly to keep others out. It happens to be the protocol that works for them and they have chosen not to expose it at this time.

Their priority—as you state—is to focus on the low-hanging fruit, which is why we hear so few consumer complaints about Sonos.

You have to wonder if Vudu did itself a disservice by trying to support so many third-party control systems when that was not their forte.

I think Vudu is excellent, Julie. We never had any issues controlling it. Their paid firmware versions were lame, but that’s the past and now it makes sense they way they have structured it.

I even think they’ve gone about it the right way. They established a customer base and an excellent library. Having it built into TVs now will be huge for them. No subscriptions, so you only pay for what you actually use and the quality is way better than Netflix or Apple TV.

Sell sonos when your client just wants a multiroom audio system that can access their digital music and internet radio.

Sell a squeezebox when you want to integrate the same features with a control system like Crestron.

While I know that integration is key and having your product work with everything is important, protecting how that integration is handled is also important.  The something going wrong factor is something to be aware of.  When a component in a control system does not perform as it should, customers are apt to blame the component or the system.  A good portion of the time it is how the system was programmed for functionality and performance that is in error, hence the wrong part being blamed.

Too often manufacturers leave the structure of control open to the integrator without proper support, they simple publish a list of codes and believe that everyone has the same mindset and will make it perform in the same manner as the component.  This is where the customer gets lost in what is really happening.

My take is that more manufacturers need to work with more control companies and produce approved templates or modules that can only be altered in small ways.  Looks like Sonos feels the same by accepting the Pronto module from Phillips, perhaps this is the beginning of opening up by working on a product level and not leaving the programming up to the integrator.

As others have pointed out, if you need to control a music system as part of an automation system, then sell something else.  Make Sonos be itself and sell those to customers who do not need all the control..

These guys are about to release a 2-way Control4 driver for Sonos, allowing very nice integration of Sonos players within a Control4 system:

http://www.extravegetables.com/index.htm

...will support use of Sonos control AND Control4 control…

Hey, 85—can you get the vegetables to contact me please?

jjacobson at ehpub dot com.

Thanks!

I understand the potential trap of your product being blamed for a failure in another part of the system, but that is by no means an excuse for shutting out integrators. Perhaps JBrown is right, they simply dont have the knowledge or resources to support integrators with 3rd party control issues.

“You have to wonder if Vudu did itself a disservice by trying to support so many third-party control systems when that was not their forte. “

VUDU had a published simple control protocol that was easily integrated with many 3rd party IP control systems and the dealer appreciated it.
Control Systems actually are my forte and while I was with VUDU our dealers received “world class” support with Creston, AMX, Control4, etc…

@sanfran—I meant that integration wasn’t Vudu’s forte in terms of its overall mission. It takes a lot of resources to invest in people like YOU to write the drivers and support this channel. In the end, a relatively small number of Vudu systems were sold through the channel and the integration team was dissolved.

My main point with sonos is: It’s possible for integrators to be successful—very successful—with off-the-shelf products that suit their customers well.

Ah, the old “guarantee the user experience” line.  What a load of crap.  Even Apple, the king of “guaranteeing the user experience” now has what, 100,000 plus 3rd party aps available for the iPhone?

There are any number of ways Sonos could open up their system while still providing a high degree of control of the user experience.

How much more control does anyone need? The CR200 is nice, the app is maybe even better, and the desktop controller on a wireless laptop or netbook is probably an even better option as time goes on. I am controlling my sonos system off and on while I am making this post by toggling back and forth while I sit comfortably in my big chair. I think that an integrator has to look past just shortsightedly what they can design and sell to how the end-user will actually live with the installed technology.

Are there really that many crestron dealers out there who are trying to force this amazing round peg into their hard square hole?

I have ripped out so many obsolete crestron systems and replaced them with sonos (and Nevo or RTI, etc.) in the last five years that I laugh every time I hear the word.

Multiple, simple stand-alone systems work better for the intended imediate purpose. Who really needs to know the status of the HVAC system (or how many users actually use that functionality) if it is properly programmed and functioning well? Lighting control and automation is a different story, but can be integrated into the living experience in a much simpler way. An AquaLink system works pretty great as a stand alone system, when you are outside, you are outside, why do you need to contol the Master Suite? And, do you really want to drag your $5K touchscreen out by the pool? It doesn’t really matter if you screw it up of course because it will be a door stop way to soon anyway.

While the new systems are very different than the old crap that I have stacked in the corner, the culture and the attitude has not changed much as far as I can see. Even if the client wanted to keep walking over to the wall everytime they wanted to change to another radio station, I would have to somehow find Mr. Valls or whomever else is holding us hostage and pay him $150 an hour or more to change his “proprietary and wholly-owned intellectual property”!!!!! Are you CRAZY?

Easily enjoyable High Performance is ALWAYS preferable to complicated tech mostly for the benefit of profit and status.

The world has changed and more and more people are chosing the value proposition. Our new tagline is “Technology that you can live with!”, which is much different than ” As much technology that we can ram down your throat!”

Loren I completely disagree with most of what you have written. I am not a dealer and do not sell SONOS or Crestron, I am a user of both. If multiple stand alone systems worked better from a usability and efficiency standpoint, then I would not need you or any other dealer, I’d just set them up myself and be done with it.
The point is I dont want a different controller for SONOS, a different controller for VUDU, a different controller for Kaleidescape and then something else to control my Projector, AV Receiver. Not many people would argue that the original remote (VUDU, SONOS) is the best way to interface with the device, it’s just not practical and any integrator who would propose such a system to me would quickly be shown the door.

Why is it that in the comments section you can always count on having the one crazy angry guy show up?  Welcome Loren, we were waiting for you.

Now, now, David and Sanfran

I think Loren raises some excellent points.

Many (most?) consumers enlist a CE pro’s service to get whole-house audio. Then the project grows and grows and grows ... because it can.

I know many dealers who are successful maintaining separate systems for multiroom audio (Sonos) and everything else.

If you want a fully integrated system, there are plenty of other options.

But don’t overlook the possibility of easy-to-sell, easy-to-install, easy-to-get-referrals systems like Sonos (appletv, etc.)

Sorry Julie, If he raised any good points I missed them in between all of his ridiculous and invalid characterizations and misstatements.  They are so outrageous and ill-informed, do I really need to break them down one by one?  Your wish is my command so if you like I will, otherwise I shall not bother .

Ha ha, David. Certainly you can find one valid point in Loren’s discussion?

BTW Julie, I think that Sonos is a wonderful system, it is so good it should make some of the manufacturers of much more expensive multi-room systems ashamed of their interfaces.

However I reject the idea that the lack of integration is due to “controlling the experience”.  You can be sure as shootin that as soon as Sonos thinks it is in their best economic interest to provide a protocol for integration, they will do so.  In this day and age, I find anything less unacceptable.

Whether it’s A/V equipment or software, just about everyone now realizes they need to make their equipment play well with others.  This is not the cell phone industry (lock you in), thank God.

There is no doubt a healthy market for products like SONOS and for many, it’s all they need…simple, effective and easily installed by even the geek squad types.

Yes multi-room audio is usually the foot in the door and the project grows, but SONOS is something that does not “grow” into a larger control system, so why even spec it? There are integrator friendly solutions such as music servers and iPod docs that work equally well.

Why would a systems integrator offer something that cant easily integrate with other systems? If I were to ever be a dealer, I would really avoid products like this and stick to those that understand and support the industry.

The solution is simple really, open your control protocol for third parties, play nice with others.

Julie, even a blind chicken can find a kernel of corn once in a while, I am sure Loren has one somewhere in there.