Why I Chose Airplay Over Sonos

[ozaz]

Google Cast and Airplay are very different and I have no idea why anyone thinks one would "replace" the other. I seriously doubt you will see Google Cast on receivers or other hardware for example. The Chromecast chief advantage is that it is cheap which you pay for by Google monitoring what you do with it and selling that information to advertisers. No thanks. It is also an inferior streaming solution being of lower quality partly because of the wifi implementation it uses which does not do 5ghz and partly because inferior hardware quality is the price you pay for being cheap. I expect this will be fixed in future versions but Google isn't selling Chromecast to make money from the device itself they are selling them to make money by monitoring what you do with it and selling that data. Just like all their other products. You are in fact the product not your Google device.

Personally I use both an Apple TV and a Roku 3. I can afford a little extra over Chromecast for higher quality video and sound, better connectivity, and far more content and features and not be monitored by Google.

I guess this is directed at me. For the second time, I never said Google Cast would replace AirPlay. I said I expect it to become dominant. Android is the dominant mobile OS worldwide, but it's not going to replace iOS, so I'm not sure why my statement on Google Cast is so controversial. I don't see how AirPlay can be the dominant streaming protocol in the future when the AirPlay experience on the dominant mobile OS (Android) is unofficial and poor.

If you live in a mixed IOS and Android household, AirPlay is not the best choice today (if you just want a single streaming option in the house), and it's not going to be the best choice in the future.

As I've said earlier, Chromecast is not the be all and end all of Google Cast. Regarding your doubt about Google Cast on other receivers - I'm not sure why you doubt this. Sony, LG, and Denon have said they will soon be selling speakers with Google Cast built in, and Sony & Sharp have said they will soon by selling TVs with it built in.

 

[Uofmtiger]

I guess this is directed at me. For the second time, I never said Google Cast would replace AirPlay. I said I expect it to become dominant. Android is the dominant mobile OS worldwide, but it's not going to replace iOS, so I'm not sure why my statement on Google Cast is so controversial. I don't see how AirPlay can be the dominant streaming protocol in the future when the AirPlay experience on the dominant mobile OS (Android) is unofficial and poor.

If you live in a mixed IOS and Android household, AirPlay is not the best choice today (if you just want a single streaming option in the house), and it's not going to be the best choice in the future.

As I've said earlier, Chromecast is not the be all and end all of Google Cast. Regarding your doubt about Google Cast on other receivers - I'm not sure why you doubt this. Sony, LG, and Denon have said they will soon be selling speakers with Google Cast built in, and Sony & Sharp have said they will soon by selling TVs with it built in.

Sorry, I misunderstood your prior statement. I don't think Apple cares about Airplay being the number one protocol as long as it gets more people reliant on the Apple ecosystem. Also, at this point, it is entirely too difficult to even figure out how many people use it because it is in so many devices already.

As far as "being the most dominant", it will be large uphill climb for Casting and I don't even know how we would measure market dominance. Do you have any clue how many devices work with Airplay? I can put Airfoil Speakers on my iPhone/iPad/Touch/Android device and stream to it from a computer using Airplay. How can you measure how many people use it this way? I can also stream from one Windows computer to another or to a Linux or Mac. If we look at every single Windows computer, Mac computer, every single iOS device, every AppleTV, every Airport Express, every third party product that use it, etc. The number of possible Airplay devices are already in the billions.

As far as getting support in "unrooted" Androids, I don't think Apple cares about it. Using Casting on iOS is a much less satisfying experience. It isn't built into the interface the same way as Airplay and it doesn't work with nearly as many apps as Airplay. I have Airplay devices (like most people) and a Chromecast and I rarely use the Chromecast for this reason.

 

[Uofmtiger]

This idea that Sonos or whoever could be sold and therefore its a risk to buy is true of just about any consumer product..so maybe not buy anything ever?

Sonos speakers aren't like most other audio products. They rely on the Sonos service for a lot of what they do. If Sonos was bought by Apple tomorrow and those features were discontinued, your speaker would be much less useful. A regular bookshelf speaker doesn't rely on an outside service to be useful because it has speaker cable connectors.

I have speakers and a receiver right now that were both made in the 1970s and will continue to work exactly like the day they left the warehouse (excluding a possible breakdown in the receiver) regardless of what happens to the companies that made them.

Personally, I don't consider $200+ speakers a throw away consumer item. A typical, decent speaker can be useful for decades.

 

[steve knight]

Sonos speakers aren't like most other audio products. They rely on the Sonos service for a lot of what they do. If Sonos was bought by Apple tomorrow and those features were discontinued, your speaker would be much less useful. A regular bookshelf speaker doesn't rely on an outside service to be useful because it has speaker cable connectors.



I have speakers and a receiver right now that were both made in the 1970s and will continue to work exactly like the day they left the warehouse (excluding a possible breakdown in the receiver) regardless of what happens to the companies that made them.



Personally, I don't consider $200+ speakers a throw away consumer item. A typical, decent speaker can be useful for decades.

But the 600$ phone to make them work is

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

But the 600$ phone to make them work is

My HiFi "regular" speakers (if you call 6 foot ribbons speakers "regular") don't need a $600 phone to "work". I still have a CD player connected (although rarely used) and a less than one year old analog record player (transferred all my records to my Macbook Pro, removed clicks/pops and now are available on my iTunes server, but I can always play a real record live as well).

I don't need an iPhone to make them work either even with the Airplay system. They can run directly from AppleTV ($99, not $600) and play off any home PC or Mac via iTunes (free) and any songs I bought from iTunes can run directly from Apple's servers to the AppleTV unit. I can also beam music from an iPod Touch ($189+), even old Gen1 used ones or an iPad.

The point he's making is that you can always move conventional speakers to almost ANY future system (be it new amps, receivers or convoluted wireless transmission systems). But something like an Airplay speaker won't work without Airplay. Most are fairly poor quality speakers anyway, designed for non-picky people like Bose radios, which sound good for a tiny radio, but do NOT sound like a good regular hi-fi system AT ALL. If I need "better" speakers, I can replace my current ones at any time without harming any other part of the system (save my active crossovers designed for those speakers), although one of my power amps may become redundant as most speakers don't need 500 watts for their woofer and another 180 for their mid-range/tweeters.

 

[Uofmtiger]

I don't need an iPhone to make them work either even with the Airplay system. They can run directly from AppleTV ($99, not $600) and play off any home PC or Mac via iTunes (free) and any songs I bought from iTunes can run directly from Apple's servers to the AppleTV unit. I can also beam music from an iPod Touch ($189+), even old Gen1 used ones or an iPad.

.

Exactly. I have already mentioned a few times that you don't need an Apple device at all to use Airplay.

Also, as you mentioned, if you want to use it with iOS, there are a lot of options that are cheaper than a new iPhone.

(I own one Airplay speaker. I got it mainly for its ~$100 price tag, small footprint, the fact that it could run on batteries, and it has a USB input (I am using it to charge a gen 1 iPad in the Kitchen) and Aux input. Sonos has nothing similar on the market at any price. Many of the Airplay capable speakers also have DLNA abilities, so they won't stop working if Airplay goes away. Sonos has an aux input on a couple of models, but I believe they start in the 300-400 range (can't look it up right this minute)).

 

[ozaz]

Sorry, I misunderstood your prior statement. I don't think Apple cares about Airplay being the number one protocol as long as it gets more people reliant on the Apple ecosystem. Also, at this point, it is entirely too difficult to even figure out how many people use it because it is in so many devices already.

As far as "being the most dominant", it will be large uphill climb for Casting and I don't even know how we would measure market dominance. Do you have any clue how many devices work with Airplay? I can put Airfoil Speakers on my iPhone/iPad/Touch/Android device and stream to it from a computer using Airplay. How can you measure how many people use it this way? I can also stream from one Windows computer to another or to a Linux or Mac. If we look at every single Windows computer, Mac computer, every single iOS device, every AppleTV, every Airport Express, every third party product that use it, etc. The number of possible Airplay devices are already in the billions.

As far as getting support in "unrooted" Androids, I don't think Apple cares about it. Using Casting on iOS is a much less satisfying experience. It isn't built into the interface the same way as Airplay and it doesn't work with nearly as many apps as Airplay. I have Airplay devices (like most people) and a Chromecast and I rarely use the Chromecast for this reason.

I've never understood the desire to have a sophisticated device with non-cumbersome UI like a computer/tablet/smartphone as a push terminal for Airplay. To me, it seems much better to setup a server on a computer or NAS (iTunes, Plex, whatever) and pull the content using one of the above devices. Maybe someone can explain the appeal and convince me that this is an important use case?

I tend to think of speakers and TVs (and relevant peripherals like Airport Express, Sonos Connect, Apple TV, Chromecast) as being the important terminals for Airplay and Airplay-like protocols (I include Google Cast & Sonos as Airplay-like protocols because ultimately you are getting what you would otherwise watch/listen on one device on to another device, even though they differ at a deeper level). At least in the case of connected speakers, it might be possible to get some idea of market dominance. However, I actually hope that speaker manufacturers decide to support both Airplay & Google Cast in their connected speakers rather than one or the other. Manufacturers that do so may gain data on how much Airplay & Google Cast are being used. Whether they release that info is another matter.

I do agree that the flexibility of Airplay within an Android free household is a big plus. But the lack of good support of Android as a source device just kills it for me. For anyone else who has Android in their household I would always suggest Sonos for Music, or wait a couple of months to see what Google Cast devices are like (even if they also have iOS).

 

[Uofmtiger]

I've never understood the desire to have a sophisticated device with non-cumbersome UI like a computer/tablet/smartphone as a push terminal for Airplay. To me, it seems much better to setup a server on a computer or NAS (iTunes, Plex, whatever) and pull the content using one of the above devices. Maybe someone can explain the appeal and convince me that this is an important use case?

I am not sure I understand your question, but if you are asking why someone would prefer streaming directly from a mobile device rather than using the mobile device as a remote, the answer is related to simplicity and ease of use.

As an example, if I am listening to Spotify/Rdio in the car via Bluetooth streaming (which sets up in iOS like an Airplay device), I can walk out of my car, walk in the house, and flip up the control panel and move that audio to my receiver (which will automatically start up and give me full audio volume control from within the app). If I am listening to a Podcast directly from my iPhone to an Airplay device in my bathroom while getting ready in the morning, I can flip up the control panel, move that audio to the iPhone while I take my dogs out, then when I get to the car, it automatically connects to Bluetooth audio and starts playing. Ease of use is huge.

The simplicity is that I don't need anything else involved. I just stream to the phone and back to the Airplay device. It is simple.

I should mention that I don't always use my setup this way. I have a Synology NAS with Airplay built in and I can just use the iPhone to control it. I run a Mac Mini with Rdio, Airfoil and iTunes open all the time. I can use TodayRemote to start playing audio from anywhere on my network and if want to change the selection, I can launch the Remote or Rdio app (Spotify Connect works the same way). However, I like the option to have the computer off, the NAS installing a firmware upgrade, and the ability to stream directly from the iPhone.

 

[ozaz]

I am not sure I understand your question, but if you are asking why someone would prefer streaming directly from a mobile device rather than using the mobile device as a remote, the answer is related to simplicity and ease of use.

No. I was replying to your example of using a computer/tablet/phone as an Airplay receiver. I'm asking why one would want to use Airplay to push media to such a device when it is easy with such a device to pull the media from some other source on your network.

When the Airplay receiver is something relatively dumb (e.g. speaker) or has a relatively cumbersome interface (e.g. TV) then pushing media to it is understandable.

 

[steve knight]

Exactly. I have already mentioned a few times that you don't need an Apple device at all to use Airplay.

Also, as you mentioned, if you want to use it with iOS, there are a lot of options that are cheaper than a new iPhone.

not what I am saying. i am saying technology makes our devices obsolete. Speakers were not so prone to this but in the last several years speakers have improved dramatically in the sound quality they reproduce for their cost. replaced a 10 year old powered subwoofer that was built better then the new one and cost more the one blows it away. the small speakers these days are great for what they are. so speakers may be needing a change mroe often too.

 

[hagar]

I'm having the same doubts: should I invest in more expensive Airplay speakers, or stay with Bluetooth. Or go all out and go for Sonos.

The fact is that I hate my AppleTV: I use it to stream videos from my local iTunes library and it simply never works. I truly despise it. As soon as I'm sitting in front of my TV, the problems start:

- An error occurred. please try again later
- No network available. check your settings
- watching the spinning wheel forever when a video is loading
- my Mac iTunes library is missing
- my Mac iTunes library is there, but is missing 90% of the content
- while watching, the screen goes black

The solution is quite simple: restart iTunes and/or restart AppleTV. And if that doesn't help, also restart Airport. Nothing major, but it's so annoying... Especially as I have these problems every single time I'm watching something.

I'm afraid I will have the same problems with speakers, so I'm leaning towards Sonos at the moment.

 

[steve knight]

I only went with sonic because it is fair more practical for my blind wife. Listening to music issue some much easily with sonos then with airplay that right now in so buggy she can't use in with iOS 8

 

[Uofmtiger]

No. I was replying to your example of using a computer/tablet/phone as an Airplay receiver. I'm asking why one would want to use Airplay to push media to such a device when it is easy with such a device to pull the media from some other source on your network.

When the Airplay receiver is something relatively dumb (e.g. speaker) or has a relatively cumbersome interface (e.g. TV) then pushing media to it is understandable.

The main benefit is being able to dock the iPhone/Android device and hook it up to an audio system or DAC/Amp and send audio to it without being near the device. It takes the place of an Airport Express and since many people have older iOS devices laying around, it pretty much just extends their usefulness.

The way I use it is by having my old 4S docked on a Pure i20 and hooked to a PA2V2 amp and some headphones and using it as a receiver from my AppleTV or iPhone (I have an app called AirTunes that will accept a signal from another iOS device). Since Airtunes is no longer available, the easiest process is to send the signal from the computer to the 4S using Airfoil or Airfoil Speakers/Airfoil. Since the location of the dock would require me to get up to directly control the 4s, I would rather be able to remotely control it from my laptop or iPad.

The other benefit is that an older Touch/iPhone can work this way, but they also work for other purposes.. .I also use my 4S for sending audio via Airplay out in the pool since it has a Lifeproof case and I don't want to put one on the 6 plus because of the size.

In other words, it is for those that want to dock their phones and send audio to them remotely.

 

[Uofmtiger]

I'm having the same doubts: should I invest in more expensive Airplay speakers, or stay with Bluetooth. Or go all out and go for Sonos.

The fact is that I hate my AppleTV: I use it to stream videos from my local iTunes library and it simply never works. I truly despise it. As soon as I'm sitting in front of my TV, the problems start:

- An error occurred. please try again later
- No network available. check your settings
- watching the spinning wheel forever when a video is loading
- my Mac iTunes library is missing
- my Mac iTunes library is there, but is missing 90% of the content
- while watching, the screen goes black

The solution is quite simple: restart iTunes and/or restart AppleTV. And if that doesn't help, also restart Airport. Nothing major, but it's so annoying... Especially as I have these problems every single time I'm watching something.

I'm afraid I will have the same problems with speakers, so I'm leaning towards Sonos at the moment.

I have an AppleTV and I think that the best way to use it with the newest firmware is to set it up to stay on all the time. It has solved the disappearing iTunes library issues I was having.

I should mention that Airplay isn't really what we are talking about here. This a homesharing feature built into iTunes. You may be able to get around it by using the Remote app on an iOS device and Airplay to send the music to your AppleTV without homesharing.

 

[dgalvan123]

I'm having the same doubts: should I invest in more expensive Airplay speakers, or stay with Bluetooth. Or go all out and go for Sonos.

The fact is that I hate my AppleTV: I use it to stream videos from my local iTunes library and it simply never works. I truly despise it. As soon as I'm sitting in front of my TV, the problems start:

- An error occurred. please try again later
- No network available. check your settings
- watching the spinning wheel forever when a video is loading
- my Mac iTunes library is missing
- my Mac iTunes library is there, but is missing 90% of the content
- while watching, the screen goes black

The solution is quite simple: restart iTunes and/or restart AppleTV. And if that doesn't help, also restart Airport. Nothing major, but it's so annoying... Especially as I have these problems every single time I'm watching something.

I'm afraid I will have the same problems with speakers, so I'm leaning towards Sonos at the moment.

Regarding the Apple TV problems: I have been using Apple TVs with my computer library for almost 5 years now. What I have found is that, as I update Apple TV firmware and Mac OS software and iTunes, the reliability of being able to access the home-shared iTunes library varies. I leave my mac on all the time, but let it go to sleep after 15 minutes of non-use to save energy. The Apple TV used to be able to "wake" the mac without me having to get up and wake the mac manually. Then I updated (to Mavericks on the mac), and the Apple TV isn't as reliable at waking the mac any more. I found some suggested command-line instructions online to make sure that my mac was set to "wake on LAN", but that has not helped the problem. Then there was an iTunes update and that seemed to solve the problem. Then there was an Apple TV update and the problem came back.

I've stopped trying to solve it, really, since it seems whatever I do, an update will likely undo my efforts. The no-nonsense solution would be to not allow my mac to sleep at all, but I'd rather hop up to wake the mac manually than waste the electricity to keep it awake all the time.

Regarding Sonos: I have had a Sonos Play:1 for the past 6 weeks. It is on the same wifi network as my apple TV and mac (no "bridge" device). I have had occasional problems with it seeing my iTunes library, similar to the Apple TV: when the mac is asleep it needs to be woken up for Sonos to see the library.

 

[steve knight]

I finally put the music on a drive hooked to AE to keep from having a computer on. But then you have to make sure iTunes sees that drive when it loads.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Regarding the Apple TV problems: I have been using Apple TVs with my computer library for almost 5 years now. What I have found is that, as I update Apple TV firmware and Mac OS software and iTunes, the reliability of being able to access the home-shared iTunes library varies. I leave my mac on all the time, but let it go to sleep after 15 minutes of non-use to save energy. The Apple TV used to be able to "wake" the mac without me having to get up and wake the mac manually. Then I updated (to Mavericks on the mac), and the Apple TV isn't as reliable at waking the mac any more. I found some suggested command-line instructions online to make sure that my mac was set to "wake on LAN", but that has not helped the problem. Then there was an iTunes update and that seemed to solve the problem. Then there was an Apple TV update and the problem came back.

I had the opposite problem. My brand new 2012 Mac Mini running Mountain Lion would NOT wake up for Apple TV use or "Wake on Lan". Updating to Mavericks fixed it. The problem is that NEITHER would "stay awake" for NFS. Apple does not recognize NFS as network activity to not sleep for, thus making it impossible for me to use "Eden" XBMC on my 1st Gen AppleTVs without leaving the Mac set to stay awake. I could use newer XBMC/Kodi versions, but I would lose the ability to use the original AppleTV GUI for rentals, whole house sync, etc.

 

[rhett7660]

But the 600$ phone to make them work is

Actually you can also use a computer, so you don't really need the phone or tablet.

The sonos program that runs on your computer can be the controls.

I love my Sonos system (1-5, 1-3, 2-1's, plus a boost). Have it setup in four rooms and have all our devices. I do not use it for video though. There are used 100% for music and that is all. Which I feel they do extremely well with. YMMV, especially given the amount of posts this thread has.

I also purchased a third party player ($4.99 Sonopad) that works with my dedicated iPad min remote running iRule). Enables me to use the functionality of the remote and has a back button built within the Sonopad app for ease of going back and forth.

Yup no complaints and the wife even finds it easy to use, once shown everything it can do.

No granted it is not cheap, but I did not want to have to run wires everywhere in my house. There were other wifi speakers at the time, but I liked the sonos and again, this is only for music. I have not, nor do I plan on using them with a tv. I have my sudo home theater for that.

 

[ozaz]

Actually you can also use a computer, so you don't really need the phone or tablet.

The sonos program that runs on your computer can be the controls.

He was replying to an argument in favour of Airplay. He was saying a $600 phone (iPhone) is needed to use Airplay.

Even this is not literally true. You can of course also Airplay from other devices (such as Mac, PC, iPad, iPod). But I think most people would like to be able to control music streaming from their phone, so I think the iPhone constraint is a valid criticism from a financial point of view.

 

[rhett7660]

He was replying to an argument in favour of Airplay. He was saying a $600 phone (iPhone) is needed to use Airplay.

Even this is not literally true. You can of course also Airplay from other devices (such as Mac, PC, iPad, iPod). But I think most people would like to be able to control music streaming from their phone, so I think the iPhone constraint is a valid criticism from a financial point of view.

Gotcha.... thanks for the clarification....

 

[JonC]

This has been an informative and confusing thread. I appreciate all of the discussion of the various options. I think if I were starting fresh, I'd go the Sonos route. However, I already have three AirPlay speakers and a receiver with AirPlay. Since I don't want to start over and buy new equipment, I'll probably give multi-room audio a shot via AirPlay. Since I use music streaming services like spotify and Sirius, I think airfoil will be the way to go. I'm hoping some of the tips I've read about in this thread will help that to be a success. Thanks. Jon

 

[RenoG]

Wow what a thread, Sonos is a wonderful system that addresses in a wonderful way how the common folk listen to music in the home in this modern techie world. However based on my experience using these wonderful technilogical systems by these fairly small independent companies (especially in home audio) they either fold, replaced or bought out by some big corporate beast and retooled as a cheaper (Albeit less quality product) for the masses which results into something no one wants anymore. Leaving bits and pieces of the original Sonos system collecting dust on the consignment shelf at your local hifi shop. I've been down that road too many times.