Archimago wrote: > Was curious about some of the new music servers and did some reading in > the event that my Squeezebox system goes kaput one day... > > Looks like the 'Sonos has a 65000 track limit' > (https://ask.sonos.com/sonos/topics/future_of_the_65k_limit). > > BlueSound has a '~80000 track limit' > (https://support.bluesound.com/hc/en-us/articles/201253417-How-many-tracks-can-my-Bluesound-Player-index-on-the-network-). > > Hmmm, looks like I'm "over the limit" with my music collection already > if I were to own one of these systems if I include all the vinyl rips > and SACD rips over the years! I must admit I was surprised by these > limits. I'm sure there must be many of you (us) out there with larger > libraries than these numbers. > > A bit surprised and a bit disappointed by these limits. I'm impressed > again at the power and flexibility of the Squeezebox/LMS system! Also > strange how reviewers don't mention this since I imagine it's -one of > the most important specifications- that should really be made clear to > purchasers.
And the 65,000 Sonos limit is actually much less if you have extensive tags in your music files. The Sonos is a perfectly good system (I bought a single unit to play with last year). But there are so many limitations as compared with Squeezeboxes and LMS that it would take too long to list them. Functionality that Squeezebox users have taken for granted for many years doesn't exist in the Sonos ecosystem. We have lots of discussions around here regarding the library database function and how certain tags are handled, etc. With all of its issues, the database/library/tag use of Squeezeboxes are light years ahead of the Sonos handling of tags. At the Sonos forums there are lots of threads on things like hi-res (Sonos plays only 16/44.1, or maybe 16/48, but not 24 bit) and track limit. Unfortunately, these turn in to mud slinging contests (and be prepared to be told that if you say you need more than 65,000 tracks you're either lying or crazy). From what I understand, the 65k limit (less with lots of tags) is a function of the memory/processing power of the SONOS players. The system is very different from LMS/SB. Each Sonos player has a complete index of all the files. But I'm not expert on Sonos, so my interpretation is oversimplified I'm sure. My casual reading of the Sonos forums suggests that there are many users there that are primarily interested in streaming services as compared to their own music libraries. That may be a perfectly good business model for SONOS, as that seems to fit the actual music listening market (People like me with 100k tracks or more are dinosaurs I guess). But even in the streaming world, many Sonos users have similar complaints to us in terms of BBC changes (and at least we have workarounds that they don't) and Spotify (lack of functionality), etc. *Home:* VortexBox 4TB (2.3) > LMS 7.8 > Transporter, Touch, Boom, Radio w/Battery (all ethernet) *Cottage:* VBA 3TB (2.3) > LMS 7.8 > Touch > Benchmark DAC I, Boom, Radio w/Battery (all ethernet except Radio) *Office:* Win7(64) > LMS 7.9 > Squeezelite *Spares:* Touch(3), Radio(3), Boom, SB3, CONTROLLER *Controllers:* iPhone6 & iPadAir2 (iPeng8 & Squeezepad), CONTROLLER, or SqueezePlay 7.8 on Win7(64) laptop *Files:* ripping: dbpoweramp > FLAC; post-rip: mp3tag, PerfectTunes; Streaming: Spotify ------------------------------------------------------------------------ garym's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17325 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=103488 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
