SnapAV & Sonos

[Time2Jet]

As most of you have heard I'm sure, SnapAv has announced that they are now a nationwide distributor of Sonos.  I'm curious if this may be a sign of more robust integration with C4?

[Cyknight]

Why? Distributor doesn't have direct influence to that, and as discussed many times before, the limitations of intrgration are most likely due to the streaming services' demands (or some of them). That wouldn't change no matter who distributes it.

[mstafford388]

Yeah I wouldn't get too excited about that.  

[EverAction]

37 minutes ago, time2jet said:

As most of you have heard I'm sure, SnapAv has announced that they are now a nationwide distributor of Sonos.  I'm curious if this may be a sign of more robust integration with C4?

Sonos & Control4 created a parternship back around 2016. Sonos would release an API and Control4 would make the driver. That went no where in terms of integration (in fact, many will argue the integration took a step back when they removed input switching that allowed a group of Sonos devices to act as a matrix, aka the switch from the HTTPS driver to the API driver). Sonos never bothered to add to the API to bring back features of the old driver that many dealers asked for, essentially leaving them out in the dust. Another bad example, Control4 still haven't modified the Sonos drivers for recent products that have been out for more than a year (2nd gen Amp and Beam). Those devices have two separate inputs that the driver doesn't know how to differentiate which causes its own issues. Don't know if Sonos is to blame for not adding it to their API or Control4's fault for never periodically checking for API changes with drivers they developed and implementing (Control4's driver development is a whole different soapbox I'm not going to get on at this time).

In short, don't hold your breath.

[LollerAgent]

Not expecting this to have any impact on the integration.

[msgreenf]

Unless snap agrees to 10sof millions annually in sales I don't see it happening

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

[Kahn]

19 hours ago, EverAction said:

Sonos & Control4 created a parternship back around 2016. Sonos would release an API and Control4 would make the driver. That went no where in terms of integration (in fact, many will argue the integration took a step back when they removed input switching that allowed a group of Sonos devices to act as a matrix, aka the switch from the HTTPS driver to the API driver). Sonos never bothered to add to the API to bring back features of the old driver that many dealers asked for, essentially leaving them out in the dust. Another bad example, Control4 still haven't modified the Sonos drivers for recent products that have been out for more than a year (2nd gen Amp and Beam). Those devices have two separate inputs that the driver doesn't know how to differentiate which causes its own issues. Don't know if Sonos is to blame for not adding it to their API or Control4's fault for never periodically checking for API changes with drivers they developed and implementing (Control4's driver development is a whole different soapbox I'm not going to get on at this time).

In short, don't hold your breath.

I totally agree with your assessment. BUT - I do believe in relationships between businesses comes down to the management and the employees willing to do whatever it takes. IF someone in a position of importance at Control4/SnapAV were to place value and importance on the integration, and the right people involved in implementation and firmware updates at SONOS were to listen....this could happen very easily. The right people talking to the wrong people is what's happened. Making things happen comes down to a conversation where both see the benefit and correcting/implementing the issue.

All that being said - it's my belief that one of these scenarios have occurred:

Sonos doesn't see the value in 3rd party integration with Control4 and Sonos wont spend the money or invest in a firmware to make it happen.
There is an issue or restriction within the firmware that prevents a solution that doesn't break other operational aspects of the firmware. IE fixing this for Control4 users (let's say 25% of total Sonos users) could affect users (let's say 75% of total Sonos users) that have no Control4. It comes down to  customer usability issue for Sonos.
In the past, Control4 has taken "no we cant" for an answer from Sonos. Wrong people talking to the wrong people.
Control4 has had too many projects occurring simultaneously and Sonos was placed at the bottom of the list for correction.

Compatibility between Control4 and Sonos is as good as it's capable of being based on firmware limitations possibly on both sides of the issue. Maybe one day the right person will communicate with the right person and solve the issue. As one who has plenty invested in both companies - I'd be totally elated to see that happen. We should all hope the news has a ripple effect and new staff within Control4 from SnapAV are undoubtedly serious about taking Control4 to the next level and won't accept business as usual or won't accept "can't" for an answer.

[mstafford388]

2 minutes ago, Kahn said:

I totally agree with your assessment. BUT - I do believe in relationships between businesses comes down to the management and the employees willing to do whatever it takes. IF someone in a position of importance at Control4/SnapAV were to place value and importance on the integration, and the right people involved in implementation and firmware updates at SONOS were to listen....this could happen very easily. The right people talking to the wrong people is what's happened. Making things happen comes down to a conversation where both see the benefit and correcting/implementing the issue.

All that being said - it's my belief that one of these scenarios have occurred:

Sonos doesn't see the value in 3rd party integration with Control4 and Sonos wont spend the money or invest in a firmware to make it happen.
There is an issue or restriction within the firmware that prevents a solution that doesn't break other operational aspects of the firmware. IE fixing this for Control4 users (let's say 25% of total Sonos users) could affect users (let's say 75% of total Sonos users) that have no Control4. It comes down to  customer usability issue for Sonos.
In the past, Control4 has taken "no we cant" for an answer from Sonos. Wrong people talking to the wrong people.
Control4 has had too many projects occurring simultaneously and Sonos was placed at the bottom of the list for correction.

Compatibility between Control4 and Sonos is as good as it's capable of being based on firmware limitations possibly on both sides of the issue. Maybe one day the right person will communicate with the right person and solve the issue. As one who has plenty invested in both companies - I'd be totally elated to see that happen. We should all hope the news has a ripple effect and new staff within Control4 from SnapAV are undoubtedly serious about taking Control4 to the next level and won't accept business as usual or won't accept "can't" for an answer.

I can see where you would speculate those possible scenarios but that's really just not what's going on.  Control4 users probably make up less than 1/2 of a percent of sonos users if that.  So at the end of the day Sonos really does not care about the CI channel.  They'd rather have people using the sonos app so they can collect more data.  This isn't just a Control4 integration issue either, it's a limitation with the Sonos API which is the same for all other control systems so clearly it's not just the guys at control4 not having the right conversation.  The past several years Sonos has made it very clear with their actions that they have zero interest in supporting the CI channel, which you can't really blame them, they're really just a blip on the Sonos radar.  

[EverAction]

16 minutes ago, mstafford388 said:

I can see where you would speculate those possible scenarios but that's really just not what's going on.  Control4 users probably make up less than 1/2 of a percent of sonos users if that.  So at the end of the day Sonos really does not care about the CI channel.  They'd rather have people using the sonos app so they can collect more data.  This isn't just a Control4 integration issue either, it's a limitation with the Sonos API which is the same for all other control systems so clearly it's not just the guys at control4 not having the right conversation.  The past several years Sonos has made it very clear with their actions that they have zero interest in supporting the CI channel, which you can't really blame them, they're really just a blip on the Sonos radar.  

I have to agree with this. Without giving too much detail the dealership I used to work with was directly involved with gettingthis partnership to fruition (the C4 / Sonos partnership, not SnapAV / Sonos). These issues were brought up to both sides on numerous occasions.

Lots of talk no resolution. And how much further can you go with getting the right people involved if its the top people?

[msgreenf]

Business runs and dollars and sense. Sonos is much more concerned w Amazon and best buy and Walmart then snap. Snap will never buy enough to matter.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

[msgreenf]

I would venture to say - total guess Amazon sells more Sonos in a month then snap will sell in a year

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

[eggzlot]

55 minutes ago, msgreenf said:

I would venture to say - total guess Amazon sells more Sonos in a month then snap will sell in a year

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk
 

in a month?  I may beg to say in a week.  :-)  Snap also sells Yamaha but also Autonomic.  I have to figure most dealers would spec Autonomic as its CI only and the end user cannot price check the quote as easily.  I realize Autonomic may not have a stand alone wireless speaker like Sonos, but a dealer selling Snap products will likely be looking at doing in ceiling speakers, centralized runs to a rack area, etc so Autonomic matches up well vs Sonos.  I understand the CI guy has to make a buck so that's fine.  But its why a CI guy who sells Snap would suggest Luma vs selling Hik or Dahua in their quote.  If I was a CI shop I'd quote Autonomic over Sonos because of the price protection but also because the customer feels like they are getting something unique that their friend who shops at Best Buy is not getting.  They hired a "pro" and they are getting "pro" gear.

[msgreenf]

I was trying to be generous w a month...

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

[Cyknight]

7 hours ago, Kahn said:

BUT

Nope, no buts.