Hands-on with Sonos ZoneBridge BR100 and 2.5 firmware

There's really not much to say about the new simple-as-could-be ZoneBridge BR100, but it's got a pretty specific function and seems prepared to carry that out. Sonos primarily sees the BR100 as a range extender, specifically solving the problem of some households wasting a ZP80 or ZP100 locked away in a closet with their router due to the requirement of at least one Zone being hard plugged directly into the network. The unit itself is smallish, light and of quality construction -- and that's really all there is to it. As for firmware 2.5, Napster is obviously the primary addition, but we're pretty partial to the new search function; text input is a chore, but there's really no better way to locate your own music or track down new tracks on the multiple music services available to the system.

Gallery: Hands-on with Sonos ZoneBridge BR100 and 2.5 firmware

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

[John Laur @ Oct 23rd 2007 1:04PM]

Everyone seems really passive and accepting about this bridge device when the real problem with the Sonos in the first place is its proprietary wireless protocol. There are many strategies that Sonos could have used in order to make their devices behave appropriately using regular 802.11g and this thing would have never even been needed.

[John @ Oct 23rd 2007 1:50PM]

John,

Sonos does leverage 802.11 in order to communicate across the Zoneplayers. That allows you to control your system using a laptop or any computer on the network as long as you install the desktop software. Prior to this zonebridge, Sonos owners were hacking various 802.11 routers/bridges to perform this functionality.

The biggest reason was the requirement that at least one Zoneplayer needed to be physically wired to the Internet/network. This device allows all of your other Zoneplayers to function as music distribution and not just network redundancy.

SuperQ, I also looked at the Squeezeboxes and I easily justified the added cost of Sonos because of the simplicity of deployment. I plugged my Zoneplayer into power, connected an ethernet cable and in 10 minutes it had cataloged my entire 90GB music collection that is sitting on a NAS attached to my wireless router.

If I went with Squeezebox, I would A) have to leverage a PC as a media management system or hack a NAS with Slimserver firmware B) I wouldn't have a 2-way remote control without purchasing a Nokia device. C) Syncing zones at the time I evaluated was still an issue back then if it isn't still an issue today.

[Ian @ Oct 23rd 2007 2:07PM]

John/John

I use Squeezebox and it's IMHO simpler and less expensive than Sonos. There is also no limit to the numvber of radio channels one can use.
I have the software installed on a PC and it draws so little capacity there is no need of using a specific NAS device, though one can if one wants. All one has to buy are the SB units, either wired through an ethernet router, or wireless. ANY WiFi device can then control the whole plethora of SBs. Your choice of using a laptop as controller, or a Nokia 770/800 (going for around $200 these days) or Sony's PSP (I have used that for some time) or a handy WiFi PDA even.
If I can do it so can most people!

[John @ Oct 23rd 2007 2:15PM]

Ian,

I respect your opinion...But there are guys that tell me parking their car on a hill, draining the oil out of the pan, remove/replace their oil filter, pour the oil into a milk jug and take it to a recycling center is easier than driving into a Quick Lube.

If nothing else, they saved $5.

John

[John Laur @ Oct 23rd 2007 3:09PM]

@John

>Sonos does leverage 802.11 in order to communicate across the Zoneplayers.

This is not correct. "Sonosnet" is a proprietary wireless protocol that although apparently derived from 802.11 is not in any way compatible directly with any equipment other than a Sonos ZonePlayer, Controller, or (now) a ZoneBridge.

To say that people have been "Hacking" 802.11 access points/routers to perform ethernet bridging functions for a ZonePlayer is not quite correct because these devices are designed specifically to perform this task. The desktop controller software communicates with the zoneplayers via regular TCP/IP (uPnP) and has nothing to do with having a wired or wireless network. Communication between the desktop controller and a Zoneplayer is going to happen at the point where a sonos device (either ZonePlayer or ZoneBridge) is attached to the local network via ethernet, period.

If Sonos supported 802.11b/g out of the box and the devices could form up as WDS access points there would be no need for ZoneBridges or 802.11 ethernet bridge devices. The key reason for not having this, though, is immediately evident to anyone who has ever set up a Sonos system: You don't have to configure anything. You just push two buttons when it tells you to and you're done. Everything else just (generally) works. Still, for more advanced users it would be nice to have the option of having the sonos devices participate on an existing wireless network rather than trying to deal with the problems of two overlapping networks.

I guess when it comes right down to it, when you are planning a decent-size sonos install you are already looking at $1500 or more, so what's an extra $99 to save a couple headaches?

[John @ Oct 23rd 2007 3:48PM]

@JohnLauer,

You are right. Sonosnet is 802.11 derived but does not integrate and is closed communication.

Luckily, I don't have to be all that technical to enjoy Sonos!

John

[Randy @ Oct 23rd 2007 1:10PM]

I'm sorry, I was under a rock.... Need to come up to speed. What is a Sonos, what does it do, and why would this be needed?

[SuperQ @ Oct 23rd 2007 1:29PM]

I wouldn't say everyone is passive. Most of us who know better have already bought SqueezeBoxes. Nice open system with normal 11g wifi. Lots cheaper too.

[LordJohnWhorfin @ Oct 23rd 2007 2:02PM]

If you buy TWO squeezeboxes you're already at the price point of a Sonos system bundle, and you don't even have a fraction of the convenience, functionality and user-friendliness of Sonos, not even mentioning the huge WAF.
SuperQ, you need to get your head out of wherever it is you put it.

[SonosFreak @ Oct 23rd 2007 2:11PM]

Key word for you Super Q is Cheap! SqueezeBoxes can't touch Sonos sophistication. I mean really think about this. Can SqueezeBoxes stream up to 32 rooms either simultaneously or individually? Does SqueezeBoxes have a sweet wireless Controller that you can control all of your ZonePlayers that displays album art? I can go across the street, four houses down and still be able to Control my Sonos in my house can Squeezebox do that? So cheap is definitely the correct word for Squeezebox.

[Ian @ Oct 23rd 2007 3:38PM]

Yes Squeezebox can run multi-room units playing different sources. No idea of the many, I don't know anyone with 32 rooms though.
Yes I can control my system several places down the street both work off WiFi.
I don't see anything more sophisticated about the Sonos than the SBs? In fact I sense that SBs can use more radio stations and streaming Audio sources than Sonos lists. Plus there are so many add ons as the system is open source. SB's can drill down to music types, individual songs, artists you name it. I haven't found anything I can't do and I've used them for 3 years.

Having said all that SB's should be dropping their prices....by now.

[Ian @ Oct 23rd 2007 2:16PM]

Her's the rpice list of the Sonos equipment.
http://www.sonos.com/store/?tref=gproducts
You have to start off buying a Zone Player for $350-500.00 + A controller %400.00 + Bridges $100.oo each. This is NOT less expensive than slimdevices SB system.

[John @ Oct 23rd 2007 2:21PM]

Ian,

Actually, all you need is a Zoneplayer. If you are able to plug that into a wired ethernet connection. you can control the Zoneplayer using the desktop software.

You can also use an open source perl-based application to create a web interface for Sonos. Thus allowing any wi-fi enabled device the ability to control the Zoneplayer.

[Ian @ Oct 23rd 2007 2:37PM]

That's agreed John, but that reuires a little more technical knowledge than the average Joe consumer would want to be bothered with IMHO. In the Slimdevices case you simple load the server software on your PC and buy an SB unit and take any old Wifi device and put in one line of URL and hey presto you are up and running.
As stated I agree that the Sonos is a more elegant product for a wholehouse/new house installation which can be implemented by an expert and handed over to the owner. SD should have plugged this gap ages ago.

[LordJohnWhorfin @ Oct 23rd 2007 3:04PM]

No, you can start off by buying a BU130 bundle which contains a CR100 controller and two Zone Players (one ZP80 and one ZP100), and lists for $999, the cost of three Squeezeboxes.
Bottom line, if you want ONE network player and are not too demanding in terms of browsing music and connecting to network music, you can go with the Squeezebox (although the Roku Soundbridge is a better product in my opinion, and it's also much cheaper).
If you
- want a multizone system, or think you may want to build on the system later
- need something that is extremely easy to operate and can browse large music collections in a convenient, efficient manner
- access internet music sources like Rhapsody, Sirius satellite radio, Napster...
The Sonos system is a no brainer.

[Martin Sieckmann @ Oct 23rd 2007 2:41PM]

Sonos rocks. Great customer service and user forums on their website. The handheld controller (wireless with color LCD screen) is a big reason why i'm a Sonos user and didnt consider Squeezebox/Slimserver option.

[Ian @ Oct 23rd 2007 2:28PM]

I should add that I AM a fan of the Sonos system. It's well made and performs well and is easy to install and looks/works great. But it isn't less expensive thana slimdevices system.

By comparison the slimdevices system is also a great product, great sound and easy to install and less expensive.
However if you want say to install a SD sytem in a new/whole house you likely have to engineer it's appearance slightly to make it look as good as the Sonos system, bought off the shelf and add a controller like the Nokia N800. Quite frankly I am surprised that since Logitech purschased SD they haven't offered a whole house installation set for a discounted price from buying individual SB units and added a controller like a N800. If they had done this we would not be having this discussion. But then what do I kmnow about marketing;)

[Nick @ Oct 23rd 2007 3:59PM]

IT LOOKS JUST LIKE A MAC MINI THIS IS OBVIOUSLY A RIP OFF OF APPLE'S DESIGN LOLOL WTF HAX

:P

[John @ Oct 23rd 2007 4:06PM]

I knew it was just a matter of time before someone compared this to Apple.

Anything white, square, electronic or having a display is clearly an Apple rip-off.

My Kitchenaid mixer is white. Obviously, they are trying to copy the iPod.

[Nick @ Oct 23rd 2007 4:10PM]

LOL JON, U NERD THIS IS OBVIOUSLY NOT A SQUARE, ITS A ROUNDED RECTANGLE WTF LOL

IF IT WAS A SQUARE IT WOULDNT BE COPYING AT ALL LOL BBQ

[John @ Oct 23rd 2007 4:51PM]

Nick,
If anything then, it is a ripoff of the Zune with the Squircle design.

John

[Nick @ Oct 23rd 2007 6:00PM]

Hmm. I'm out of sarcasm.

It was fun while it lasted. Maybe you didn't notice the :P at the end of my first post? Or you didn't notice the extraneous, irrelevant acronyms such as "bbq".

Either that or you interpreted it as me being an idiot.

Doesn't matter.

[Chris @ Oct 23rd 2007 6:28PM]

I beg to differ.. the Sonos system was out WAY before the Mac Mini was ever designed.

[Sonuses @ Oct 23rd 2007 6:04PM]

Sonos is, in my opinion, the best system out there for most whole house music needs. I have no idea of the various technical jargon spread out above, but I had a new, very large loft apartment, with a lot of difficulty in running wires (i.e., there are virtually no internal walls) and a layout (4,000 sq ft footprint) and composition (concrte walls, floors and ceilings, metal and glass walls) that I thought would make any wireless solution utterly impossible. Luckily, I stumbled upon Sonos, asked a lot of questions of their exceptional customer support, and took the plunge. I have 14,000 songs on a Buffalo NAS and six Sonos boxes powering about 20 speakers and two SVS subwoofers throughout my apartment. The Sonos boxes are in closets, on top of kitchen cabinets, in nightstands -- no interference or issues.

The product is, in my view, virtually flawless. And, while not cheap, it was a small fraction of any hard-wired solution, and did not require a masters degree in computer science to get them it up and running initially, or to operate it. The most difficult part of operating the Sonus is retrieving the remote from guests who first experience Sonos.

In fact, I rarely even use my own music collection. Streaming Rhapsody over the Sonus is wonderful. The only problem is that now, every time I am in a car listening to the radio, I want to press a button to fast-forward an unwanted song.

[MadhatterPDC @ Oct 26th 2007 2:57PM]

Wow, this is frustrating to watch. First, I refuse to compare the Sonos solution to Slim Squeezebox or Roku Soundbridge. This is truly an apples to oranges comparison. It is true that all three solutions (and many more) stream music from local and internet sources, but I have to say that is exacly where the similarity ends.

Let's piece apart y'alls arguments. 1) The Sonos user interface (in the form of Desktop Controller or Handheld Controller) is intuitive, logical, consistent and comfortable. Slim and Roku both rely on a standard IR remote (requiring line-of-sight) and display is limited to a couple of lines of LED text. Furthermore, linking and controlling multiple rooms simultaneously is essentially not an option using Roku or Slim.

2) Sonosnet. Based on 802.11g and culled to remain proprietary. Why would Sonos make it impossible for non-Sonos devices to use its robust wireless SonosNet? 16 simultaneous, skip-free streams. That's why. Try doing that on a Soundbridge and you would be miserably disappointed (My Soundbridge would skip and crash constantly until I replaced it with Sonos).

3) Searching. How could anyone EVER critize Sonos' search functionality and mention either Roku or Slim in the same breath. This is analogous to critizing someone for riding a bike while you are forced to walk... slowly.

[sdsdv10 @ Oct 23rd 2007 10:56PM]

I agree, Sonos is without a doubt the best in home music system. But charging $100 for what is just a $40-60 WiFi AP is what keeps me from considering it. Just bring down the high prices and people will come in droves...

[Fogbert @ Oct 28th 2007 7:53AM]

I thought I also heard that the ZoneBridge would turn the ZonePlayers into Ethernet bridges also.

[Steve @ Nov 26th 2007 12:30PM]

I can't keep Rapsody connected to my Sonos....it drops off almost right away. Also, Internet radio stations cut in and out...mostly out. Very anoying!!Itunes is no problem. That part works great.