Apple Cuts HomePod Orders After Sales Prove to Be Lackluster

[Uofmtiger]

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.

There is an audio forum founded by Steve Hoffman (audio engineer extraordinaire) and he has threads entitled "I have a big problem. My stereo is too good, too accurate. I can't stand it sometimes." and "Audiophiles don't really want NEUTRAL. Audiophiles don't really like NEUTRAL.".

Flat or neutral aren't ideal for a lot of people. As he mentions:

" A colored sound is fine with me if it doesn't get in the way of the music. For example, I like a colored tube sound when it renders a more holographic midrange than in reality. It makes stuff sound more real. That being said, I cannot stand vinyl cartridges that have a built in treble boost (like almost every moving coil cart I've ever heard). There is no way to turn it off and the end result is that pops and tics always sound worse because they are BOOSTED, being mainly comprised of top end."

Whether audiophiles would like the HomePod would depend on the application. As I mentioned, no one is replacing 10,000+ systems with a $350 HomePod. However, it sounds good enough that audiophiles can use them in kitchens and other areas where huge speakers won't fit.

Many audiophiles like tubes, which negates your argument.

 

[ipponrg]

There is an audio forum founded by Steve Hoffman (audio engineer extraordinaire) and he has threads entitled "I have a big problem. My stereo is too good, too accurate. I can't stand it sometimes." and "Audiophiles don't really want NEUTRAL. Audiophiles don't really like NEUTRAL.".

Flat or neutral aren't ideal for a lot of people. As he mentions:

" A colored sound is fine with me if it doesn't get in the way of the music. For example, I like a colored tube sound when it renders a more holographic midrange than in reality. It makes stuff sound more real. That being said, I cannot stand vinyl cartridges that have a built in treble boost (like almost every moving coil cart I've ever heard). There is no way to turn it off and the end result is that pops and tics always sound worse because they are BOOSTED, being mainly comprised of top end."

Whether audiophiles would like the HomePod would depend on the application. As I mentioned, no one is replacing 10,000+ systems with a $350 HomePod. However, it sounds good enough that audiophiles can use them in kitchens and other areas where huge speakers won't fit.

Many audiophiles like tubes, which negates your argument.

I don't think many of us in-the-middle folks are arguing that the HomePod is bad. I agree in that audiophiles sometimes don't like neutral. It's why they invest in thousands of dollars in their setup for speakers and meticulously adjust their EQ. I personally like my speakers close to flat because like I mentioned, much of modern day music has already been produced with EQs adjusted in the sound.

What baited anti-HP arguments are these types of statements:

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.

If it had been rephrased such that it was neutral and not naively biased as in just, "It's a great sounding speaker for a small room such that even some audiophiles like it", then there wouldn't be any real argument here. When particular posters proclaim that this rivals other (super high end) speakers and is a major engineering feat in sound, then that really can't be taken seriously.

 

[KeanosMagicHat]

Some Apple customers are happy to go all in, many will except a certain amount of lock in.

This speaker was a step too far though in terms of only being compatible with the Apple ecosystem.

Especially considering Apple were late arrivals to the music streaming party, meaning people already had subscriptions with other services.

I fully understand the business aim of driving subscriptions to Apple Music.

However, if Apple really want the HomePod to be a huge success, they need to reduce the price slightly and allow it to play fully controlled from sources other than Apple Music.

So it depends on their priority moving forward, do they want to continue to use the HomePod as a vehicle to try to increase their Apple Music userbase or will they now prioritise it succeeding as a product in its own right . . .

 

[Uofmtiger]

Some Apple customers are happy to go all in, many will except a certain amount of lock in.

This speaker was a step too far though in terms of only being compatible with the Apple ecosystem.

Especially considering Apple were late arrivals to the music streaming party, meaning people already had subscriptions with other services.

I fully understand the business aim of driving subscriptions to Apple Music.

However, if Apple really want the HomePod to be a huge success, they need to reduce the price slightly and allow it to play fully controlled from sources other than Apple Music.

So it depends on their priority moving forward, do they want to continue to use the HomePod as a vehicle to try to increase their Apple Music userbase or will they now prioritise it succeeding as a product in its own right . . .

We don't really know. They also require an iOS device to program it. They like building an ecosystem around iOS, which is why it works with Airplay rather than Bluetooth at this point, too.
[doublepost=1524237429][/doublepost]

If it had been rephrased such that it was neutral and not naively biased as in just, "It's a great sounding speaker for a small room such that even some audiophiles like it", then there wouldn't be any real argument here. When particular posters proclaim that this rivals other (super high end) speakers and is a major engineering feat in sound, then that really can't be taken seriously.

I don't think it rivals high end speakers, but fitting that kind of sound quality into such a small package is an engineering feat.

 

[ipponrg]

I don't think it rivals high end speakers, but fitting that kind of sound quality into such a small package is an engineering feat.

I think it's still subjective. The Wren to me sounds better than the HomePod and is cheaper. Just like BOSE, small can only get you so far. Of course if your only use case is just the kitchen in a corner, then maybe.

 

[Karma*Police]

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.

You talk about reality like you’re the only one making a case based on it when in fact, you’re so intent on making a case against the HomePod that you missed all the main points I made, including the part where I said sound was very subjective (ie, I don’t expect everyone to like how HomePod sounds).

As for the term “EQ”, if you go back through the thread, you’ll realize the term is being used liberally to describe all the real time computations HomePod does to optimize the sound for its surroundings.

The fact that it does that, delivers 360 sound (unlike most speakers with a limited sweet spot), in such a diminutive package for only $349 is what makes HomePod an engineering triumph and an amazing value; provided you like how it sounds. Again, while you may not like how it sounds, you can’t argue the impressive engineering that went into it... THAT is the main point of this conversation. At least it was until others jumped in with their hate blinders on to disparage whatever they could about HomePod.

 

[Uofmtiger]

I think it's still subjective. The Wren to me sounds better than the HomePod and is cheaper. Just like BOSE, small can only get you so far. Of course if your only use case is just the kitchen in a corner, then maybe.

I don't think the Wren packs in the room sensing tech, the 360 sound, Siri control of Apple Music, etc. It isn't an engineering feat like the HomePod,even if you personally prefer the sound.

Mine isn't in a corner. It is on a half wall that separates the living room, dining room, and kitchen. It sounds great in every room for its size. I have floor standing speakers in the living room and they sound fantastic, but the HomePod is much more convenient and isn't a big sacrifice like most small speakers.

 

[Regime2008]

There is an audio forum founded by Steve Hoffman (audio engineer extraordinaire) and he has threads entitled "I have a big problem. My stereo is too good, too accurate. I can't stand it sometimes." and "Audiophiles don't really want NEUTRAL. Audiophiles don't really like NEUTRAL.".

Flat or neutral aren't ideal for a lot of people. As he mentions:

" A colored sound is fine with me if it doesn't get in the way of the music. For example, I like a colored tube sound when it renders a more holographic midrange than in reality. It makes stuff sound more real. That being said, I cannot stand vinyl cartridges that have a built in treble boost (like almost every moving coil cart I've ever heard). There is no way to turn it off and the end result is that pops and tics always sound worse because they are BOOSTED, being mainly comprised of top end."

Whether audiophiles would like the HomePod would depend on the application. As I mentioned, no one is replacing 10,000+ systems with a $350 HomePod. However, it sounds good enough that audiophiles can use them in kitchens and other areas where huge speakers won't fit.

Many audiophiles like tubes, which negates your argument.

There is one sentence in my post which states "Now with that being said, users can manipulate the sound through an EQ, to adjust for their preference if need be."

Audiophiles in fact do prefer flat sounding speakers. This way there is very little to no spikes in db's throughout the range of frequencies. They can then adjust EQ to their liking, if need be. It would be counter productive to start off with colored speakers, then trying to adjust them, which many times, simply can't be fixed.

 

[Uofmtiger]

There is one sentence in my post which states "Now with that being said, users can manipulate the sound through an EQ, to adjust for their preference if need be."

Audiophiles in fact do prefer flat sounding speakers. This way there is very little to no spikes in db's throughout the range of frequencies. They can then adjust EQ to their liking, if need be. It would be counter productive to start off with colored speakers, then trying to adjust them, which many times, simply can't be fixed.

A lot of audiophile equipment is colored. Vinyl setups, tubes, speakers, etc. So no, I don't agree and neither does Steve Hoffman. Once you start messing with EQ after it is flat, you are also coloring the sound. So no, there most audiophiles aren't listening to flat, neutral music.

 

[Regime2008]

You talk about reality like you’re the only one making a case based on it when in fact, you’re so intent on making a case against the HomePod that you missed all the main points I made, including the part where I said sound was very subjective (ie, I don’t expect everyone to like how HomePod sounds).

As for the term “EQ”, if you go back through the thread, you’ll realize the term is being used liberally to describe all the real time computations HomePod does to optimize the sound for its surroundings.

The fact that it does that, delivers 360 sound (unlike most speakers with a limited sweet spot), in such a diminutive package for only $349 is what makes HomePod an engineering triumph and an amazing value; provided you like how it sounds. Again, while you may not like how it sounds, you can’t argue the impressive engineering that went into it... THAT is the main point of this conversation. At least it was until others jumped in with their hate blinders on to disparage whatever they could about HomePod.

Hate to say this, but homepod is not a technical feat. If beamforming had never been done before in prior speaker system, routers, etc, then it could be considered a technical feat.

But it's the fact of how apple processes the music. It sounds so bad when you compare it to the same song through airplay. It's as if apple boosted the 60hz - 500hz bands. Vocals are too pronounced, and overwhelm the rest of the track. Midrange is severely lacking. Sub bass is missing, while there is a huge spike around 60hz to make up for it. Some like exaggerated bass, which is fine, but i like my bass flat in relation to the dynamics of the rest of the spectrum.
[doublepost=1524248270][/doublepost]

A lot of audiophile equipment is colored. Vinyl setups, tubes, speakers, etc. So no, I don't agree and neither does Steve Hoffman. Once you start messing with EQ after it is flat, you are also coloring the sound. So no, there most audiophiles aren't listening to flat, neutral music.

Read my post again. Audiophiles don't buy colored speakers. They but flat speakers, and can adjust them if they like. It would be counter intuitive to buy colored speakers, and then trying to eq them to their liking, cause sometimes spikes can't be fixed with eq.

Point is, you can't EQ the homepod, and it's sounds signature is not for me. Not sure why I'm getting flack for it. Audiophiles got nothing to do with my personal opinion on it, and why many of them returned the homepod. It's ok for background music, but not for listening sessions. I'm not ok with spending 350, well actually 700 for background listening. And definitely not on something so small which doesn't sound that great.

 

[Uofmtiger]

Hate to say this, but homepod is not a technical feat. If beamforming had never been done before in prior speaker system, routers, etc, then it could be considered a technical feat.

But it's the fact of how apple processes the music. It sounds so bad when you compare it to the same song through airplay. It's as if apple boosted the 60hz - 500hz bands. Vocals are too pronounced, and overwhelm the rest of the track. Midrange is severely lacking. Sub bass is missing, while there is a huge spike around 60hz to make up for it. Some like exaggerated bass, which is fine, but i like my bass flat in relation to the dynamics of the rest of the spectrum.
[doublepost=1524248270][/doublepost]
Read my post again. Audiophiles don't buy colored speakers. They but flat speakers, and can adjust them if they like. It would be counter intuitive to buy colored speakers, and then trying to eq them to their liking, cause sometimes spikes can't be fixed with eq.

Disagree with the first part. Tell me a router that is room sensing.

Also, if you were right, every audiophile would have the exact same flat speakers. No, speaker sound is all over the place unless you think Maggies and Wilson Watt Puppies sound the same.

 

[Regime2008]

Disagree with the first part. Tell me a router that is room sensing.

Also, if you were right, every audiophile would have the exact same flat speakers. No, speaker sound is all over the place unless you think Maggies and Wilson Watt Puppies sound the same.

Do you want me to tell you about a single router that uses beam-forming? Or should I just paste one of the first links I found, with a list of routers? Pretty sure a 2 second google search could have helped you here lol.
https://www.bestbuy.com/site/shop/beamforming-routers
Many routers with more than 2 antennae's, use beam-forming to provide a better signal. Apple did NOT create beam-forming tech. It's been around for quite some time, in audio as well.

Sound is personal. What I may like, is different from what you may like. But a common thing I saw on forums, reviews, etc, is that the homepod does not sound better than a decent pair of bookshelf speakers. I found this to be true after spending time with a homepod myself. Apple did a horrible thing with Apple music, and many do not like the sound. Not sure what else you guys want me to say? It's not like I am going to change my opinion on the device, especially since I love home/car audio more than the average Joe.

 

[Z3man]

I think the sales are lacklustre and returns are high because the sound isn't as good as it was made out to be by Apples over hyped launch. The sound is ok but nothing special, certainly not £319 worth.

I returned my first HP because of the over powering bass. I think Apple got carried away with this because they found a way of getting a lot of bass out of a small product, and tried to show it off by giving it too much bass.

Then there was an update 11.3 and Apple reduced the bass, so i bought another one to try and it is much better now, a much more balanced sound, but still nothing special. My second one is still in the 14 day return period and i am contemplating returning it because even with the improved sound it still isn't worth the money.

I may keep it yet i am not sure, i am hoping there is another software release and Apple give us some presets or equaliser settings so we can tweak the sound. The one sound they have now isn't going to suit everyone because people have different tastes so we need to be able to change it.

Obviously there are other improvements needed that have been mentioned in this thread, like improving Siri and it needs more functionality, but they can come with software updates over time, but we need to get the sound quality sorted first.

I have returned my second HP as well, the sound quality just isn't good enough for the money, even though it was improved in 11.3 it still isn't good enough. The more i listen to it the more i think it is actually quite poor when streaming from Apple Music.

The annoying thing is, is that when i Airplay to it from my Mac the sound is actually very good and can match a good set of bookshelf speakers or a half decent £500 hifi. So it is capable of good sound quality but for some reason it cant stream good quality sound, must be the way Apple have set it up i imagine. When i Airplay to it from my Mac i can use the presets in iTunes which make a hell of a lot of difference, which then makes it a very good speaker, the difference is like night and day. But i don't want it as an Airpaly speaker as i already have that option. I want the HP for a streaming speaker, which it is pretty poor at.

I am just going to buy an Echo plus and use that, at least the smart features are good on that, and if the sound isn't very good i will just connect it to my hifi.

 

[Regime2008]

I have returned my second HP as well, the sound quality just isn't good enough for the money, even though it was improved in 11.3 it still isn't good enough. The more i listen to it the more i think it is actually quite poor when streaming from Apple Music.

The annoying thing is, is that when i Airplay to it from my Mac the sound is actually very good and can match a good set of bookshelf speakers or a half decent £500 hifi. So it is capable of good sound quality but for some reason it cant stream good quality sound, must be the way Apple have set it up i imagine. When i Airplay to it from my Mac i can use the presets in iTunes which make a hell of a lot of difference, which then makes it a very good speaker, the difference is like night and day. But i don't want it as an Airpaly speaker as i already have that option. I want the HP for a streaming speaker, which it is pretty poor at.

I am just going to buy an Echo plus and use that, at least the smart features are good on that, and if the sound isn't very good i will just connect it to my hifi.

This is literally what I was just saying. It sounds better through Airplay than Apple music. I'm not sure what Apple was thinking.

 

[Karma*Police]

Hate to say this, but homepod is not a technical feat. If beamforming had never been done before in prior speaker system, routers, etc, then it could be considered a technical feat.

But it's the fact of how apple processes the music. It sounds so bad when you compare it to the same song through airplay. It's as if apple boosted the 60hz - 500hz bands. Vocals are too pronounced, and overwhelm the rest of the track. Midrange is severely lacking. Sub bass is missing, while there is a huge spike around 60hz to make up for it. Some like exaggerated bass, which is fine, but i like my bass flat in relation to the dynamics of the rest of the spectrum.
[doublepost=1524248270][/doublepost]
Read my post again. Audiophiles don't buy colored speakers. They but flat speakers, and can adjust them if they like. It would be counter intuitive to buy colored speakers, and then trying to eq them to their liking, cause sometimes spikes can't be fixed with eq.

Point is, you can't EQ the homepod, and it's sounds signature is not for me. Not sure why I'm getting flack for it. Audiophiles got nothing to do with my personal opinion on it, and why many of them returned the homepod. It's ok for background music, but not for listening sessions. I'm not ok with spending 350, well actually 700 for background listening. And definitely not on something so small which doesn't sound that great.

Sounds like you haven’t read up on HomePod if you think all it does is beamforming.

Never gave you flack for not liking HomePod’s sound.

Audiophiles buy speakers depending on what THEY think sounds best which is why they buy different brands with different sound signatures.

Considering many audiophiles (just look on reddit) have already said they think it sounds great, I’m not sure why you’re speaking for them.

No one is forcing you to buy HomePod or even proclaim it has great sound. At least I never did. If you don’t like how it sounds, point taken... again.

 

[Uofmtiger]

Do you want me to tell you about a single router that uses beam-forming? Or should I just paste one of the first links I found, with a list of routers? Pretty sure a 2 second google search could have helped you here lol.
https://www.bestbuy.com/site/shop/beamforming-routers
Many routers with more than 2 antennae's, use beam-forming to provide a better signal. Apple did NOT create beam-forming tech. It's been around for quite some time, in audio as well.

Sound is personal. What I may like, is different from what you may like. But a common thing I saw on forums, reviews, etc, is that the homepod does not sound better than a decent pair of bookshelf speakers. I found this to be true after spending time with a homepod myself. Apple did a horrible thing with Apple music, and many do not like the sound. Not sure what else you guys want me to say? It's not like I am going to change my opinion on the device, especially since I love home/car audio more than the average Joe.

I am referring to Apple's implementation:

"The beamforming technology allows the HomePod to determine the position of the user relative to the device, and in turn adjust its microphone settings to better acquire audio from that direction. In effect, the audio feeds from all of the microphones in the array are analyzed for speech, with any extra noises picked up by the array used to remove extraneous sounds from the sound of the voice, making it clearer.

"A beam-form mic array means that while there are multiple mics pointed in every direction, they can weight the signal received by each mic differently depending on a sort of correlation matrix," Hines explains, continuing that the processing "helps reject environmental surrounding ambience, and highlight only the more transient, desired speech material.""
https://appleinsider.com/articles/1...-beamforming-and-why-it-needs-an-a8-processor

You are referring to how beam forming works with routers:

"There’s a standard way for beamforming to work, and any 802.11ac devices that support beamforming will work with other ones that do. Essentially, 802.11ac devices — like your router and laptop — can communicate with each other and provide information about their relative positions.

Beamforming is a standardized part of the 802.11ac Wi-Fi standard. However, not all 802.11ac devices have to support beamforming. Just because you have an 802.11ac device doesn’t mean it supports beamforming. But, if a device does support beamforming, it does so in a standardized way"

https://www.howtogeek.com/220774/htg-explains-what-is-beamforming-on-a-wireless-router/

Very different implementations.

 

[Regime2008]

Sounds like you haven’t read up on HomePod if you think all it does is beamforming.

Never gave you flack for not liking HomePod’s sound.

Audiophiles buy speakers depending on what THEY think sounds best which is why they buy different brands with different sound signatures.

Considering many audiophiles (just look on reddit) have already said they think it sounds great, I’m not sure why you’re speaking for them.

No one is forcing you to buy HomePod or even proclaim it has great sound. At least I never did. If you don’t like how it sounds, point taken... again.

As matter a fact, most of the people spamming /r/audiophile , were /r/Apple users that flooded the subreddit upon homepod release. I have read through multiple threads on there, and the majority if not most Audiophiles, dislike the homepod, and actually opposed it being in the subreddit. Go through and see all the downvoted comments, and you will see what I mean.
[doublepost=1524251642][/doublepost]

I am referring to Apple's implementation:

"The beamforming technology allows the HomePod to determine the position of the user relative to the device, and in turn adjust its microphone settings to better acquire audio from that direction. In effect, the audio feeds from all of the microphones in the array are analyzed for speech, with any extra noises picked up by the array used to remove extraneous sounds from the sound of the voice, making it clearer.

"A beam-form mic array means that while there are multiple mics pointed in every direction, they can weight the signal received by each mic differently depending on a sort of correlation matrix," Hines explains, continuing that the processing "helps reject environmental surrounding ambience, and highlight only the more transient, desired speech material.""
https://appleinsider.com/articles/1...-beamforming-and-why-it-needs-an-a8-processor

You are referring to how beam forming works with routers:

"There’s a standard way for beamforming to work, and any 802.11ac devices that support beamforming will work with other ones that do. Essentially, 802.11ac devices — like your router and laptop — can communicate with each other and provide information about their relative positions.

Beamforming is a standardized part of the 802.11ac Wi-Fi standard. However, not all 802.11ac devices have to support beamforming. Just because you have an 802.11ac device doesn’t mean it supports beamforming. But, if a device does support beamforming, it does so in a standardized way"

https://www.howtogeek.com/220774/htg-explains-what-is-beamforming-on-a-wireless-router/

Very different implementations.

In that case, I do not know of a router that has beam-forming audio capabilities.

 

[Uofmtiger]

I am just going to buy an Echo plus and use that, at least the smart features are good on that, and if the sound isn't very good i will just connect it to my hifi.

If you are going to connect it to a hifi, you are better off just spending $40 on a Dot.

 

[ipponrg]

I don't think the Wren packs in the room sensing tech, the 360 sound, Siri control of Apple Music, etc. It isn't an engineering feat like the HomePod,even if you personally prefer the sound.

The Wren is not a fully featured smart speaker like the HomePod. However it supports Airplay, Bluetooth, and PlayFi. It does have an input jack in the back for a 3.5mm, so you can easily connect anything else to it and make it "smart". It projects and sounds full with nicely well rounded mids. It does not need room sensing tech because it's up to you to figure out how to place your speakers. It's first and foremost a fairly straight forward speaker.

I understand why you prefer automated features. It allows you to avoid making adjustments given you trust someone else's opinions on what those automatic adjustments are. The HomePod was precisely made for people such as yourself.

That is perfectly OK too.

For people that are meticulous about sound and/or their setup, the HomePod is not for them.

 

[Uofmtiger]

The Wren is not a fully featured smart speaker like the HomePod. However it supports Airplay, Bluetooth, and PlayFi. It does have an input jack in the back for a 3.5mm, so you can easily connect anything else to it and make it "smart". It projects and sounds full with nicely well rounded mids. It does not need room sensing tech because it's up to you to figure out how to place your speakers. It's first and foremost a fairly straight forward speaker.

I understand why you prefer automated features. It allows you to avoid making adjustments given you trust someone else's opinions on what those automatic adjustments are. The HomePod was precisely made for people such as yourself.

That is perfectly OK too.

For people that are meticulous about sound and/or their setup, the HomePod is not for them.

Like I said, I don't use it as my main system. For my use, I prefer just putting it in a spot and letting it do the work. Yes, the Wren is like hundreds of speakers on the market. I have no use for something like it at this point because it isn't as good enough to replace my other speakers, it doesn't have smart features, and it needs proper placement. The HomePod can go anywhere and sound decent. That is the point.

For my own implementation, the 360 sound and the room sensing were the most important factors. I don't have space for multiple speakers facing different directions on the small half wall between rooms. I would have never put a conventional speaker in that spot because it wouldn't do what I need. Also, the fact that it is one device with one cable makes it less messy looking than plugging a bunch of stuff into a conventional speaker.

Typically, I am moving around (making dinner and whatnot) when it is playing, so it helps that I don't have to sit in a sweet spot to get the best sound quality. Lots of factors that make the HomePod so useful for my situation.

 

[Z3man]

If you are going to connect it to a hifi, you are better off just spending $40 on a Dot.

Got a dot at the moment, just borrowed it off a family member. Only problem is i have to leave my hifi on 24/7 or keep turning it on and off, it is not easy to find an always on speaker to use with it. I will try the echo plus and see if i like it, if not i may send it back and just use the dot. I will see how it goes, but at least the echo plus isn't a big outlay.

 

[loon3y]

Do you think they'll ever add the ability to connect to a TV? I would get one if so.

 

[recoil80]

Do you think they'll ever add the ability to connect to a TV? I would get one if so.

I'd like to have a port on the back to be able to use it a speaker without streaming, but the odds are pretty low.
I'm not looking for a smart speaker, having an AW I can set reminders and deal with my messages right from my wrist so I'd buy it for the music only.
HomePod is great for music, but I'm not willing to subscribe to Apple Music, not yet. Being able to connect it to something via a cable or having third party support like Spotify would be great.

 

[Uofmtiger]

Got a dot at the moment, just borrowed it off a family member. Only problem is i have to leave my hifi on 24/7 or keep turning it on and off, it is not easy to find an always on speaker to use with it. I will try the echo plus and see if i like it, if not i may send it back and just use the dot. I will see how it goes, but at least the echo plus isn't a big outlay.

Yes, that is the issue with plugging any of these devices into a "hi fi". They become a lot less useful for casual listening because you have to deal with turning on and off the stereo, getting it on the right input, etc. I do have Dots plugged into always on speakers, but none of them have SQ close to what the HomePod has.

 

[loon3y]

I'd like to have a port on the back to be able to use it a speaker without streaming, but the odds are pretty low.
I'm not looking for a smart speaker, having an AW I can set reminders and deal with my messages right from my wrist so I'd buy it for the music only.
HomePod is great for music, but I'm not willing to subscribe to Apple Music, not yet. Being able to connect it to something via a cable or having third party support like Spotify would be great.

I don't want to get a TV sound system and an apple home pod. I Just need one speaker that will connect to any device I have at my APT.

Currently and sadly seems like the SONOS is the only option at the moment. Why apple didn't want it to be connected to there devices is beyond me.

They would sell by the tenfold if that were the case and from the reviews it seems like its good enough to be a decent home entertainment speaker.