Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Cuts HomePod Orders After Sales Prove to Be Lackluster
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Sounds like you're a Google fan? Which is fine, but let's not distort facts.
While sound may be subjective, physical dimensions are not, and compared to the HomePod, the Max is twice the size and weight. It looks HUGE next to HomePod.
A single Max can't produce stereo any better than a single HomePod because there isn't enough space separating the left/right channels. In fact, because of the way HomePod separates each sound and plays them intelligently through its 7 tweeter array; even using its surroundings, like bouncing certain sounds against the wall for ambient effect, HomePod probably does a better job.
Including 1 yr sub is nice.
I'm not sure what multitude of limitations you speak of with HomePod. It includes tech that was heretofore only included in super expensive speakers, and like I said in my last post, producing consistent audio quality no matter where I am in the room is a pretty amazing feat... some have even called it magical. And HomePod consistently gets high marks for its mic sensitivity which Max does not.
Here's a review from a trusted audio publication (not some bogus tech blog like the Verge et al):
The Apple HomePod is, hands-down, the best-sounding speaker of its size I’ve ever heard, and, note-for-note, an absolute pleasure to listen to every moment it’s on. It is, indeed, a remarkable sonic achievement.
https://www.soundandvision.com/content/apple-homepod-wireless-smart-speaker-review
Your posts show you are a huge Apple fan, which is fine too. So lets not distort facts at all just because of bias.
Twice the size because of the magnets on the larger drivers, and more powerful amplifiers. The driver's will need airspace, hence why it gets much louder than the homepod.
A Google Max definitely can produce stereo much better than a homepod. In fact, there is no stereo on homepod, but a combination of the channels played. This does not give you separation of channels. So tracks that are recorded with panning, and different levels of instruments in the different channels, are NOT apparent from the homepod.
The obvious several limitations that the homepod exibit...Do I need to go down the list, which there are plenty of forums to cover the many complaints. Lack of EQ, no aux, BT doesn't work, only Apple music integration with Siri, Siri is the worst AI assistant, latest update changed the EQ algorithm, etc. Pretty sure you have came across a couple of them.
The best speaker of its size... Well, that isn't really saying much. I don't really know if there are that many speakers of its size and price range to really compare. The whole small speaker trend seems to be a recent one. Most people who listen to music either do it from a headphones/iem's, or from their stereo. And pretty much any pair of bookshelf speakers in the price range as the homepod, blow it away with sound quality, volume, and bass. I had posted a video in an earlier post which compared the homepod to several bookshelf speakers. And even a $129 pair were said to have sounded better than the homepod. Sure the bookshelf speakers are little larger than the homepod, but nothing will beat physics when it comes to sound. Bigger driver/enclosure = bigger sound, with all things equal.
Uh, where did I distort facts? You said it wasn't big and bulky compared to HomePod but it clearly is. Doesn't matter what the reasons are.
No, it can't. Without enough physical separation between speakers, a single Max will always produce sound like it's coming form a single source.
But those are clearly limitations based on your POV and/or for argument's sake. For example, not only do I not see any of what you mentioned as limitations (aside from smarts, though I've always said all digital assistants are pretty stupid) but something like HomePod's ability to self-EQ in real-time, I would consider a huge benefit and a feature... it's part of what makes it sound so great. I don't need aux (I got it cos it's wireless), BT (why diminish sound quality??) or another music service (I subscribe to Apple Music). As for Siri, it gets a bad rap but when tested in real life, it's never as bad as the media claims. Here's a test where Siri (HomePod) came in last, but when you look at the details, once Apple enables a few abilities on HomePod that already exists on iPhone, it would come in second behind Google Assistant. The study also mentions Siri has a more human-like interaction than Google or Alexa: https://www.phonearena.com/news/Siri-finishes-last-in-test-among-smart-speaker-assistants_id102400
Here's another comparison done by C/Net where Siri's main shortcoming stems from lack of 3rd party "skills" but aces many other areas: https://www.cnet.com/news/voice-wars-siri-vs-alexa-vs-google-assistant/
Here's a recent article that puts the whole quantity of commands = better smart speaker/digital assistant into perspective: https://techcrunch.com/2018/04/15/in-defense-of-the-homepod/
You should read the entire article. The small speaker trend is driven in part by technology. HomePod is a breakthrough in many ways... size being one of them. Apple had to create a new material for the HomePod's woofer to create the deep, clean bass in such a small package without distorting.
The bottom line is this... If you like the Max, enjoy it. I've no doubt it sounds good. The question you need to ask yourself is this: why waste so much energy trying to promote a Google product and put down an Apple product on a site designed for Apple fans/users?
0.6in taller, and a barely over the width of 2 homepods... seems like you have a very thin line between what is considered big and bulky. Heaven forbid you get near some "REAL" speakers. I guess those would be what, humongous? Ginormous? Colossal?
However you want to sway what I said, the fact remains, The google max will forever have more stereo separation, and proper reproduction of the channels of how tracks were recorded. All day everyday over the homepod. Because the homepod cannot distinguish left from right channel. It wouldn't matter if the Max's speakers were any closer together, or spread 4ft from each other. It will still properly play the L and R channel in accordance to how it was meant to be played back. The homepod will never in a million years be able to do this, unless Apple pushes an update to define L and R channel. And at that point, it would be confusing with the amount of drivers, positioning, etc.
And what you have mentioned are things that you consider points based on your POV of the device. Different strokes for different folks. The average customer on the other hand apparently do care. In fact that is why there is so much controversy surrounding the homepod in the first place. Because of its lack of features, sub par assistant, and many don't care for the synthetic sound algorithm that Apple uses for auto-eq.
I like technology in general. I love audio as well, hence me being around in plenty of discussions surrounding the topic, as well as my profile pic. I personally don't own a Google home max, nor plan on buying one. I stick to a quality pair of speakers, which can be hooked up to a smart assistant, and voila. Best of both worlds. Not sure why you are questioning why I am here. Unless I missed the rules/requirements to view/post on this site, I am unsure what the relevance of my answer would be for you?
0.6in taller, and a barely over the width of 2 homepods... seems like you have a very thin line between what is considered big and bulky. Heaven forbid you get near some "REAL" speakers. I guess those would be what, humongous? Ginormous? Colossal?
However you want to sway what I said, the fact remains, The google max will forever have more stereo separation, and proper reproduction of the channels of how tracks were recorded. All day everyday over the homepod. Because the homepod cannot distinguish left from right channel. It wouldn't matter if the Max's speakers were any closer together, or spread 4ft from each other. It will still properly play the L and R channel in accordance to how it was meant to be played back. The homepod will never in a million years be able to do this, unless Apple pushes an update to define L and R channel. And at that point, it would be confusing with the amount of drivers, positioning, etc.
And what you have mentioned are things that you consider points based on your POV of the device. Different strokes for different folks. The average customer on the other hand apparently do care. In fact that is why there is so much controversy surrounding the homepod in the first place. Because of its lack of features, sub par assistant, and many don't care for the synthetic sound algorithm that Apple uses for auto-eq.
I like technology in general. I love audio as well, hence me being around in plenty of discussions surrounding the topic, as well as my profile pic. I personally don't own a Google home max, nor plan on buying one. I stick to a quality pair of speakers, which can be hooked up to a smart assistant, and voila. Best of both worlds. Not sure why you are questioning why I am here. Unless I missed the rules/requirements to view/post on this site, I am unsure what the relevance of my answer would be for you?
If you loved technology, you would appreciate the HomePod for its breakthroughs in audio technology. I can see that you're the type of person who'll argue for the sake of arguing, so I'll end it here.
I love technology and I'm a huge fan of audio, like I previously stated. If technology muddles the way sound is reproduced, I do NOT like it. I do not like artificial processing of sound nor do I want a device to try and simulate an environment it cannot truly understand. You are only interested in this device because of the Apple logo. If Samsung or Google made the homepod, you would be bashing it. Only difference is, I would be bashing it as well.
I am happy that traditional speaker manufacturers are not going this route. And the ones that have pioneered this route, have the R&D and technology to actually work properly. But its far from affordable to the general public. They run about 90k for a pair. But these are audiophile speakers, unlike the homepod. Homepod did not make a breakthrough in audio, no offense to Apple. But they are just implementing their own version of what other speaker manufacturers have done, but in a cheaper package.
I don't think Apple made any breakthroughs really with this. By altering EQ automatically, it creates a very opinionated environment which is not usually ideal for people that care about sound. I'm sure it creates an interesting listening experience for some, but for the creators it's not preferred.
Try producing music and see if you love to have its EQ auto adjusted.
Is that a valid question? If Apple were composing their music it would be. You can get the same music in many places (and many of those would be a better choice - better search, better price etc.) And Siri? Seriously? Because of her voice?
Maybe Siri helps with music discovery. You ask her to play a song, and she plays a completely different song. Voila, new music found! At least that's what several users complained about.
Whether you like the idea of computational audio or not doesn’t make it any less of an engineering feat.
And it’s not like HomePod is messing with the sound like a madman on a mixing board.
I used to DJ and still dabble in music and if I have speakers that make my music sound even better, why would I be against that?
If everyone in the world used HomePods, then we’d all hear it exactly the same way.
But the reality is, no matter what gear I use to create music, people will experience it very differently because they have different equipment/ears.
This notion that people should experience music the way the artist intended is silly for that very reason... it’s impossible unless they have the same exact equipment, acoustic setup and ears as the artists. Not to mention, there’s quite a bit of engineering magic that make some artists sound way better than they ever could in real life. And that’s what HomePod and every decent stereo/speaker attempts to do; make the original recordings sound as good as possible.
Can’t wait for the article that HomePod made like 80%of all smart speaker profit.
I don't think you should be against that if you feel HomePods sound better for you. For many others such as myself, we prefer to have control over our EQ than to trust a forced setup.
You might have "DJ" and "dabbled" in music whatever that means in this context , but it's clear you've don't understand music production.
There is a reason in the studios that music producers use reference monitors and adjust EQ in their mixing board. They know people have varying setups for sound equipment. One of the easiest ways to experience a recording in how the producer heard it is to just listen with a flat EQ. The producer has already adjusted the EQ for you from the recording, and usually there isn't much need to adjust it unless you have a specific preference. Speakers typically have a sound signature, so the rest of the coloring is taken care by your speakers' character.
With that in mind, what if people prefer more flat EQ and less "V" shaped EQ? You can't really change that with the HomePod, which is one of the main issues people have with it.
Music producer here and I have no issues with how my tracks sound on the HomePod.
I think this is a PERFECT example of Apple'as diabolical marketing department nowadays.
Show/demo the product with all the appropriate hoopla on JUNE 15, 2017 - all the bells and whistles, razzmatazz ect.
RELEASE the product on FEBRUARY 9, 2018 - 8 MONTHS LATER (to SOME markets) - with/to NO real excitement.
IF Apple had shown it in June, said they'd be available for pre-order in 2 days and rolling out in instore and by delivery in 10 days (LIKE A NORMAL iPHONE's release), they'd have sold better.
Apple should CEASE showing pre-release stuff. Go back to showing product ONLY when the product available within a few days.
The cycle of showing and holding from release MUST stifle sales, ESPECIALLY if they finally roll it out with no BIG hoopla. The Homepod, the wireless charging CASE for Airpods, the wireless charging mat...even the iMAC Pro (or whatever that black iMac is called) - ALL shown months before release - though some of these products, we're STILL waiting on.
Whoever (Marketing?) decided to show products months in advance of release, and then finally release something with completely underwhelming "excitement", should be sacked.
Show/demo the product with all the appropriate hoopla on JUNE 15, 2017 - all the bells and whistles, razzmatazz ect.
RELEASE the product on FEBRUARY 9, 2018 - 8 MONTHS LATER (to SOME markets) - with/to NO real excitement.
IF Apple had shown it in June, said they'd be available for pre-order in 2 days and rolling out in instore and by delivery in 10 days (LIKE A NORMAL iPHONE's release), they'd have sold better.
Apple should CEASE showing pre-release stuff. Go back to showing product ONLY when the product available within a few days.
The cycle of showing and holding from release MUST stifle sales, ESPECIALLY if they finally roll it out with no BIG hoopla. The Homepod, the wireless charging CASE for Airpods, the wireless charging mat...even the iMAC Pro (or whatever that black iMac is called) - ALL shown months before release - though some of these products, we're STILL waiting on.
Whoever (Marketing?) decided to show products months in advance of release, and then finally release something with completely underwhelming "excitement", should be sacked.
You have just made the case for the HomePod. The places that I listen to music are not reproductions of a recording studio and hence the HomePod has the ability to make the best from imperfect surroundings.
If you’re the audiophile type with the means and money to set up an acoustically perfect room for $500k, you are not the target demographic of the HomePod. The HomePod is for the rest of us.
I think you took my comment out of context. My point is I like to adjust my EQs. I start with flat then adjust it accordingly to whatever room I'm in. It does not have to be a reproduction of a recording studio. My point is that if you listen to it with a flat EQ, that's how it was recorded in a recording studio. Then you can adjust it accordingly to your room and how you prefer it.
If you prefer the automated setup of the HomePod and feel it's best for you, that's OK too.
Many of us knew from the beginning that the HomePod despite whatever "audiophile" review was out there, it was not targeting people that cared about these types of details.
Yeah, I don't have any issues either with how my tracks sound, but I also don't think it sounds great with it either
Personally, I think the type of people that appreciate those type of details can still appreciate the HomePod for its small size and its ability to fill up a kitchen, bedroom, etc. The size is ideal for many places you can't fit a true stereo system and it sounds good enough that people that appreciate details will still like it. Personally, I have a HomePod, but it didn't replace my main system. I didn't expect it to. I just like it for the size, convenience, and its SQ in that form factor.
Wait, I'm SUPER confused because your original argument against HomePod was because "it creates a very opinionated environment which is not usually ideal for people that care about sound. I'm sure it creates an interesting listening experience for some, but for the creators it's not preferred. Try producing music and see if you love to have its EQ auto adjusted."
Now you're saying "For many others such as myself, we prefer to have control over our EQ than to trust a forced setup."
You realize you're creating a "very opinionated environment" by changing your EQ settings, right? Except, the HomePod does it better than a person ever could on their own. That's why audiophiles use special tools to set up their equipment. HomePod negates that need.
And where did I say HomePod would sound great for everyone? I've always maintained that sound is subjective which was the basis of my original argument against yours; because even audio equipment manufacturers differ on what great sound is, which is why as you pointed out, different systems have different audio characteristics. HomePod is no different in that regard.
Whether you like the sound or not is immaterial to the original point; that's just your opinion on sound quality. It has nothing to do with the fact that HomePod is a major engineering feat, bringing super high-end (ie, very expensive) audio tech into a small package costing only $349 which seems to have impressed the vast majority of people who've heard it, including audiophiles.
When it comes to the word "audiophile" and the gear that they use, they go for speakers that have a flat frequency response, not something that features a v-shaped sound signature. The homepod is far from flat. Now with that being said, users can manipulate the sound through an EQ, to adjust for their preference if need be.
The statement that really caught my eye was:
This is extremely wrong. Humans created the technology. Apple uses something similar to beolab, and tried to make their own sound algorithm for auto EQ. If you think the homepod can EQ the sound in a room better than any human, don't you think it would be the best sounding speaker? Don't you think it would beat every similar speaker in a comparison? I understand you like Apple and all, but there's gotta be a point where reality kicks in. The homepod alters the sound, which many don't necessarily like. I personally don't think it sounds good.