I originally posted my impressions in the Deathmatch thread, but seeing the many threads popping up regarding this new system I figured I would re-post it as review.

Well I finally got around to ripping most of my music collection in FLAC, and had been reading up on players and decided to give each a whirl.

Anyhow the Sonos has not arrived yet, buy I did receive the Duet and the Cisco System.

The Duet did not want to communicate with the control without running the squeeze control/server software and applying a few tweaks. Overall I could see how inexperienced users without network skills could easily hit a road block with this thing. After completing the setup on my home server I streamed some older rips in .WAV to test if it would lose signal or run across buffer underrun. Surprisingly the signal held solid which I wasn't expecting considering the distance and that the Duet and router are on different floors in open face cabinets.

The control has a visually appealing screen for the size, but the text is small, and can be hard to read for older folks. The remote feels really good in your hand and I like that you don't need two hands. However I find it a pain to use the scroll for entering letters, and I wish it had directional clicks (L,R,U,D) which would work better for the branch menu layout. I also had to reboot it 4-5 times in a matter of a few hours of playback to get it to recognize the network again, un-freeze it, or get it to access my shares. Overall I think it's lacking a bit, and would like to see a remote that resembled a full size Zune, with a nice big screen and control which has directional click as well as scroll.


On to the Cisco/Linksys, which is annoying in it's self to see "Linksys by Cisco" on everything. Personally I think most of the junk Linksys stuff will just diminish the goodwill Cisco has developed. So I fired up the remote, easily navigated to network settings, which you can either achieve by using the scroll wheel or by touching left or right on the screen to shuffle through the icons. When it came to entering my password the touch pad immediately showed its weakness, even though the individual letters are good sized (maybe 2.5x times the iTouch keyboard letters), it still registered wrong presses or didn't register them at all. I would press a letter and it would highlight as pressed, however it would not register on the entry line. Second it was slow, if you pressed letters beyond a slow-moderate rate it would miss letters. Anyhow I got my pass entered and it logged on quick, I then proceeded to change a few general settings and exited. I proceeded to navigate to libraries, and presto my media servers showed up along with computers that had active shares, and I thought hey this is nice. Well I tried to browse my folders and I got a "System Busy" error. I proceed to try other computers, and the other Server and nothing, all errors.

After giving up on accessing my shares I plugged in the Director unit as well as the extender and quickly found that the remote would not find either of them. So I used the front panel buttons on the Director to set up my network on that unit, and soon found the interface to be quite lousy using the buttons. When you press one of the buttons, four graphics pop up, one in each corner next to the buttons to show there corresponding action. Anyhow I found it to poor that they chose aesthetics over function, instead of having a dedicated select and back button, along with an up down left right control. When you press any button, to get the OSD action boxes to pop up so you can tell what your doing, it will perform the unknown action corresponding to that key. Next I found the lower left button OSD box blocks part of the password entry box and therefore you couldn't see the letters, which starts as A and requires the use of the top buttons to adjust to a different letter/number. So without being able to see what you had adjusted the letter to, it was completely worthless. I quickly got fed-up and had to walk away.

Which leads to today, so I hopped online this morning and read the manual online which is very scattered and un-detailed. According to the manual the use of the packaged software is not required to setup the system, but is required to activate online services like Rhapsody. Well since my previous attempts at manual setup failed, I fired up the software, which took forever to load on a new laptop, and was actually surprised by the nice interface. Once it finally finished installing a screen pops up that shows you network and all the attached devices. For some reason it took close to 15 minutes for it find and identify all the stuff on mine. Anyhow the setup of audio system components is pretty straight forward, you click the "Add New Device" button and it prompts you for what type, and the third option being "Home Audio Device". It proceeds to bring up a new window which has large icons of the different components. From there I just clicked the Director icon and it proceeded with simple written instructions and flash graphics to install the unit. The steps were plug-it-in, connect it to your network via CAT cable, enter your password, it then proceeds to configure the device for you, when its done it asks you to disconnect the CAT cable so it can test whether it has successfully installed and can connect to your wireless network, if successful your done. Now you can choose to add another device or you can quit, I chose to add the remote which requires you connect it via USB to the computer for it to auto configure, and then proceeded to install the Extender. Overall the software is very easy to use, though it takes a few minutes for setup and test of each device, and definitely will be easier for the standard user than Squeeze.

Now that I was done I played around with the "Cisco Media Server" which is the name for the PC control interface. It has a very pleasing GUI, it shows your different music sources as icons across the bottom, with your players along the left, with the rest for file trees and and searching. You can easily link the players with 2 mouse clicks and it then proceeds to synch them and start streaming, which took roughly 30 seconds. Overall it looks nice and Rhapsody searches from the laptop were pretty fast, displaying cover art when available. But the niceties stop there, even though my shares showed up under sources it would still not successfully access any of them, after 40mins of screwing with it I once again got fed up and decided to write a review about this hardware's failures. Due to oversimplification of the GUI, I have been unable to find a method to truly diagnose the problem or be able point the software to specific paths, nor can I enter access keys for pass protected content. After running the remote setup twice now, both times with it confirming proper installation and showing up on the network, it still fails to find either the director or the extender, along with System Busy errors any time I try to access my music. Needless to say I am highly disgusted with this sytem.

Regarding network strength, I had high hopes for the Cisco stuff since that's their primary business, and was excited they went with Draft N dual band since I recently updated my network bits. However the limited settings give you no options or information regarding the quality of you connection like the Squeeze does, nor can you manually choose or see which band it's using. The remote shows 2 of 3 bars signal when 2 ft from the WAP and sometime drops to 1 bar when only 20-25ft away in the family room. Again just more disappointment. Since it fails to access my media I have been unable to comparison test against the Duet by streaming the same file to the same location.

I did plug some spare speakers into the Director and streamed some Rhapsody, it sounded as good as one could expect from a cheap amp and bookshelf's. While playing from Rhapsody I tried using the volume wheel (does not move) that's located around the power button on the face, and it was again unimpressive and required a deliberate press and leave of your finger for a second to register that your touching it before you can start scrolling, otherwise it would do nothing. It's also too small and easy to accidentally turn off the unit since it does not require a press and hold. While on the topic of power, there is no power button on the remote, which leaves you sleep and hibernate both of which are adjustable in settings. Both the director and extender also come with a seperate IR remote. The one pictured below is for the extender (the director remote is the same besides a blue home button), with many of the buttons being useless since it has no display to see what your controlling.

Overall I had high hopes for the Cisco system, I liked the idea of having a nice color screen on the extender and also a large touchscreen remote. However navigating the OSD with buttons is a pain, and the remote is both inaccurate and unresponsive at times. I wish they would make extenders with a small touch screen and make it available on non-amplified units. I also liked the idea of USB drive support and analog inputs, but really have no patience at this point to test them. Hopefully I'll have a better experience with the Sonos. After reading all the CES coverage, what looks promising is some type of mixed system utilizing $350 touchscreen netbooks and MCE's. Too bad the iTouch XL ended up being vaporware, at least for now. If they made it, it could serve many control purposes and enhance a lot of these sytems.

For those interested I did check the internals on the extender, it uses: -Samsung ARM designed core processor.
-DAC is a TI PCM1782 24bit 192khz
-ADC is a TI PCM1807

Some comparo pics

http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj119/Pmpcaddy/NetPlayers/CvS01.jpg

http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj119/Pmpcaddy/NetPlayers/CvS03.jpg

http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj119/Pmpcaddy/NetPlayers/CvS04.jpg

http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj119/Pmpcaddy/NetPlayers/CvS05.jpg

http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj119/Pmpcaddy/NetPlayers/CvS06.jpg

http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj119/Pmpcaddy/NetPlayers/NetPlayers06.jpg

Regarding the problems you had. It never ceases to amaze me. Don't these companies do usability tests before they release products to the consumer market?

I could somewhat understand an issue with finding shares, but the fact that remote, nor the Director can "see" the other components in the system amazes me.

I also noticed this morning that the PC "Music Player" software is unable to power on the extenders. So you would have to manually turn each on before streaming music to them. I imagine the touchscreen remote, if it would recognize the other components, would be able to turn them on.

I also found that the only method to add additional networked music folders is by right clicking Cisco Server icon in the toolbar; navigating to properties; and then manually entering file locations separated by semi-colons. I was very surprised they don't include a browse button to allow the average user to find their folders, rather it requires you to enter direct file paths.

Still no success getting the units to communicate today, or accessing my shares.

LBDriver please don't take any offense to this comment but I hope you were drunk when setting up a the Linksys gear. Otherwise it's a major fail. It sounds like you know what you were doing and had issues. This will be a complete nightmare for the average J6P home user.

I think you'll be pleasantly surprised and happy with the Sonos system.

Sorry ChicagoTC, not drunk

I followed their manual to the T after the previous manual setup attempts failed on the remote, and the Director screen interface blocked me from entering my password.

When I first un-boxed & turned on the remote, it found my network fine. So I entered my network pass it, it connected and showed the DLNA shares on my windows server, shares on Ubuntu Server, and also the shares on one a Vista machine that was running. However it errored with "system busy" when I tried to browse either set of files.

Now, after installing all their bundled software, using their auto-installer, with the installer telling me that each component successfully installed, I see no reason why it should not work.

It's the lack of manual options that inhibits me from successfully installing, personally I don't need all these 2 click setups, I just want the ability to configure it manually, and be done with it.

Well the Sonos bundle showed up today.

I just got off the phone with Cisco/Linksys support. They had no explanation for the "system busy" errors nor the controllers failure to communicate with the other devices.


Other things I found out/had confirmed:

- There is a Hard-Reset button on the remote under the m-USB port cover, hold 10 secs. for reboot to factory.
- The touchscreen controller can NOT power on/off the extenders, nor bring them out of standby. Users must manually turn on/off each device
- Told you can't get 3/3 bars connection on the controller, (interestingly all the screen-shots in the manual show 2 bars).
- The control should have no noticeable lag when typing using the soft keyboard.
- They are looking at improving the touch accuracy/sensitivity in a firmware update.
- The controller should communicate directly between the extenders without re-routing.(Later told this is NOT true, and that they require a router for communication)
- The controller and/or extenders should play music from a server, NAS, or running computer without the Cisco Media Server Software (CMSS) running.
- You don't have to run CMSS on each device you want to share music.
- CMSS is only required to play music using the PC player.
- The controller, extenders, and CMSS do not cache or pre-fetch any file data from your different storage devices.
- So from above, each time you access your shares it re-acquires all data.
- The remote should not have to re-acquire network access after coming out of sleep.
- When running the install, add the extenders first before the remote (which I did).
- Currently, NO other online partners/media providers coming soon
- Maximum battery life of the controller is 3 hours, though my experience was around 1 hour. The screen really only looks good when it's 80% brightness or above.
I'll add more if I can remember.

On second note, the other reviewer on Amazon had a much more positive experience with her system, using an iPod and CMSS, though she is not accessing NAS/Server shares. She did also note long install times, and having to user her nail to get the touchscreen to register properly. She stated she uses the click wheel the majority of the time instead. I was pretty surprised how she seemed content with the fact her $400 touchscreen remote didn't really work well as a touchscreen. I guess some may have never experienced a proper touchscreen appliance that's responsive and precise.

LBDriver,

You are more patient then I. I appreciate the thoroughness of your reviews. I'm definitely a Sonos fanboy, but they simply work. I'm a network/security admin by trade but when home I want my gear to work and enjoy music, not tinker with them. The only issue I had with Sonos is DHCP is the only option, so it required reserving the MAC addresses so I knew where my controllers and players were.

Once you get them up an running you can get into them via a browser at

http://xxx.xxx.x.xxx:1400/status

I'm curious to hear your thoughts...

So after talking to Cisco support, you still have no idea about why it won't work?

Well, after talking to the Cisco tech last night, I re-installed everything from scratch for a third time, and the components still failed to recognize each other. So I did everything I know possible, gave each component a static IP/DHCP reservation, full access control to files and shares, still no dice.

So I called them back this morning, and according to the tech I got, everything should be working properly based on the fact their Linksys EasyLink Advisor "LELA" showed active interlinked connections to all devices. He basically had no answers for me, but still wouldn't admit product was defective. So finally I just told him I had had enough, it was obviously defective and I was returning it.

Interestingly, I had him re-read the information they had, and he says their is no mesh network or sub-net. Therefore the devices can NOT communicate with one another without the signal being passed through a router. He also confirmed their is no wake-on-lan nor wireless. So anybody who had thoughts of hiding away extenders in cabinets or elsewhere will have to leave the unit on 24/7, since you have to manually power them on and off.

So back in the box this goes, I really wanted to get it working just so I could give it a true comparison to others, even though I had already experienced flaws and dislikes with parts of the system. It still had features that if they worked well, would be a step above the competition at this moment.

I have been saying that releasing all of these products at once will make or break this system. They only get one shot at capturing their customers with no chance of winning people back through new advancements.

It sounds to me, based upon your review, that they have failed and this product will not fair well in the J6P market they are trying to get into.

Jonnio I agree, at this price point it should just work. Now if people are just entering the realm of networked music, Cisco does have the advantage that they can bundle a dual-band router, NAS, and audio system as a complete system. However their products should have no issues playing nice with other manufacturers network products also.

So, last night I set the timer on the oven, and proceeded with un-boxing and setting up the Sonos.

Here's how it went.

1) Unbox everything, look at the 4 step setup card.
2) Run a patch cable to the local switch and plug in the Zone Bridge.
3) Install software on laptop.
4) Started software and it found an update, automatic download and install.
4a) Created DHCP reservations for all components while update downloaded.
5) Pressed the button on the zone bridge, unit was found within seconds, the software auto-configured the unit, successful.
6) Proceeded to to add the Zone Player 90 and 120 wirelessly, each was found and installed in roughly 45 seconds, successful.
7) Added the controller using the on-screen prompts on the unit itself, success
8) Added iTouch using on-screen prompts, success
9) Pointed the software to my shares on the windows server and FLAC archive on the NAS, it proceeded to index both locations.
10) Connect speakers to ZP120, search my music using iTouch, find the album I want and add to queue, now wait for it..........

MUSIC!

I have to be honest I didn't expect it to go as smoothly as everybody states, hence the timer. Overall it took 1 hour and 6 minutes without a single error, connection drop-out, nothing, I have to say I was impressed.
Note, the majority of this time was the download and install of the software update, with each component also auto-updated by the software, and the indexing of my music archives. I was amazed that once the software had finished indexing my archives, it was available to searched and played on both the Sonos remote and iTouch immediately. No need to restart or manually sync it was already there. I continued to explore the interface on both the Sonos remote and iTouch, sync between zones was within seconds, and I found the options and layout very intuitive.

It was a much welcome change to the Cisco, I can now see what all you Sonos lovers' are talking about, it just works. I didn't really think much about the 30 minutes I spent tweaking the Duet and SqueezeCenter to get the controller and extender to recognize each other and my shares. Nor, did I think much about the remote dropping connection every on in awhile. Until of course seeing the Sonos in action.

However I was disappointed with the screen on the Sonos remote, it's quite small considering the overall size of the unit, the iTouch screen is nearly the same size, and the color and contrast is lacking as well. I used it a bit to explore the interface and see what settings were available to the user, but soon found myself using the iTouch exclusively, I really like the QWERTY search ability. Regarding the interface, I was relieved how plain easy and intuitive it was. Considering I had never used SB, Sonos, or Cisco products before, the Sonos was the easiest, the SB coming a close second, and the Cisco being worst. The Cisco UI surprisingly wasn't great, even though they had the most screen real estate. I suppose the reason for the limited and oversized text lines on the Cisco is due to the inaccuracy of it's touchscreen, where incrasing the number of actions would result in more errant selections.

Regarding the ZonePlayers, they would definitely look better black. I was amazed at the size of the ZP120, the previous model must have been a real beast, and a little disappointed that it lacked the same analog and digital outputs that the ZP90 possesses. I also was dissapointed that they've not updated the Zone Bridge to SonosNet 2.0. My planned setup was to place the ZoneBridge at a midpoint in the house and have it as the sole wired unit, though I have yet to test if it will flawlessly stream from the planned location via SonosNet 1.0. I was able to un-scientifically A/B the Sonos ZP120 to the Cisco Director, well at least until the Director stopped recognizing the USB jump-drive after 15 minutes of playback. I loaded a few FLAC songs onto a jump-drive and popped it into the back of the Director, it recognized it fine at first then later failed and would no longer show up as an option for playback, actually it would not play anything, no Rhapsody or radio because it no longer recognized itself as a device for playback. Anyhow, while it worked, I queued the same songs on the Sonos, and plugged one speaker each (from pair of Klipsch bookshelf's) in the right channel on both players. I then alternated playing back the same songs/segments between the pair at as close to an equalized volume that I could. Overall I felt the Director displayed a louder sound and maybe a little more detail, but honestly it was pretty even, neither is going to blow your socks off.

In close, the Sonos definitely lived up to the reputation I've read about, it was simple and fast to setup, and so far no issues whatsoever. Que times are very fast with no annoying lag as with the Cisco. I think without the ability to try each system, and compare them directly that the average consumer may accept the shortcomings in the Cisco UI and consider it normal. I personally expect the best from modern electronics, especially from heavy hitters like Cisco with their capital and engineers. Honestly I like the idea of a nice color screened model, not that I personally need it, but if properly implemented could cut costs on multiple LCD remotes for individual rooms. With the IR remote the Cisco wasn't nearly as bad to navigate, but once again they use huge oversized text that I imagine is to increase viewing distance, but it just crams up the whole screen and makes searching annoying at best. Also the addition of USB is nice, again if it worked and each player could properly index the files located on it, it would be very useful especially with the price drops on 250GB+ ultraportable drives like the WD Passport. It would also be useful as a 5v powered port alone, I plugged a Zune docking station into the Director using the analog audio inputs and the USB for power, too bad this was after the jump-drive debacle so it would not show the analog line-in as a playable option. For Sonos users utilizing iTouch's for remotes it would be nice to be able to charge them directly from the Zone Player. Hopefully Sonos has some tricks up their sleeve for future releases. Either way for a whole house system you still can't go wrong with Sonos' current line-up, but I wish Sonos would at least update the remote and Zone Bridge in the near future.

thanks for the very informative review...

Sean

Very nice reviews of each products. Well done.

I'm really hoping that Sonos comes out with it's own touch screen remote. I'm currently using my iPod Touch remote and it's great but since I use my iPod in my car and on the go it's a little bit of a pain to not have a dedicated remote out of it but I guess I can solve that by purchasing another iPod Touch and dedicating it to my Sonos.

Great review, you hit on my one complaint. The controller needs updating. As far as the appearance/size of the units I really don't care as they are either in closets or under beds in my house.

Picking up an ipod touch as a 3rd remote for me is a nice idea!

ChicagoTC,

The iTouch only gets used for trips, so it will now be predominantly a remote. The other thing to consider is someone was so inclined to run a combo Sonos and Squeeze system that it could control both with the proper apps. I did buy the iPeng app for SB, but have yet to hook back up the Duet. I believe the developer has tried to imitate the Sonos app so it should be pretty similar in use. Regarding the Sonos remote, the screen is really the worst part about it, I took the second photo of all the remotes at least 1 stop underexposed to show the screen content more clearly, otherwise it's pretty washed out. I think they could shrink/slim it down some, but I personally like their use of hard-buttons. Even if they made the new remote touchscreen, I would still like to see a combination of soft and hard buttons.

Regarding the Duet, I kind of hastily set it up, anyhow I was running the SqueezeCenter on my Windows server and it created a log file 15.4GB in size, which I have yet to diagnose the reason for. Therefore, for stability and file security purposes, I am going to attempt to install SqueezeCenter on a Maxtor Fusion NAS. I bought a bunch on clearance for cheap, they have a Celeron processor in them along with an upgradeable so-dimm and gigabit LAN. I currently have 2 running Ubuntu/Samba server, and I get pretty good upload/download speeds, so I figure it should be able to handle a few SB players. I just need to find some time to tear one down and load a base OS on the drive with VNC.

ChicagoTC,

The iTouch only gets used for trips, so it will now be predominantly a remote. The other thing to consider is someone was so inclined to run a combo Sonos and Squeeze system that it could control both with the proper apps. I did buy the iPeng app for SB, but have yet to hook back up the Duet. I believe the developer has tried to imitate the Sonos app so it should be pretty similar in use. Regarding the Sonos remote, the screen is really the worst part about it, I took the second photo of all the remotes at least 1 stop underexposed to show the screen content more clearly, otherwise it's pretty washed out. I think they could shrink/slim it down some, but I personally like their use of hard-buttons. Even if they made the new remote touchscreen, I would still like to see a combination of soft and hard buttons.

Regarding the Duet, I kind of hastily set it up, anyhow I was running the SqueezeCenter on my Windows server and it created a log file 15.4GB in size, which I have yet to diagnose the reason for. Therefore, for stability and file security purposes, I am going to attempt to install SqueezeCenter on a Maxtor Fusion NAS. I bought a bunch on clearance for cheap, they have a Celeron processor in them along with an upgradeable so-dimm and gigabit LAN. I currently have 2 running Ubuntu/Samba server, and I get pretty good upload/download speeds, so I figure it should be able to handle a few SB players. I just need to find some time to tear one down and load a base OS on the drive with VNC.


SC is unfortunately the worst part of the duet/sb system. The fact that its not standard upnp or the units just dont talk over SMB like xbmc or a sonos to me is a detractor. Even on a fast machine SC is slow.... I always seem to be fixing something with it.

If only XBMC had multizone support.... for single zones its great... lots of control options etc...

sonos has the multizone thing down. The setups I have used have all been seemless and realible. They understand the the usability aspect of their product very well and its priced accordingly... Still a bargain though compared to some of the higher end offerings....

iphone/itouch makes a great remote for many products....

Sean

SC is unfortunately the worst part of the duet/sb system. The fact that its not standard upnp or the units just dont talk over SMB like xbmc or a sonos to me is a detractor. Even on a fast machine SC is slow.... I always seem to be fixing something with it.


I agree to some extent, but I am curious about the speed issue...I have never had SC be slow either through the web interface or the controllers. What kind of machines/os are you using?

I agree to some extent, but I am curious about the speed issue...I have never had SC be slow either through the web interface or the controllers. What kind of machines/os are you using?

Slow on my 30K song library

on

C2DUO 1.8
P4 2.8 Ghz
600 Mhz PIIII

Totally unusalble on my ready nas....

its plugs along nicely on my quad core

many may think its ok till you compare it to its competition then its nature as a dog becomes very evident....

Sean

Slow on my 30K song library

on

C2DUO 1.8
P4 2.8 Ghz
600 Mhz PIIII

Totally unusalble on my ready nas....

its plugs along nicely on my quad core

many may think its ok till you compare it to its competition then its nature as a dog becomes very evident....

Sean

I can understand the PIII and the ready NAS the other two there is no reason for any server related latency issues. My library is smaller than yours, but as soon as I can click on something it is visible using an old celeron machine. That is interesting that you have issues with them.

Sean, have you had SC address a smaller library and judged performance, yours is 3x the size of mine. The server I was running it off has a xeon quad, so I imagine I was getting top tier access speeds. Just wondering before I go through all the trouble just to have it bog down and be slow. It's really more of a test to see if it's possible to run a NAServer type setup for Squeeze. I will say after using the Sonos I couldn't stand much, if any, slower load times.

Sean, have you had SC address a smaller library and judged performance, yours is 3x the size of mine. The server I was running it off has a xeon quad, so I imagine I was getting top tier access speeds. Just wondering before I go through all the trouble just to have it bog down and be slow. It's really more of a test to see if it's possible to run a NAServer type setup for Squeeze. I will say after using the Sonos I couldn't stand much, if any, slower load times.

LB - I would be interested in your results in side by side testing. The controller speeds for the demo I played with is one of the reasons that I choose squeeze over sonos, so I would be curious if I had a bum setup to play with.

LB, one correction (that may be a typo on your part) - The ZP120 does have analog inputs. It lacks the analog outputs of it's predecessor, the ZP100.

Fixed that thanks, after seeing the subwoofer out I mistook the adjacent LR jacks as outputs as well.

LB, one correction (that may be a typo on your part) - The ZP120 does have analog inputs. It lacks the analog outputs of it's predecessor, the ZP100.

Jonnio, are you referring to the screen inteface, for example how fast an action took on the remote itself, like a search query. Or are you referring to the speed in which the extender/player responded once a selection on the remote was made? Either way I can try and get some quantitative results tomorrow with both the factory remotes and the iTouch apps.


LB - I would be interested in your results in side by side testing. The controller speeds for the demo I played with is one of the reasons that I choose squeeze over sonos, so I would be curious if I had a bum setup to play with.

Jonnio, are you referring to the screen inteface, for example how fast an action took on the remote itself, like a search query. Or are you referring to the speed in which the extender/player responded once a selection on the remote was made? Either way I can try and get some quantitative results tomorrow with both the factory remotes and the iTouch apps.

It was general menu navigation - for instance if I clicked on genre, the amount of time it took to bring up a listing of songs was so long I actually had clicked on it again thinking my click didn't register, which of course starts the inevitable loop of the impatient (you know where you try and anticipate what menu it will stop on and preclick to get to where you want to go :) )

LB - I would be interested in your results in side by side testing. The controller speeds for the demo I played with is one of the reasons that I choose squeeze over sonos, so I would be curious if I had a bum setup to play with.

It was general menu navigation - for instance if I clicked on genre, the amount of time it took to bring up a listing of songs was so long I actually had clicked on it again thinking my click didn't register, which of course starts the inevitable loop of the impatient (you know where you try and anticipate what menu it will stop on and preclick to get to where you want to go :) )

Sonos should be instantaneous because the sort tags are held in memory. No need to do a disk read at the server when they are already read in. Your demo probably had communication problems.

I did buy the iPeng app for SB, but have yet to hook back up the Duet. I believe the developer has tried to imitate the Sonos app so it should be pretty similar in use.

Cool. Would like to get your opinion on iPeng. If you have any more questions on this, please ask!

BUT one thing: iPeng - albeit as a Webapp - has been around almost one year before the Sonos iPhone app came out.
But I agree both are somewhat modeled after Apple's iPhone UI and indeed iPeng's MultiPlayer control is modeled a bit after Sonos' zone capabilities.

Oh, BTW. 1st post here, so:
"Hello". I'm the iPeng author.

Sonos should be instantaneous because the sort tags are held in memory. No need to do a disk read at the server when they are already read in. Your demo probably had communication problems.

That is what I was wondering. It did seem like it was communication lag, not file access lag, based on the way it didn't acknowledge the button press. Once it did the screen immediately changed though.

Jonnio, I can tell you this evening I plugged the ZoneBridge into a switch on the lowest level, the ZP90 top level by the door, and the ZP120 across the street on my neighbors deck along with the bookshelf's, and the interface was still lightning fast using the Sonos remote. At first I thought it was lagging on searches, but then I realized I was entering the whole artists name so there was no second result, the artist I was searching popped up near instantaneous. Songs queued immediately at both houses. I also connected a laptop to the ZP120 across the street and downloaded a large file using FTM to see if it would cause any hiccups, and still it continued to play smoothly. I ran a WAN bandwidth test and was getting a 1873kb/s connection. I have yet to test LAN bandwidth, hopefully tomorrow if I am not too busy, I had a box of computer hardware arrive today so I have some building and swapping to do tomorrow.

Anyhow I think you have sampled some bad hardware, or depending how long ago it was, an update since then may have fixed the issue you were experiencing.

Jonnio, I can tell you this evening I plugged the ZoneBridge into a switch on the lowest level, the ZP90 top level by the door, and the ZP120 across the street on my neighbors deck along with the bookshelf's, and the interface was still lightning fast using the Sonos remote. At first I thought it was lagging on searches, but then I realized I was entering the whole artists name so there was no second result, the artist I was searching popped up near instantaneous. Songs queued immediately at both houses. I also connected a laptop to the ZP120 across the street and downloaded a large file using FTM to see if it would cause any hiccups, and still it continued to play smoothly. I ran a WAN bandwidth test and was getting a 1873kb/s connection. I have yet to test LAN bandwidth, hopefully tomorrow if I am not too busy, I had a box of computer hardware arrive today so I have some building and swapping to do tomorrow.

Anyhow I think you have sampled some bad hardware, or depending how long ago it was, an update since then may have fixed the issue you were experiencing.

Thanks for the update - If I get a chance this weekend I was going to post a video of how fast my Duet remote is selecting songs etc... so that you could compare it to your squeezebox and the Sonos and maybe let people know which is the more responsive overall.

I do still have to admit that I am disappointed that after the major entry of the Linksys stuff that this is back to Sonos or Squeeze with you leaning towards Sonos for your needs. Not that I am disappointed in you leaning towards Sonos, but that Linksys really has no chance in the market.

Fantastic review. I personally have owned the Sonos system for 2.5 years, and it has become my most enjoyable gadget *ever*. Wife agrees too.

I was hoping Cisco would bring some serious competition, and this way help bring the price of the Sonos system down -- but it appears that may not happen... I suspect with such poor reviews popping around on the web, sales will be abyssmal, and Cisco will kill the product line.

Thanks for all the effort, you have saved me some g rief, as I myself was trying to find out how the Cisco unit performed.

And not only what appears to be a great product on paper, but a very poorly executed one, I posted 3 very simple feature-related questions on the Linksys by Cisco technical support forums (click here) (http://forums.linksys.com/linksys/board?board.id=PreSales1) over a week ago that still remain unanswered by them.

So, in frustration, I posted a message 2 days ago on the board lamenting about how poor their tech support was in that in a week they can't even answer these 3 questions.

What does Cisco do? Instead of answering or apologizing, they erase my thread and the 3 questions still sit there unanswered.

That and the bad reviews is enough for me to stick with Sonos and swear off Cisco's music system forever.

Wow, I’m sorry and surprised to hear of the poor experience with the Cisco products. That is a shame. On the chance that your experience could have been more of an exception, I thought I’d share my experience as well, as it could not have been more different.
I purchased the Cisco Wireless Audio Premier Kit, which includes the wireless touch-screen Controller, the Extender (for connecting to an AV Receiver or other self-powered device), and the self-powered Director. It also includes a free year of Rhapsody service for a limited time – a nice bonus, I would later find. My wireless router is the WTR610N and I have a Vista laptop.
I didn’t bother with the manual setup and instead went straight to the CD, which based on the previous review sounds like is the way to go. It proceeded to load all of the setup software without issue. After a few minutes it then provides a prompt to begin setting up the individual devices. You simply select the radio button next to the device you would like to setup. It asks you to do a hardline connect to start, then to plug the power in, then hit Next. PRESTO, in a matter of minutes the device was up and running. The software did a quick check to make sure it is available wirelessly (asking me to disconnect the hardline in the process), provided the option to name the “zone” it will be in, and I was done.
At this point the software asks if you would like to connect additional devices, and it took me through the same set of steps for each device. The only difference is the touchscreen controller, which requires a usb connection to a PC or laptop. It also asked me for my account information for online services such as Rhapsody.
As soon as I had completed the setup of the three devices, I placed them in each of their respective rooms, connected them to my audio system or individual speakers as appropriate, and off I went. First, I familiarized myself with the wireless control, which I found to be pretty intuitive. The GUI is nice, but I did find that the touch screen could be a little more sensitive, as it did not always recognize my finger initially. It seems to prefer a slightly longer press, although not annoyingly so, just a fraction of a second longer than expected. It also provides the same functions with the spin wheel on the side, which was a nice feature and what I find myself using the majority of the time. In any case, seven choices are given on the first screen:

Settings – for accessing network options, screen appearance and button options, and changing “zones”
Rhapsody – access to the Rhapsody service
All Libraries – access to your personal music libraries on devices that are on your home network
Radiotime – access to the Radiotime service – live, online streaming of radio stations across the world.
Now Playing Queue – what is currently in your queue to play.
Play To – option to synchronize zones to play the same music without any delay.
Favorites – 10 assignable slots for your top songs, playlists, artists, etc. from any of the above music sources.

I first went into All Libraries, where the controller was able to immediately identify my laptop and found all of my music, organizing it all as you would expect – by artist, album, genre, etc. It also provides a search by function and allows you to simply peruse individual folders on the computer. I am happy to say that this worked flawlessly for me, and I was able to listen to my music without issue.

Radiotime is a free service that streams radio broadcasts from around the globe over the internet. It is organized by talk, sports, music, etc. and further by genre. It even recognizes your local stations. It is a feature that I enjoyed a lot. A handful of the radio stations, however, do not seem to be compatible with the players. They are few and far between, but still a bit frustrating when you come across one, as you’d expect this service to work the same for all sources.

The ultimate, though is the Rhapsody service. Not only did it work without any issues at all, the quality of the broadcasts was a terrific surprise. I have a high end home theater system that can be picky with substandard material, but with this service it came through full and rich sounding, with all of the dynamics you would expect from a CD. Needless to say, having access to a digital pantheon of music of this quality, either that I can search or that is streamed to me through “channels” was a great experience that worked for me without a single hiccup after I signed up for the service.

Use of the Now Playing Queue require a quick read of the Controller User Guide, as features such as repeat and shuffle are not immediately obvious (a right click of the spin wheel brings up the available playback features, which vary depending on the source). However, once I became familiar with these features, playing the music in the queue in the manor I wanted worked as expected. Overall, I found the playback functionality to be uneventful - which is a good thing.

There are, of course, a few areas that need improvement. For one, trying to use the Director without either the included IR remote or touch screen controller is not pleasant. As explained in the previous review, there are two variable function buttons on either side of the screen (4 total) and their functions are not always displayed on the screen, so you have to remember what each one does. It can be annoying to work with the director like this. I found that just using the IR remote was simpler and easier, and of course it can be controlled with the touch screen controller just like the Extender. The touch screen controller’s battery life is not long enough – an hour or so of heavy use at which point it needs to be plugged in to either an electrical outlet or usb port. And the touch screen itself could be a bit more sensitive, as explained previously. I would also like to see more support for different audio files, such as the lossless versions from Apple and Microsoft.

Overall, the setup and use of this system has exceeded my expectations. For me, the setup process worked exactly as expected and without any hiccups. I was up and running in 30 minutes or so. Access to content, be it on my laptop, Radiotime, or Rhapsody was similarly easy and painless, and quite intuitive. The quality of music is a wonderful surprise and gives me confidence that my CD purchasing expenses will start to decrease dramatically. Despite a couple of quirks with the UI, this system is providing to be a sound investment and providing a lot of enjoyment.

1 hour battery time on the controller is a very serious issue imho. I can spend the entire day with my Sonos controller without charge. often, I can spend 2 days without even thinking about the battery charge, with regular use!
:confused:

1 hour battery time on the controller is a very serious issue imho. I can spend the entire day with my Sonos controller without charge. often, I can spend 2 days without even thinking about the battery charge, with regular use!
:confused:
Yeah, I see where it can be. I found it not to be to much of an issue because of the Cisco Media Player interface on my laptop. It's pretty slick and lets you control everything easily. Also, with normal use I find the controller to last most of the day on a charge - that is, setting up your music queue and making changes here and there. If you're contantly on it, utilizing the wireless and the LCD screen for an extended period of time, it obviously won't last as long.

Bruiser,

Glad to hear you had a better experience and it worked out for you. As I later stated I figured I received some defective hardware, the shame was Cisco's answer was for me to keep trying to re-install, somehow expecting a different outcome. I checked my voice-mail this morning and I had a message from a local Cisco representative (same area code and all, not Delhi), the saying "a little too late" comes to mind. Anyhow I see you noted the same poor battery life on the remote, and it wasn't just my defective one. I find it highly unacceptable, not being able to spend a single afternoon out on the patio without worrying about the thing dying is/was not going to work for me.

Anyhow, I am glad your system actually worked, enjoy your purchase.

Regarding the remote interface and speed of actions between the SB Duet and the Sonos, here is what I found out this weekend. I setup the ZoneBridge right next to my router, and placed the Duet and ZP90 one story up in an open cabinet. I proceeded by randomly queuing 20 artists along with 20 albums using the factory remotes, indexed to and accessing the same file server, and then averaged the times for both units.

Results:

Duet - Artist = 1.08 seconds
- Album = 3.93 seconds

ZP90 - Artist = .77 seconds
- Album = .82 seconds

The difference for Artist was barely perceivable, but Albums was another thing. Regarding other operations during playback like pause, next, mute, etc. they were both fast and responsive, with no obvious difference.

I also had a go with the iPeng app for Squeeze control using the iTouch. I updated to the latest version 1.05 and the app ran flawlessly. It is similar in many ways to the Sonos app but also different. On the home page it has 4 icons/shortcuts along the bottom, which can be changed to your liking in options, that allow 1 touch navigation to artists, albums, search, internet radio, or whichever you choose to put down there. The other feature I liked was that during playback you can swipe right to left and it brings up the track list of the album your listening to as a translucent mask over the cover art allowing quick selection of a new track with a single touch, where in the Sonos app you must navigate back using the small arrow, select the song, and then play now. If you perform the opposite, or a left to right swipe, iPeng brings up your zones with individual volume control, play/pause, sync, and power controls for each. Both apps are fast and responsive, they loaded album art quickly, and give the user a nice alternative to the factory remotes for both systems. I really enjoyed having the large screen of the iTouch over the small guy on the SB remote, and once again found myself using the iTouch almost exclusively.

I can concur tha the Sonos is extremely easy to use. The only problem I have had is that occasionally the itouch loses sync and needs rebooting. usually after using a non-apple application.

Your making me want to get an itouch now!

I also had a go with the iPeng app for Squeeze control using the iTouch. I updated to the latest version 1.05 and the app ran flawlessly. It is similar in many ways to the Sonos app but also different. On the home page it has 4 icons/shortcuts along the bottom, which can be changed to your liking in options, that allow 1 touch navigation to artists, albums, search, internet radio, or whichever you choose to put down there. The other feature I liked was that during playback you can swipe right to left and it brings up the track list of the album your listening to as a translucent mask over the cover art allowing quick selection of a new track with a single touch, where in the Sonos app you must navigate back using the small arrow, select the song, and then play now. If you perform the opposite, or a left to right swipe, iPeng brings up your zones with individual volume control, play/pause, sync, and power controls for each. Both apps are fast and responsive, they loaded album art quickly, and give the user a nice alternative to the factory remotes for both systems. I really enjoyed having the large screen of the iTouch over the small guy on the SB remote, and once again found myself using the iTouch almost exclusively.

I'm really interested in checking out the Linksys product, however I am thinking it is too new to see any reviews just yet? Has anyone reviewed this product yet besides the OP in this thread?

I was heavily leaning towards the SB Duet, but the Linksys has me intrigued...it can do Videos and Pictures too.

The SB Duet and Sonos have the advantage that they have been on the market and have a lot of the quirks/bugs worked out. These days, I don't have time to be a beta tester...

Hmmmmmm.

Chris

Check amazon.com for 2 reviews as of today. One poor (1/5), the other good (4/5).

Hi all, thanks for the great reviews and comments on the products. I just ordered the Cisco NAS (NMH405) and the WRT610N router as a first step to get the entire setup (premier kit) Just like others I felt there was more potential on this setup with videos and pictures than simply audio.
I have to say I am now worried :eek: with the poor reviews the Cisco gear are getting and wondered if the NAS will work with Sonos the same way it is supposed to do with the Cisco gear. Can one of the Sonos users confirm this for me please?:confused:
Also it seems to me Cisco is paving the road to release some sort of media center to be hooked to the TV and HT that should not only play music, but pictures and HD video from their NAS with the same platform (remote, look and feel). I guess another option is to take a few months to organize the media libraries from the disparate sources I have them now, while Cisco works out the bugs…
Thanks,
Martin

Hi all, thanks for the great reviews and comments on the products. I just ordered the Cisco NAS (NMH405) and the WRT610N router as a first step to get the entire setup (premier kit) Just like others I felt there was more potential on this setup with videos and pictures than simply audio.
I have to say I am now worried :eek: with the poor reviews the Cisco gear are getting and wondered if the NAS will work with Sonos the same way it is supposed to do with the Cisco gear. Can one of the Sonos users confirm this for me please?:confused:
Also it seems to me Cisco is paving the road to release some sort of media center to be hooked to the TV and HT that should not only play music, but pictures and HD video from their NAS with the same platform (remote, look and feel). I guess another option is to take a few months to organize the media libraries from the disparate sources I have them now, while Cisco works out the bugs…
Thanks,
Martin

Any SMB capable NAS is compatible with Sonos. You don't have to run any server on the NAS, you only need the minimum file access that SMB provides. The Cisco NAS will work fine, but it's really overkill (re. expensive!!) for what you need with Sonos. A $150 Buffalo Linkstation would do fine.

Hi all, thanks for the great reviews and comments on the products. I just ordered the Cisco NAS (NMH405) and the WRT610N router as a first step to get the entire setup (premier kit) Just like others I felt there was more potential on this setup with videos and pictures than simply audio.
I have to say I am now worried :eek: with the poor reviews the Cisco gear are getting and wondered if the NAS will work with Sonos the same way it is supposed to do with the Cisco gear. Can one of the Sonos users confirm this for me please?:confused:
Also it seems to me Cisco is paving the road to release some sort of media center to be hooked to the TV and HT that should not only play music, but pictures and HD video from their NAS with the same platform (remote, look and feel). I guess another option is to take a few months to organize the media libraries from the disparate sources I have them now, while Cisco works out the bugs…
Thanks,
Martin

Martin, I'll be curious to read your thoughts on the entire package once you receive it and set it up. I hope the product works well, as it has good intentions :D Let us know when it arrives and how things go.

Chris

CFoote, can you elaborate on this, are you referring to a Linksys Media Extender? The DMP collection of wireless music players does not do video or pictures.



I was heavily leaning towards the SB Duet, but the Linksys has me intrigued...it can do Videos and Pictures too.

CFoote, can you elaborate on this, are you referring to a Linksys Media Extender? The DMP collection of wireless music players does not do video or pictures.

Hi there, you are right, I am not referring to the Linksys Media Extender, this was what I was referring to:

http://www.linksysbycisco.com/US/en/products/NMH410


I was assuming this system (the link below) could work with the the Media Hub I linked to above:

http://www.linksysbycisco.com/US/en/products/WirelessHomeAudio


However, maybe I have it all wrong. What exactly did you purchase from the links above?

Chris

Martin, I'll be curious to read your thoughts on the entire package once you receive it and set it up. I hope the product works well, as it has good intentions :D Let us know when it arrives and how things go.

Chris

Hi Chris, my plan is to first buy the media hub and after a few months of research pull the trigger on the wireless audio device, either linksys or sonos depending on everybody's comments/reviews. I will be more than happy to provide feedback on the Media Hub as soon as it arrives (around 20 days :confused:). Let me know if this will interest you. Thanks, Martin

Any SMB capable NAS is compatible with Sonos. You don't have to run any server on the NAS, you only need the minimum file access that SMB provides. The Cisco NAS will work fine, but it's really overkill (re. expensive!!) for what you need with Sonos. A $150 Buffalo Linkstation would do fine.

Thanks! I still like the functionality provided on the linksys media hub over the regular network storage device :D

Hi there, you are right, I am not referring to the Linksys Media Extender, this was what I was referring to:

http://www.linksysbycisco.com/US/en/products/NMH410


I was assuming this system (the link below) could work with the the Media Hub I linked to above:

http://www.linksysbycisco.com/US/en/products/WirelessHomeAudio


However, maybe I have it all wrong. What exactly did you purchase from the links above?

Chris

Chris,
It really seems to me like the missing piece of the puzzle is a device that could be hooked to the TV with a nice touchscreen and that could be controlled with the same linksys controller. Something like the Apple TV but should connect to the Media Hub to play music, videos or photos, I personally don't like the media extender look. My 2 cents.

Hi Chris, my plan is to first buy the media hub and after a few months of research pull the trigger on the wireless audio device, either linksys or sonos depending on everybody's comments/reviews. I will be more than happy to provide feedback on the Media Hub as soon as it arrives (around 20 days :confused:). Let me know if this will interest you. Thanks, Martin


That would be great, let us know what you think!!

Chris,
It really seems to me like the missing piece of the puzzle is a device that could be hooked to the TV with a nice touchscreen and that could be controlled with the same linksys controller. Something like the Apple TV but should connect to the Media Hub to play music, videos or photos, I personally don't like the media extender look. My 2 cents.

I agree, and at some point we may see that product produced. We are in the infancy of this technology. I see Blu-Ray eventually going away and everything going digital.

I purchased the KWHA700 home audio set. The products you provided links to are designed to work together, yes, but the DMP home audio products only do audio. However, you can use the media hub for storing photos, and videos, and whatever else you like. I will tell you that 1 Terabyte won't last long if you start backing up your DVD and HD media, but for music it will be more than enough for the average collection.

The question you need to ask yourself is whether you plan to keep that box accessible, and need the ability to dump files directly from memory cards. If not, then you have a plethora of cheaper, tried and tested NAS units to choose from.


Hi there, you are right, I am not referring to the Linksys Media Extender, this was what I was referring to:

http://www.linksysbycisco.com/US/en/products/NMH410


I was assuming this system (the link below) could work with the the Media Hub I linked to above:

http://www.linksysbycisco.com/US/en/products/WirelessHomeAudio


However, maybe I have it all wrong. What exactly did you purchase from the links above?

Chris

Wow, I’m sorry and surprised to hear of the poor experience with the Cisco products. That is a shame. On the chance that your experience could have been more of an exception, I thought I’d share my experience as well, as it could not have been more different.
I purchased the Cisco Wireless Audio Premier Kit, which includes the wireless touch-screen Controller, the Extender (for connecting to an AV Receiver or other self-powered device), and the self-powered Director. It also includes a free year of Rhapsody service for a limited time – a nice bonus, I would later find. My wireless router is the WTR610N and I have a Vista laptop.
I didn’t bother with the manual setup and instead went straight to the CD, which based on the previous review sounds like is the way to go. It proceeded to load all of the setup software without issue. After a few minutes it then provides a prompt to begin setting up the individual devices. You simply select the radio button next to the device you would like to setup. It asks you to do a hardline connect to start, then to plug the power in, then hit Next. PRESTO, in a matter of minutes the device was up and running. The software did a quick check to make sure it is available wirelessly (asking me to disconnect the hardline in the process), provided the option to name the “zone” it will be in, and I was done.
At this point the software asks if you would like to connect additional devices, and it took me through the same set of steps for each device. The only difference is the touchscreen controller, which requires a usb connection to a PC or laptop. It also asked me for my account information for online services such as Rhapsody.
As soon as I had completed the setup of the three devices, I placed them in each of their respective rooms, connected them to my audio system or individual speakers as appropriate, and off I went. First, I familiarized myself with the wireless control, which I found to be pretty intuitive. The GUI is nice, but I did find that the touch screen could be a little more sensitive, as it did not always recognize my finger initially. It seems to prefer a slightly longer press, although not annoyingly so, just a fraction of a second longer than expected. It also provides the same functions with the spin wheel on the side, which was a nice feature and what I find myself using the majority of the time. In any case, seven choices are given on the first screen:

Settings – for accessing network options, screen appearance and button options, and changing “zones”
Rhapsody – access to the Rhapsody service
All Libraries – access to your personal music libraries on devices that are on your home network
Radiotime – access to the Radiotime service – live, online streaming of radio stations across the world.
Now Playing Queue – what is currently in your queue to play.
Play To – option to synchronize zones to play the same music without any delay.
Favorites – 10 assignable slots for your top songs, playlists, artists, etc. from any of the above music sources.

I first went into All Libraries, where the controller was able to immediately identify my laptop and found all of my music, organizing it all as you would expect – by artist, album, genre, etc. It also provides a search by function and allows you to simply peruse individual folders on the computer. I am happy to say that this worked flawlessly for me, and I was able to listen to my music without issue.

Radiotime is a free service that streams radio broadcasts from around the globe over the internet. It is organized by talk, sports, music, etc. and further by genre. It even recognizes your local stations. It is a feature that I enjoyed a lot. A handful of the radio stations, however, do not seem to be compatible with the players. They are few and far between, but still a bit frustrating when you come across one, as you’d expect this service to work the same for all sources.

The ultimate, though is the Rhapsody service. Not only did it work without any issues at all, the quality of the broadcasts was a terrific surprise. I have a high end home theater system that can be picky with substandard material, but with this service it came through full and rich sounding, with all of the dynamics you would expect from a CD. Needless to say, having access to a digital pantheon of music of this quality, either that I can search or that is streamed to me through “channels” was a great experience that worked for me without a single hiccup after I signed up for the service.

Use of the Now Playing Queue require a quick read of the Controller User Guide, as features such as repeat and shuffle are not immediately obvious (a right click of the spin wheel brings up the available playback features, which vary depending on the source). However, once I became familiar with these features, playing the music in the queue in the manor I wanted worked as expected. Overall, I found the playback functionality to be uneventful - which is a good thing.

There are, of course, a few areas that need improvement. For one, trying to use the Director without either the included IR remote or touch screen controller is not pleasant. As explained in the previous review, there are two variable function buttons on either side of the screen (4 total) and their functions are not always displayed on the screen, so you have to remember what each one does. It can be annoying to work with the director like this. I found that just using the IR remote was simpler and easier, and of course it can be controlled with the touch screen controller just like the Extender. The touch screen controller’s battery life is not long enough – an hour or so of heavy use at which point it needs to be plugged in to either an electrical outlet or usb port. And the touch screen itself could be a bit more sensitive, as explained previously. I would also like to see more support for different audio files, such as the lossless versions from Apple and Microsoft.

Overall, the setup and use of this system has exceeded my expectations. For me, the setup process worked exactly as expected and without any hiccups. I was up and running in 30 minutes or so. Access to content, be it on my laptop, Radiotime, or Rhapsody was similarly easy and painless, and quite intuitive. The quality of music is a wonderful surprise and gives me confidence that my CD purchasing expenses will start to decrease dramatically. Despite a couple of quirks with the UI, this system is providing to be a sound investment and providing a lot of enjoyment.

Just wondering, is it all working as expected? any updates after a few more days using the system? ;) Thanks much, Martin

I purchased the KWHA700 home audio set. The products you provided links to are designed to work together, yes, but the DMP home audio products only do audio. However, you can use the media hub for storing photos, and videos, and whatever else you like. I will tell you that 1 Terabyte won't last long if you start backing up your DVD and HD media, but for music it will be more than enough for the average collection.

The question you need to ask yourself is whether you plan to keep that box accessible, and need the ability to dump files directly from memory cards. If not, then you have a plethora of cheaper, tried and tested NAS units to choose from.

Thanks a lot for the excellent advice. You are right, a NAS unit can do 95% of what Linksys's device can do, and for a lot less. It finally clicked with me that the DMP products can access the Linksys Media Hub, but only for music. I'll be very curious to hear of your thoughts on the Duet and Sonos as soon as you receive them.

We all appreciate the effort in posting your thoughts, so thank you ahead of time!

Chris

Overall, the setup and use of this system has exceeded my expectations. For me, the setup process worked exactly as expected and without any hiccups. I was up and running in 30 minutes or so. Access to content, be it on my laptop, Radiotime, or Rhapsody was similarly easy and painless, and quite intuitive. The quality of music is a wonderful surprise and gives me confidence that my CD purchasing expenses will start to decrease dramatically. Despite a couple of quirks with the UI, this system is providing to be a sound investment and providing a lot of enjoyment.

Out of interest, what made you go for the Cisco over the other devices out there?

Chris,

My thoughts on the Duet are included with the Cisco review, and my Sonos review which is about post 8 or 9 on page 1.

I would rate Sonos #1 because of it's Sub-net, and the ability to connect LAN based storage to one of the units and be done with it. However I think they could upgrade their system with additional features/higher end components, or they could drop their prices a bit. But it's business and they're job is to make a profit, so we'll have to wait and see what their engineers are developing, and how much of a dent Cisco puts in their sales. The average consumer will be drawn towards the Cisco with its color displays, touchscreen remote, and a UI that looks simple. But having tried both, even if the Cisco worked properly, I would go for the Sonos. The Squeezebox takes a little more effort to setup, and has it's moments every once in a while, but also costs much less. When used with the iPeng app for the iTouch, it seems very much like a Sonos. However I would prefer not having to run SqueezeCenter to manage my shares, and yet another client on my network. There are many variables one has to weigh, including what storage, hardware, and network components they already own, before deciding which system best suits them.


I'll be very curious to hear of your thoughts on the Duet and Sonos as soon as you receive them.

We all appreciate the effort in posting your thoughts, so thank you ahead of time!

Chris

You can get ZP modified by Cullen for better sound. They do sound a lot better but it is pricy.

You can get ZP modified by Cullen for better sound. They do sound a lot better but it is pricy.

Do you have one of these? On a scale of 1 to 10 what is a Sonos and a Sonos/Cullen and what would the respective prices be?

Do you have one of these? On a scale of 1 to 10 what is a Sonos and a Sonos/Cullen and what would the respective prices be?

A ZP90 is $350, A modified unit is $800. I never had an unmodified unit but in shopping others described the effect as dramatic. I can clearly hear the improvement when playing a ripped CD losslessly through the modded Sonos compared to the original. Processor is Lexicon MC12

A ZP90 is $350, A modified unit is $800. I never had an unmodified unit but in shopping others described the effect as dramatic. I can clearly hear the improvement when playing a ripped CD losslessly through the modded Sonos compared to the original. Processor is Lexicon MC12

Your reply is confusing. How can you perceive the improvement in a modified unit over an unmodified unit if, as you say above, you've never had an unmodified unit?

I can hear the difference between the original CD and a CD ripped losslessly and then played through the Sonos. I did an A/B where I started then simultaneously and then rapidly switched back and forth. I did this with me wife who didn't know which was which and she also clearly preferred the Sonos playing.

Internet radio (Pandora) sound much better than XM through directv.

Now it's even more confusing.

Are the two Sonos you are playing these tracks on modified or unmodified? Your previous post said that you do not have an unmodified Sonos, yet you said the sound was better on the modified. How would you know if you have never heard the same track on an unmodified?

a) play the original CD in a CD/DVD player
b) ripped copy of the same CD streaming through the modded Sonos

b sounds better. The circuitry in it makes the original CD sound better. For a discussion of modded vs. unmodded comparisons you can start here. http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ddgtl&1204503359&openfrom&39&4

Just wondering, is it all working as expected? any updates after a few more days using the system? ;) Thanks much, Martin
Still completely loving it. I'm listening to it right now, in fact. :) Nothing new or unexpected to report. For anyone who might be concerned about performance of the wireless network, I can tell you that I haven't come across a single drop, any lagging, anything like that. It just keeps streaming the music.

Out of interest, what made you go for the Cisco over the other devices out there?
Well, I knew I didn't want to invest in anything on a closed system - my main issue with Sonos. I wanted something that used established standards on an open network. Over the next several years I expect that there is going to be a lot of innovation in terms of media streaming and other, as yet unforeseen, technologies that will integrate the devices on wireless network and I didn't want to be trapped. That left just a few options like Squeezebox, Cisco, etc. I liked the Cisco package because it happened to provided exactly what I was looking for - a means to send music to my home theater system digitally (via optical) in one room, and a separate, powered streamer for my bedroom, and a controller that can control it all at once. I like that I can control all parts of the system as one - from a single application and / or controller. Something I didn't see in the various squeezebox products. Plus, I think it looks the coolest. :) The free year-long subscription to rhapsody didn't hurt, either.

alv,

Thanks for the link.

So you're saying that the analog output sounds better from a modified ZP than from the DAC on your CD/DVD player. Or were you outputting digital from the CD/DVD player and letting your receiver do the analog conversion?

I assume a second option would be the purchase of a mid-priced standalone DAC. Has someone compared a modified ZP vs. a unmodified that's plugged into a $450 DAC ?

Here's a quote from the link alv posted for people interested in what modifications Cullen makes to the ZP80

These are the mods:
The upgrade consists of installing a new custom Cullen Circuits designed pc board that contains:
1) A high end sample rate converter made by TI
2) A low jitter clock with less than .5ps jitter
3) A low noise power supply for the clock
4) A new micro processor
5) Input & output digital buffers.
6) New upgraded RCA output jacks are added.


a) play the original CD in a CD/DVD player
b) ripped copy of the same CD streaming through the modded Sonos

b sounds better. The circuitry in it makes the original CD sound better. For a discussion of modded vs. unmodded comparisons you can start here. http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ddgtl&1204503359&openfrom&39&4

alv,

Thanks for the link.

So you're saying that the analog output sounds better from a modified ZP than from the DAC on your CD/DVD player. Or were you outputting digital from the CD/DVD player and letting your receiver do the analog conversion?

I assume a second option would be the purchase of a mid-priced standalone DAC. Has someone compared a modified ZP vs. a unmodified that's plugged into a $450 DAC ?

Here's a quote from the link alv posted for people interested in what modifications Cullen makes to the ZP80

I was comparing digital outs on both. The upconversion that the modded sonos does helps the sound. I am not familiar enough with the exact technology to explain why.

Well, I knew I didn't want to invest in anything on a closed system - my main issue with Sonos.

Then youve made a massive error and fallen for the misinformation that's been spread by the competition The only important part of Sonos which is proprietary is the wireless transport. That means one thing and one thing only: you aint gonna be able to connect your standard wifi to Sonos. You can get around this with a single cable. The payoff is a vastly more stable wireless capability.

In pretty much every other respects its at least as "open" as the Cisco. Over the Sonosnet wireless transport Sonos uses standard network technologies include TCP/IP, SMB and UPnP. You can even control it from other systems.

Now Im sure your happy with your system and I hope it continues to work well for you. I just find it hard to comprehend why you didn't at least try out other systems, especially when the premier system around with the best reviews and a proven track record is the same price.

Now if you had said you preferred how the Cisco units look or that it was an impulse purchase fair enough. But the reason you gave just dont make sense!

I always saw the fact that Sonos does not use established standards on an open network as a plus. Specialized is always better than generic when it comes to reliability.

Then youve made a massive error and fallen for the misinformation that's been spread by the competition The only important part of Sonos which is proprietary is the wireless transport. That means one thing and one thing only: you aint gonna be able to connect your standard wifi to Sonos. You can get around this with a single cable. The payoff is a vastly more stable wireless capability.

In pretty much every other respects its at least as "open" as the Cisco. Over the Sonosnet wireless transport Sonos uses standard network technologies include TCP/IP, SMB and UPnP. You can even control it from other systems.

Now Im sure your happy with your system and I hope it continues to work well for you. I just find it hard to comprehend why you didn't at least try out other systems, especially when the premier system around with the best reviews and a proven track record is the same price.

Now if you had said you preferred how the Cisco units look or that it was an impulse purchase fair enough. But the reason you gave just dont make sense!
LOL! Ha! I'm sorry, your honor. I didn't realize that I needed to explain the reasoning behind my purchase decision to the board.

I guess first of all, "vastly more wireless stability" is incorrect in my case - I've honestly had no network issues whatsoever to speak of. And yes, I'm guilty of prefering how it looks. :)

However, it wasn't any competitive statements / arguments spread "by the competition" that influenced my opinion, although its nice to see that you've remained un-biased. :) But, at the risk of over-simplifying a very complex issue, I am just unwilling to invest in anything that sits in the path from where the media and services are (the cloud) and the devices that use them (be it my home theater, my TV, a coffee maker, a thermostat, my toilet, who knows...) that is on a closed system. What you're talking about in this case is a choke point between my network and my home theater that on a Sonos system, Sonos owns.

Does this matter right now? Probably not. But the way things are headed, the wireless network is slowly starting to become sort of the central nervous system of the house, for lack of a better term. And you can bet that every one of these companies out there who is in this market is jockying over that little part of the network that you find insignificant for industry "ownership" of it. Whoever owns that piece of the network is in a position to make a lot of money for a long period of time, as the products and services that depend on the network, and the devices on it, expand. Think about how Microsoft took ownership of the PC... The difference here is that ownership has not yet been decided, and consumers are much more savy and more likely to demand open systems, since they encourage innovation, keep prices down, and require that companies perform - for risk of losing business.

Of course, that's just my opinion. Hope that explains it better. Although, for what it's worth (and at the risk of sounding like a bit of a blow-hard), I've got an MBA in business strategy and a Masters in IT architectures, and IT platforms as a business model was a particular area of interest / research for me. So I've got that corrupting my opinions a bit. Don't hold it against me, though.

, I am just unwilling to invest in anything that sits in the path from where the media and services are (the cloud) and the devices that use them (be it my home theater, my TV, a coffee maker, a thermostat, my toilet, who knows...) that is on a closed system. What you're talking about in this case is a choke point between my network and my home theater that on a Sonos system, Sonos owns.

I really dont get this.

Lets say you had put Sonos in. It's a parallel transport infrastructure. Why do you think this affects anything else you might put in like cables, homeplug or other wifi networks to support your home theater or coffee maker? It doesnt.

Lets say you even decide to use the spare sockets on Sonos to extend network connectivity to your TV or XBox. The Zoneplayers are network switches and have spare sockets on the back. A lot of people use Sonos in this way. Why is this any different from connecting your TV to any other vendors LAN switch including cisco? Its not.

It aint a "choke point" it aint "closed". It's just another LAN switch network which conforms to all the important standards. In fact it conforms a lot better than a lot of other cheap LAN switches out there including some linksys ones.

Of course, that's just my opinion. Hope that explains it better. Although, for what it's worth (and at the risk of sounding like a bit of a blow-hard), I've got an MBA in business strategy and a Masters in IT architectures, and IT platforms as a business model was a particular area of interest / research for me. So I've got that corrupting my opinions a bit. Don't hold it against me, though.

All very impressive but the way I look at it - if you make statements claiming something specific and negative about a system then you had better be prepared to justify and defend it.

You see when people who claim to know about this stuff make statements about a product which aint true or aint relevant then this can steer other folks decisions and they can end up buying the wrong thing because theyve been scared off the better product.

I have seen a lot of folk claiming Sonos is closed because of the Sonosnet wifi. Mostly this is employees or fans of competing systems trying to rubbish the competition by spreading misinformation. I have yet to find anyone claiming this who can justify it meaningfully.

My opinion is that anyone who calls Sonos a closed system because of the Sonosnet wifi either has a vested interest in a competitive system or doesnt really understand the way that Sonos works and how that applies to home networks.

Nothing youve said so far is even remotely close to proving this opinion to be wrong.

Then youve made a massive error and fallen for the misinformation that's been spread by the competition The only important part of Sonos which is proprietary is the wireless transport. That means one thing and one thing only: you aint gonna be able to connect your standard wifi to Sonos. You can get around this with a single cable. The payoff is a vastly more stable wireless capability.

In pretty much every other respects its at least as "open" as the Cisco. Over the Sonosnet wireless transport Sonos uses standard network technologies include TCP/IP, SMB and UPnP. You can even control it from other systems.

Now Im sure your happy with your system and I hope it continues to work well for you. I just find it hard to comprehend why you didn't at least try out other systems, especially when the premier system around with the best reviews and a proven track record is the same price.

Now if you had said you preferred how the Cisco units look or that it was an impulse purchase fair enough. But the reason you gave just dont make sense!

Twangy, out of curiosity what makes you think Bruiser has made a bad decision? other than the review provided by LBDiver on this thread that happens to be completely different from BruiserG's experience. It seems to me like it still remains to be seen which the best system is. Pesonally I am interested on the real facts because I am at the point where I can chose one or the other, so I simply want a fair review and as un-biased as possible.

Regarding the network issue, I see BruiserG’s point, with proprietary technology you are somehow lock-in to a single vendor and the more you go that path the more you end up traped on the cage, I believe one of the advantages of the non-proprietary technology (note that I am not using the termis open or closed) is that at some point someone could release a product that will connect the Cisco devices and take advantage of some of their features since it is in a non- proprietary platform, hence open for other people to explore.

I want to clarify that I do not work for Cisco, etc...
My 2 cents, Martin

Twangy, out of curiosity what makes you think Bruiser has made a bad decision?

I dont necessarily think hes made a bad decision. Ive never used the Cisco system and it might be great for him. I just think that if he was holding off on buying Sonos for the reason he stated then he has been holding off for a reason that makes no sense. It's not necessarily a bad decision but an uninformed one. He sounds like he's enjoying his Cisco system but he could have arguably got a better system for his money. He will never know because he discounted Sonos based partly on a reason which doesnt seem to make sense.

I could turn around and say "Im never going to buy the Cisco system because its a horrible bright green color". That would be my opinion and that might put people who hadnt checked into it properly from buying the Cisco system. Of course just because I state that as an opinion that dont mean its true but my stating that opinion still might influence people incorrectly.

Regarding the network issue, I see BruiserG’s point, with proprietary technology you are somehow lock-in to a single vendor and the more you go that path the more you end up traped on the cage, I believe one of the advantages of the non-proprietary technology (note that I am not using the termis open or closed) is that at some point someone could release a product that will connect the Cisco devices and take advantage of some of their features since it is in a non- proprietary platform, hence open for other people to explore.

Yes, but you CAN do this with Sonos. The implication is that you cant and this is just not true. The ONLY thing you cant do with Sonosnet is use it as a general wifi transport network for other wifi kit. It would be nice if you could do it I guess, but it doesn't stop you using your wifi router for this. Functionally there is NOTHING that the proprietary Sonosnet stops you doing that you could do it it used standard wifi.

Anyone who believes otherwise simply doesn't understand how networks work.

Look at it another way... Cisco uses proprietary technology inside their network equipment and probably in the Cisco Director. Does that mean it's somehow less functional? Does that mean it wont work with other systems? Does worrying about this make any sense? Is that significantly different from Sonos? I reckon the answer to all these is NO!

I see BruiserG’s point, with proprietary technology you are somehow lock-in to a single vendor and the more you go that path the more you end up traped on the cage, I believe one of the advantages of the non-proprietary technology (note that I am not using the termis open or closed) is that at some point someone could release a product that will connect the Cisco devices and take advantage of some of their features since it is in a non- proprietary platform, hence open for other people to explore.


I'm afraid the Cisco system is no more "open" or "non-proprietary" than Sonos. It may use standard WiFi, but it is locked up tight with regards to controlling or accessing third party players or devices. Per the Cisco support forums:

Q: UPnP control point (http://forums.linksysbycisco.com/linksys/board/message?board.id=PreSales1&thread.id=18)

I believe the Cisco controller is a so-called UPnP control point. If so: Can I control all my UPnP clients (Teac Wap-4500, Noxon iRadio, Philips SLA5520 and Arhos 605Wifi) and UPnP Twonky server on my NAS directly - and individually - with the Cisco controller without having to buy a Cisco player, etc....? This would be VERY nice....



/kos
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kos,



I spoke with one of my engineers and this is what he had to say "You have to buy a Cisco Audio Player (Director or Player) to play audio. The Controller will be able to view the content via UPnP from other DLNA devices though. " Chris.



Hopefully this is helpful,

Hal9000



HAL9000 is the Official Cisco rep. So although you may be able to see other DLNA sources via the remote/software (as you should, just as you can see UPnP via Sonos), you can't use your own DLNA client to play them. Just like Sonos. Seems like standard WiFi doesn't do a thing for getting someone out of "that cage".

Seems like standard WiFi doesn't do a thing for getting someone out of "that cage".

Of course it wont.

Dismissing Sonos for this reason is a bit like refusing to use a purple network cable arguing that it wont work with standard equipment as the standard color for cables is grey.

By the way, did anyone see this on the Linksys support forum:

What audio file formats is supported within WHA? (http://linksys.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/linksys.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=17566&p_created=1229664273&p_sid=E91S-eoj&p_accessibility=0&p_redirect=&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX3Jvd19jbnQ 9MjEsMjEmcF9wcm9kcz0wJnBfY2F0cz0xNzIxLDE3MjMmcF9wdj0mcF9jdj0 yLjE3MjMmcF9zY2ZfMz0xJnBfcGFnZT0xJnBfc2VhcmNoX3RleHQ9V0hB&p_li=&p_topview=1)
The audio formats supported within Wireless Home Audio are MP3, WAV, AAC, PCM and WMA.



No Apple lossless, no FLAC . . .

PS - One other thing I noticed - Everyone keeps saying the Cisco offering is cheaper. But the bundle that is comparable to the Sonos 150, i.e. 1 powered zone, 1 unpowered zone, and one remote, is $999, same as Sonos. You get a screen on one player and an IR remote, but for the most comparable package available, they are the exact same price.

Of course it wont.

Dismissing Sonos for this reason is a bit like refusing to use a purple network cable arguing that it wont work with standard equipment as the standard color for cables is grey.

No Twangy, it's a little different than that...although I agree with you that in the end the effects are about the same. The difference is people understand that which color cable you use doesn't matter in a network...but they don't have the same understanding of Sonos' sub-net. I always said SB was a victim of misinformation...in this forum we've heard everything from you need a wireless router to use SB, to it doesn't support FLAC...so I wouldn't be surprised...now that it is no longer as simple as SB is hard but cheap or Sonos is easy but expensive...now that there is a 3rd player involved, where the supporters of that product might start to spread misinformation about both these other two units.

Btw, I agree with Twangy that he absolutely didn't say the guy had made a bad decision because he chose Cisco and not Sonos; he said he made a mistake because he wouldn't even audition or consider it because of a fallacy. Been there, felt that.

CD

No Twangy, it's a little different than that...although I agree with you that in the end the effects are about the same. The difference is people understand that which color cable you use doesn't matter in a network...but they don't have the same understanding of Sonos' sub-net.

Yeah, youre right.

In a way that's the problem. Someone comes on a forum likes this and makes a statement based on a fallacy. This is how rumors get spread, especially when they then post credentials that suggest they know about this stuff.

When its something obvious (like color) then it easy for folk to see whats true and what aint and make a decision based on this. When its something that aint obvious or which requires some special understanding as in this case then this sort of misinformation can quickly become widespread.

Yeah, youre right.

In a way that's the problem. Someone comes on a forum likes this and makes a statement based on a fallacy. This is how rumors get spread, especially when they then post credentials that suggest they know about this stuff.

When its something obvious (like color) then it easy for folk to see whats true and what aint and make a decision based on this. When its something that aint obvious or which requires some special understanding as in this case then this sort of misinformation can quickly become widespread.

Goes with the territory I guess. I still maintain this is all wildly beyond the grasp of the average, pc-illiterate adult (although probably perfectly hoe-hum to the average teen). So it's easy for them to fall into the trap of believing everything they hear...since their heads are spinning from this advanced technology anyway...and anyone who's ever successfully ripped and streamed your run-of-the-mill Pink Floyd track must seem like some kind of wunderkind.

Like my brethren over in the Dedicated Theater Design & Construction thread; god love 'em...I swear, if you've ever ventured over there, you'll see some of these guys have put together 6-figure Home Theaters that would blow-away your local cineplex. Yet, someone the other day posted images from their PCH, running a movie jukebox, and you would have thought The Wheel was just rolled in front of them for the first time...lol.

CD

Of course it wont.

Dismissing Sonos for this reason is a bit like refusing to use a purple network cable arguing that it wont work with standard equipment as the standard color for cables is grey.
The purple cable is a nice analogy. The only difference is that even if the manufacturer of the purple cable could convince a large enough segment of the market to use purple cables (and not just for music, but for video, and other applications as they are developed), it would not be in a position to start influencing which services and media will be able to go through it. What you have in the Sonos bridge that connects to your main network is essentially a router that connects the two networks, and which potentially could be used to control access in the future.

Sure, the proprietary wireless network is seemless now and access is wide open, it had better be if they expect people to buy their products. However, there's no guarantee that in the future Sonos wouldn't use their market position, should they gain enough share, to leverage their installed base to start controlling the media and service providers who provide content to the devices on their wireless network. In fact, if they are in business for profit, they'd be stupid not to. This is a legitimate concern for a lot of people, and should not immediately be dismissed as propoganda or brand bashing. And I also don't think that the "purple cables" will remain solely with the music devices. No doubt, they will expand to other media - if for no other reason than all of their competitors will and they will need to as well to keep up, but more likely because of the growth potential. Although, I could also easily see them switching to a standard network as well if the market demands it.

And yes, of course I understand that the only devices that would be affected are just those that use the "purple cables", and not all devices on the main network, but your arguement that I could just use the LAN switch functionality of Sonos to connect other devices sort of takes away the point of a wireless network, doesn't it? The point is, I don't want to have to use ethernet cables, nor have multiple connections to the same devices. Just give me one, simple, open-standards based wireless network with all of my devices on it, where I won't have to think about which/when/how/if each device connects with the others or the Internet (now or in the future). I'm not sure quite why this is such a controversial idea.

Anyway, I'm not sure what else I can say other than I'm an open standards guy. I'm not trying to change anybody's mind here. I'm not even asking anybody to share my concern. I wouldn't have even brought it up, but you asked. One thing that's clear, though, is that what might have been a really interesting and helpful thread seems to be reduced to a simple, defensive, Sonos love-fest. Which is fine, I guess, but a little disappointing for those looking for objectivity and thoughtful discussion. It seems I'll have to look for that elsewhere...

What you have in the Sonos bridge that connects to your main network is essentially a router that connects the two networks, and which potentially could be used to control access in the future.

Actually its a switch. A router and a switch are different things entirely. Sonos aint any different from any other network switch or wireless bridge.

What your saying is a bit like saying that Linksys will take advantage of their installed base of wifi routers and will start blocking traffic from competitors kit. That's just silly.

Anyway, I'm not sure what else I can say other than I'm an open standards guy. I'm not trying to change anybody's mind here. I'm not even asking anybody to share my concern. I wouldn't have even brought it up, but you asked. One thing that's clear, though, is that what might have been a really interesting and helpful thread seems to be reduced to a simple, defensive, Sonos love-fest. Which is fine, I guess, but a little disappointing for those looking for objectivity and thoughtful discussion. It seems I'll have to look for that elsewhere...

Yeah, I did ask. I wondered whether your choice of the Cisco was based on an impulse purchase, a specific product feature, or something else. It intrigued me why you'd not gone with Sonos as it costs the same and seems to offer more, or Logitech as they are a little cheaper. I also wondered if you had auditioned Sonos (or Roku, Squeezebox, Stremium, Apple, etc) and found reasons why you preferred the Cisco. By the sound if it you didn't fully evaluate any other solutions. That's fine as long as we know you're not in a position to make comparisons.

And, yes it is my fault you bought it up. Your response about Sonos being closed may have been your reason, but it was a misunderstanding. I'm fine with that as long as you don't keep spreading this about as if there is some truth in it, because there aint. Actually they may be true to you in that you seem to have a nagging doubt over this issue. That's fine for you and I aint aiming criticism at you specifically as I asked the question. Im more pointing out for the sake of balance and clarification that this aint a real issue that will affect anyone in any practical sense.

I'll point out that Sonos is based on support for Open Standards and probably supports more of them than the Cisco Director does. Arguably Squeezebox is even more open standards based.

I would be interested in seeing more reviews of the Cisco system, especially from people who have or have tried other systems.

One thing that's clear, though, is that what might have been a really interesting and helpful thread seems to be reduced to a simple, defensive, Sonos love-fest. Which is fine, I guess, but a little disappointing for those looking for objectivity and thoughtful discussion. It seems I'll have to look for that elsewhere...

BG, I hope no one here is interested in turning this into Deathmatch II, but I said before I just don't see the Cisco product as a very interesting offering. The problem you run into here is people love their system, either SB or Sonos, so much, they fight to defend it. No one is going around saying "man, neither of these systems work for me...I wish there was an alternative". Now, does that mean if Cisco had offered up a legitimate alternative, people wouldn't take a look? No, of course not. But to me, a truly different product is either a) less expensive than Sonos, b) less tech-y and more stable than SB, or c) just better than them both in some way; and I don't see any of that.

I've said it before, if you think about it, these aren't complex products; get my music from here to there, and allow access to it in an easy, organized way. To me, if anything is a challenger to SB/Sonos, it's a product like say Apple TV; it is inexpensive, as opposed to Sonos, offers up video capabilities as well, which neither system can do...has its roots with an established digital media system in iTunes (yes, it's "proprietary", but a lot of people a) don't care, or b) don't care as long as it works...it's just a choice of one way to go or another, and some people have already gone that way), and talk about being integrated to an iPhone/iPod touch-remote that everyone seems to love...

To me, the Cisco is just a Sonos wannabe; same stuff, different skin, and not yet as good. So I'm not at all that surprised that the Sonos folks would lash out a bit.

CD

CD,
I reckon youve hit the nail on the head.

If there is a difference its that Cisco have much greater breadth and depth in how they can market this, and bigger pockets to spend on marketing. Its possible they will win business purely because of that. It doesnt neccesarily have to be "good" for that to happen.

I will add that both Sonos and Squeezebox provide a platform. The both have a track record of long-term support for their system and not obsoleting it. They both have a track record for good platform support and upgrades and enhancements. The Linksys track record appears to be completely the opposite of this. Rather than worrying about some unlikely scenario related to standards, I would be more worried about whether the product line might be superceded or even discontinued in a year or so. After all this aint the first media streamer product from Linksys

If there is a difference its that Cisco have much greater breadth and depth in how they can market this, and bigger pockets to spend on marketing. Its possible they will win business purely because of that. It doesnt neccesarily have to be "good" for that to happen.

Yeah, I meant to mention this as well: I don't venture into the BB very often (in my town, you had BB and CC, and of course CC is no more), and one of the reasons is the kind of display I can see being put up for this Cisco set. You know, some slick cardboard deal...taglines like "listen to music from your computer.........in the Living Room"! You know, like this Cisco system just made it possible. They'll muster as good a sound-system as BB can pull together, the fancy screens and album art will dazzle, and some 17 year-old will tell them how easy it is to use.

I agree with Twangy; if this thing makes market penetration at all, it'll be first-time users seduced by the packaging. And unless they tighten up some of the operational issues that have been reported, I can see a lot of RMAs and this thing being an also-ran.

I mean, I know the reviews are early, but the guy who bought all three systems and did a head-to-head hated the thing. Sure, like I said earlier, if someone who's never streamed before gets DSOTM to play in their Living Room, without using a disc, they'll probably think this thing is the greatest. But I don't want to keep bashing this thing; live and let live.

CD

But I don't want to keep bashing this thing; live and let live.

CD

" Every Time I Try To Get Out, They Drag Me Back In" :D

Perhaps the proper question is why the heck would anyone who is only concerned with open standards wireless pay $1000 for something he could get for much less via the Duet? After all, the only thing the Cisco offering seems to have over the Logitech system is higher price and an apparently wonky touchscreen remote.

Glad to see you guys are keeping the discussion alive. Since I found my solution for audio in the Sonos, I have now started ripping my DVD/HD collections and built 2 HTPC's, one AMD/ATI and the other Intel/Nvidia based, to start testing streaming SD/HD video.

Taking a second look at Cisco's marketing material, to find proof they've deleted all mention of FLAC compatibility, I can see how one may be suckered in. They definitely have a way with colorful graphics and bold headlines, if one didn't know any better they would be convinced Cisco just invented the concept of a media NAS and streaming extenders based off their marketing of this stuff.

Reading some more reviews it looks like additional bad hardware has hit the streets, with a guy who even bought the Cisco -n router to ensure compatibility, only for the system to never work. We'll have to wait and see how things shake out, and if Cisco can make improvements to the system without a hardware revision. After my experiences with the sysytem I am definitely skeptical over the longevity/lifespan of the Cisco 1st gen hardware. Personally I don't see the Cisco's semi-open network as being a positive over Sonos. I prefer the Sonos due to it's sub-net, it makes it a no hassle piece of hardware, that I don't have to worry about getting a call from the family while away. Now I'll admit I'm no network expert, but based on what I've read and see coming down the pipeline from some major maufacturers, it looks like the current wireless open standards are going to get pushed aside in coming years when multi-stream wireless HD becomes a broad reality. Furthermore, I can rest assured that whatever future changes do occur the Sonos will keep performing its duties over the sub-net and all I need is a simple LAN connection to a single unit to maintain internet radio/music access.


CD,
I reckon youve hit the nail on the head.

If there is a difference its that Cisco have much greater breadth and depth in how they can market this, and bigger pockets to spend on marketing. Its possible they will win business purely because of that. It doesnt neccesarily have to be "good" for that to happen.

I will add that both Sonos and Squeezebox provide a platform. The both have a track record of long-term support for their system and not obsoleting it. They both have a track record for good platform support and upgrades and enhancements. The Linksys track record appears to be completely the opposite of this. Rather than worrying about some unlikely scenario related to standards, I would be more worried about whether the product line might be superceded or even discontinued in a year or so. After all this aint the first media streamer product from Linksys

Quesiton about Sonos network: How strong is the signal compared to an 802.11N? I live in a house with thick walls and quite big and want to make sure the network wont be an issue (without having to buy the bridge).
Thanks, Martin

Quesiton about Sonos network: How strong is the signal compared to an 802.11N? I live in a house with thick walls and quite big and want to make sure the network wont be an issue (without having to buy the bridge).
Thanks, Martin

Martin,
The bridge is mainly used if you can't (or just don't want to) wire one of the zones to your existing network. It allows you to put the bridge right at your router and plug it in. It does have a secondary use as a range booster though if you have a zone that just can't see other zones.

The rest of the components will work at standard N (or G if your using the older models) ranges. The one bonus you get is if you have zones scattered throughout the house they will talk to each other so that the two points furthest apart don't have to talk to each other if there zones in between. The controller is also able to connect in the same mesh so it is less likely to have dead spots.

Just to add my $.02 - I had the Linksys Wireless Home Audio system. I've installed 3 different wireless networks successfully. After a lost weekend trying to get them to work, and 9 hours over two days troubleshooting with Linksys Tech support, I returned them. My view - Definitely not ready for primetime.

I've ordered a Sonos.

Just to add my $.02 - I had the Linksys Wireless Home Audio system. I've installed 3 different wireless networks successfully. After a lost weekend trying to get them to work, and 9 hours over two days troubleshooting with Linksys Tech support, I returned them. My view - Definitely not ready for primetime.

I've ordered a Sonos.

Interesting, please let us know how the Sonos works out for you.

Amazing. The Cisco system held such promise.

A company like Cisco never read the first chaper of this book:

Bringing a Product to Market 101:

Chapter 1 - Product has to actually work

Amazing. The Cisco system held such promise.

A company like Cisco never read the first chaper of this book:

Bringing a Product to Market 101:

Chapter 1 - Product has to actually work

No. They never do.
Cisco is big in B2B markets where customers have their own technical staff and specs and things.
Screwed up any attempt to enter consumer markets so far and killed all consumer brands they took over.

Seen any gaming consoles by IBM? Get the point?

Amazing. The Cisco system held such promise.

A company like Cisco never read the first chaper of this book:

Bringing a Product to Market 101:

Chapter 1 - Product has to actually work

Funny, but to me this is just about that elementary. These guys have got to have the sense to know that in this market, for whatever size it is, the competition is SB and Sonos. So if you want to break in...and at only two products, I think there was certainly an opportunity...you've got to offer something the others don't. I mentioned this before: what's everyone's knock against SB? It's too tech-y. What's everyone's knock against Sonos? It's too expensive. So one way in was to make a product that is easier and more stable than the SB (for the record, I of course mean the knock for those who consider it a knock...lol. We all know my stand on whether the SB is unstable or too tech-y). Well, that is easier said than done...if you take months or years to perfect a glitchy design, you're too far out of the game to even compete...and obviously they didn't succeed in this area. But it seems to me their real death-knell was the pricing; why would anyone choose this over a Sonos...when Sonos has been around and working for years...when they are essentially the same price?

And to me, it was just a bad marketing call. You know the mark-up on devices like these has got to be astronomical; you essentially pay a market value for the technology. And it's not like Linksys is a little start-up that needs to recoup its R&D and manufacturing costs right out of the gate. If they could have positioned this thing right square in between SB and Sonos...when I think of SB I think ~$400, and when I think of Sonos I think ~$800, so like maybe $499-$550...they might have given people a reason to try it. But as it is, if I'm making a decision, I either stay inexpensive and deal with whatever headaches SB may or may not give me, because there's something to be gained for it, or I plunk down a few bucks and get something that is proven to work, be stable, and have support in the Sonos.

What market does that leave for this thing? Like I said before, the suckers at the BB.

CD

I don't think it was a bad marketing call mainly because of Cisco's worldwide distribution strength and financial resources. They just screwed up on the technical execution (NOT a minor point!).

The product was clearly also aimed at Sonos but Cisco was also trying to appeal to consumer's hot buttons - black boxes that it is shown in focus groups that consumers love, fancy LCD screens on the box to wow people, iPod connectivity (we know people go crazy for something when they hear it is iPod-compatible even though we know people only want it but don't really need it), built-in CD player, etc. Pricing was not going to be an issue with consumers as it was about the same price (Slightly less espensive).

I know a lot of those features mean nothing really to people like us who love the Sonos and understand why certain features are more glitz and glamour than useful, but it would help them reach a broader market. If the Cisco had worked just like the Sonos right out of the box, supported the same file types and internet services, didn't have some of the technical limitations that weren't evident from the initial CES marketing blitz, etc. they would have been serious competition. To be serious competition Cisco's product absolutely had to raise the bar on the Sonos product and be priced below the Sonos product. That didn't happen. In fact, the product doesn't even work properly even if you spend hours and hours trying to get it to!

The problem was they screwed up in not executing properly what could have been a great business plan if it had included "1. Has to work properly and be better than Sonos".

I don't think it was a bad marketing call mainly because of Cisco's worldwide distribution strength and financial resources. They just screwed up on the technical execution (NOT a minor point!).

The product was clearly also aimed at Sonos but Cisco was also trying to appeal to consumer's hot buttons - black boxes that it is shown in focus groups that consumers love, fancy LCD screens on the box to wow people, iPod connectivity (we know people go crazy for something when they hear it is iPod-compatible even though we know people only want it but don't really need it), built-in CD player, etc. Pricing was not going to be an issue with consumers as it was about the same price (Slightly less espensive).

I know a lot of those features mean nothing really to people like us who love the Sonos and understand why certain features are more glitz and glamour than useful, but it would help them reach a broader market. If the Cisco had worked just like the Sonos right out of the box, supported the same file types and internet services, didn't have some of the technical limitations that weren't evident from the initial CES marketing blitz, etc. they would have been serious competition. To be serious competition Cisco's product absolutely had to raise the bar on the Sonos product and be priced below the Sonos product. That didn't happen. In fact, the product doesn't even work properly even if you spend hours and hours trying to get it to!

The problem was they screwed up in not executing properly what could have been a great business plan if it had included "1. Has to work properly and be better than Sonos".

Well I agree with your argument, but my point was that can be near impossible to do. What piece of technology has ever been released "just working"? My point was if you know there are going to be growing pains, which is a) just the nature of technology, and b) certainly evident with the release version of this product, you've got to give consumers something to hold on to...like a better price.

CD

Well I agree with your argument, but my point was that can be near impossible to do. What piece of technology has ever been released "just working"? My point was if you know there are going to be growing pains, which is a) just the nature of technology, and b) certainly evident with the release version of this product, you've got to give consumers something to hold on to...like a better price.

CD

I agree with you. I also think that the degree to which the product has to be offered at a better price than the incumbent is directly proportional (at a factor of 2-3 to 1) to how buggy it is, lol.

But, with how poorly the Cisco product seems to work after you fiddle with it for 8 hours after you take it out of the box, all it can be called is one big embarrassment for Cisco. Bugs are expected, but the gyrations that people seem to have to go through to get he Cisco product barely even working are ridiculous. It just doesn't seem like a better price would really help. Maybe it needn't have worked as well as Sonos (as no product is bug free out of the box) but it should have worked better and at a really good price. This would give them some traction and some time to fix the bugs.

Right now I don't think if you offered any of those Cisco reviewers a better price they would have taken it instead of their money back.

I agree with you. I also think that the degree to which the product has to be offered at a better price than the incumbent is directly proportional (at a factor of 2-3 to 1) to how buggy it is, lol.

But, with how poorly the Cisco product seems to work after you fiddle with it for 8 hours after you take it out of the box, all it can be called is one big embarrassment for Cisco. Bugs are expected, but the gyrations that people seem to have to go through to get he Cisco product barely even working are ridiculous. It just doesn't seem like a better price would really help. Maybe it needn't have worked as well as Sonos (as no product is bug free out of the box) but it should have worked better and at a really good price. This would give them some traction and some time to fix the bugs.

Right now I don't think if you offered any of those Cisco reviewers a better price they would have taken it instead of their money back.

Yup, I agree that a better price doesn't excuse a p of s. Bottom line is, no matter how you or I slice it, this thing seems to be d.o.a. Finally, something for SB and Sonos owners to unite on...lol.

CD

Finally, something for SB and Sonos owners to unite on...lol.


Yeah Man. Lets gang up and dump on this thing before it gets too many users/fans to defend it. LOL

By the way I am joking. Im still interested if anyone else has tried the Linksys system.

Right now I don't think if you offered any of those Cisco reviewers a better price they would have taken it instead of their money back.[/QUOTE]



Absolutely true in my case. I returned them and they couldn't pay me to take them back. I've got way better things to do with my time.

After wasting two weeks trying to get the Cisco system to work, I sent it back. Got a Sonos system and it took all of 15 minutes to set up two zones and start playing music. And the iTouch controller works better than the Cisco controller and it's the same price.

I am so impressed that I just ordered a Cullen Circuits modified Z90 for my main rig. I am discovering and rediscovering great music every day now.

What I'm most impressed by is how simply and solidly it works.