Apple Explains Why HomePod Was Released Again, Wi-Fi 4 Limitation, and More

[avatuar99]

It's literally not mono. I can't believe we are even having this conversation again.

How is the homepod not a mono speaker? Stereo music left and right channels are summed to one channel. The speakers in the Homepod playback one channel of audio on all it’s speakers. That’s why they want you to buy two homepods so it plays back left and right channels independently. I currently have two original homepods. Had to buy two to get stereo like a proper modern speaker system. They should have come up with a stereo speaker. The homepod plays back just like those old radios people used to listen to back in the day. In my opinion the sound is not all that great. You can get much better sound from regular bookshelf speakers.

 

[ColdShadow]

They cut corners by removing tweeters..
The rest new features are marketing.
Glad I bought Sonos 5.

 

[cfretts67]

Just waded through 11 pages of bile. If you don’t want it with the Wi-Fi it has or the reduced tweeter count (irrelevant anyway) then just don’t buy it. I’ll be in the market for an extra Homepod so will give it a careful listen to decide if it’s better or worse than my original Homepod. Only then will I decide if it’s for me or to source an original model second hand. Like any audio product, try before you buy .

 

[Sarafay]

The interesting thing is Apple's design decision are actually reasonable for the HomePod 2. Instead of marketing fluff that explained really nothing, they could have said:

Why Wifi 4? WiFi 4N bandwidth is 600mps. Even the lowest lossless audio standard Redbook CD bandwithd is only 1.4mbs. Compressed audio is even lower. And 600 mpbs is well able to handle any foreseeable high definition audio formats. Surprising the WiFi 4 handshake protocol is actually faster, which allows us to optimized the total system engery standby requirements without reducing Siri fast response.

Why no BT? The current BT bandwidth standards are not currently capable of supporting even the lowest lossless audio standard Redbook CD. Today it supports compressed audio primarly. That is why almost all audiophile speakers are wired (such as audiophile wired headphone vs wireless BT). Since the HomePod 2 is a high-end home audio quality speaker and almost all of Apple's Music library is lossless format, we want our user to have the best audio experience via WiFi much larger bandwidth.

Why no stereo pairing with older HomePod 2? Stereo speakers and even more so for spatial audio require precise frequreenty matching, sound level matching, speaker temporal response matching and same sound spread characertics. The OG Homepod is an excellent speaker, but the new HomePod 2 has many improvements in the above areas. For the best stereo sound experience, we chose to optimize each stereo speaker pair respectively.

Bluetooth is working for the AirPods just fine.

 

[Denzo]

“You can’t mate it with an older speaker, because we know apple groupies will upgrade and buy two matching newer pieces, anyway.”
“What about the wifi”
“It’s old, and we know we can get away with it, while simultaneously making it both incompatible with existing -same brand hardware, charging more, and giving you less tweeters for an even better sound “
“incredible“

Sign me up!

 

[String]

What hifi has a review of the new homepod

Apple HomePod 2 review

What Hi-Fi? Awards 2024 winner. The much-missed HomePod is back – and it sounds better than ever

www.whathifi.com

 

[nwcs]

The wifi limitation is due to the Apple Watch chip and stereo pair should only work with 2 identical speakers or else it will sound off. Simple as that.

Yes, and Apple could have said that straight up instead of a bunch of mumbo-jumbo.

 

[vmistery]

Better switch all the iPhones back to Wifi 4 then? I can't say I care as it will still function as intended but I do wonder what the real reason is, is it just to save a tiny sliver of cash? If they were just honest about it it would be much nicer

 

[cfretts67]

So What HiFi says it sounds absolutely fine with its reduced tweeter count. I’d sooner trust their review than all the Apple-knockers on here that haven’t even heard it. It’s not just about the number of tweeters clearly. As I said previously, with any audio equipment you should try before you buy to see if it’s for you. That’s what I’ll be doing.

 

[aberdeenmeadows]

I have invested in two HomePod Minis and absolutely love them. I am going to buy another two... for my office at work

They are pretty great speakers for what they are, limited of course, but works for my needs.

I've had other BT speakers and hate them. Altec Lansing drives me nuts everytime I turn it on it wants to scream on high volume that it's connected. I hate it and the volume increase isn't smooth so either the music is too loud or too soft. My GF has the JBL and actually that one is very, very good. USB-C charge and sound is awesome.

 

[aberdeenmeadows]

I had to look it up and Wi-Fi 4 is 802.11n, one generation before 802.11ac, which is what Apple's discontinued line of wireless routers had when its latest model launched in 2013.

You have to imagine that in the future, older wifi specs won't be broadcast (a lot of newer routers by default don't broadcast 802.11b) for optimization purposes, so by sticking to such old technology, it makes me think users will run into compatibility problems on some networks in the reasonably near future. I know five years is a long time in the tech world, but if you buy a nice shiny HomePod now, you want the option of it working a long time, whether to relegate it to a secondary device in your home, give it away as a working tech product to a friend, or to sell it used to recoup some costs while giving someone the chance to get nice tech at a reasonable price.

Well said. I am hoping mine will last a long time, too... and if repurposed, that it will be easy to find someone that could actually use them.

 

[vesalius]

So What HiFi says it sounds absolutely fine with its reduced tweeter count. I’d sooner trust their review than all the Apple-knockers on here that haven’t even heard it. It’s not just about the number of tweeters clearly. As I said previously, with any audio equipment you should try before you buy to see if it’s for you. That’s what I’ll be doing.

Knee jerk reactions around the tweeters and even wifi 4 are just that. Almost all speakers significantly better and higher cost than the HomePod come with 1 tweeter. one Tweeter and multiple midrange/lowrange drivers. It is not only easier but better to get great imaging and better sounding speaker that way. More tweeters firing at close to the same direction/vectors result in more cancellation and/or exaggeration of different areas of the frequency spectrum. Even attemps at omnidirectional speakers rarely have more than few. Active compensation can correct for some of those interactions but not all and every room is different. The mikes on the speaker can’t listen from your seating position so active compensation can’t fix all there. one day apple should allow an iphone mike to calibrate the sound from our seating positions, but that will come at a cost to off axis listening. Physics of sound and drivers is weirdly consistent like that. The effective difference to a blinded listeners ear going from 7-5 tweeters emanating from a point source is either NIL or usually in favor of the lower number.

 

[NT1440]

Knee jerk reactions around the tweeters and even wifi 4 are just that. Almost all speakers significantly better and higher cost than the HomePod come with 1 tweeter. one Tweeter and multiple midrange/lowrange drivers. It is not only easier but better to get great imaging and better sounding speaker that way. More tweeters firing at close to the same direction/vectors result in more cancellation and/or exaggeration of different areas of the frequency spectrum. Even attemps at omnidirectional speakers rarely have more than few. Active compensation can correct for some of those interactions but not all and every room is different. The mikes on the speaker can’t listen from your seating position so active compensation can’t fix all there. one day apple should allow an iphone mike to calibrate the sound from our seating positions, but that will come at a cost to off axis listening. Physics of sound and drivers is weirdly consistent like that. The effective difference to a blinded listeners ear going from 7-5 tweeters emanating from a point source is either NIL or usually in favor of the lower number.

I think you maybe be misunderstanding what’s happening here. Using beam forming MEMS microphones you absolutely can map out a room (this is different than the microphone setup receivers use at first setup), model it, and adjust the output of the multiple tweeters to fill the soundscape accordingly.

Not only that, it’s sampling the room hundreds of times a minute, so it is aware when something (you) have changed your positioning.

There’s alot more going on computationally and I think you may be referring to the “traditional” approach other omnidirectional speakers have taken in the past. HomePod is a different approach to sound entirely (which is why those calling for 7.1 setups in this thread make me laugh).

 

[Burger Thing]

It's literally not mono. I can't believe we are even having this conversation again.

Sorry, but you are incorrect. It gives you the impression of sound separation due to its multiple tweeters. But it’s still mono. I also can‘t believe that peeps are still having this misconception.

Kirkville - The HomePod Is a Mono Speaker

The HomePod is a mono speaker. I don’t know why some people think it isn’t.

kirkville.com

 

[t0rqx]

The explanation why to downgrade it so Siri is responsive!?!? So you saying that all iPhone 12/13/14 were sold with wrong Wifi chips...yet we paid a premium year after year?

iPhone 15 Wifi4 confirmed?

 

[Alan Wynn]

I see the RCS bit struck a nerve with a few people. It doesn’t just affect Android users. It affects anyone who has to contact Android users and I don’t believe the vast majority of iPhone users are so snobby as to refuse to text anyone who uses Android. I want to think that most iPhone users aren’t lazy teenagers, but adults with jobs who have to talk to other adults.

I know of no one that uses RCS. My friends on iOS use Messages and my friends on Android use Signal, Telegram and WhatsApp. None of the trust Google for messaging at all. They also want end-to-end encryption and other things that make these networks more useful than RCS.

Do you really want to live in a world where Apple has utter and complete control of all text messaging?

I would be fine with that. Apple has demonstrated that they are a good steward of messaging services. Unlike the Mobile Phone Network Providers and Google, they have built a secure, reliable, feature rich messaging network and have maintained it for you. Google alone has gone through: Allo, Duo, Google Chat, and Hangouts, among others.

SMS isn’t perfect but do you want iMessage to be the only way?

SMS works everywhere. For those people who do not have Messages, or one of the more secure other services, it is a great fallback. I primarily use it to find a better channel.

Isn’t it good for there to be one viable alternative if for no other reason than to keep Apple from becoming even more stagnant?

Apple has improved Messages and FaceTime over the years at a reasonable pace. RCS is not ahead of either, it is still an inferior system, just one that Google is currently pushing. Unlike them, Apple has a track record of reliability and enhancement that goes back years.

 

[CarAnalogy]

I know of no one that uses RCS. My friends on iOS use Messages and my friends on Android use Signal, Telegram and WhatsApp. None of the trust Google for messaging at all. They also want end-to-end encryption and other things that make these networks more useful than RCS.

I would be fine with that. Apple has demonstrated that they are a good steward of messaging services. Unlike the Mobile Phone Network Providers and Google, they have built a secure, reliable, feature rich messaging network and have maintained it for you. Google alone has gone through: Allo, Duo, Google Chat, and Hangouts, among others.

SMS works everywhere. For those people who do not have Messages, or one of the more secure other services, it is a great fallback. I primarily use it to find a better channel.

Apple has improved Messages and FaceTime over the years at a reasonable pace. RCS is not ahead of either, it is still an inferior system, just one that Google is currently pushing. Unlike them, Apple has a track record of reliability and enhancement that goes back years.

It’s not supposed to be a Google only thing. All the network operators and software vendors are supposed to support it now. If Google really is running the only RCS servers then I agree, but my understanding is now that it’s essentially universally supported except for Apple.

It’s not the kind of thing where you would know someone who specifically is using RCS, it’s supposed to be infrastructure level and unnoticed.

 

[NT1440]

It’s not supposed to be a Google only thing. All the network operators and software vendors are supposed to support it now. If Google really is running the only RCS servers then I agree, but my understanding is now that it’s essentially universally supported except for Apple.

It’s not the kind of thing where you would know someone who specifically is using RCS, it’s supposed to be infrastructure level and unnoticed.

Your understanding is a bit off, when you look at the details on each of the US carriers pages you’ll find that they’ve either just adopted Google’s app wholesale or they’re using Google’s servers. Not one of the big three have their infrastructure supporting it, they’re basically subcontracting that to Google directly.

 

[Dylan33x]

I misread the earlier post.
It is true that the OG HomePod had Wi-Fi 5 because it used the A8 SOC.
This new HomePod uses the S7 Watch battery which uses Wi-Fi 4.

My apologies you’re correct that the OG homePod had WiFi 5 and not 6. It did however have BT 5.0 which Assumedly shows they were willing to modify the SOC then, but not now.

Let’s call it what it is, which is cost cutting. And if it was made in order to retain the same amount of tweeters or mics it would be more understandable. But corners were cut in every area and it resulted in a worse version of a product from 5 years ago for the same price.

Theres no justification for having WiFi 4 on a 2023 smart speaker/Homehub. Especially for 300$. It’s that simple.

 

[NT1440]

My apologies you’re correct that the OG homePod had WiFi 5 and not 6. It did however have BT 5.0 which Assumedly shows they were willing to modify the SOC then, but not now.

Let’s call it what it is, which is cost cutting. And if it was made in order to retain the same amount of tweeters or mics it would be more understandable. But corners were cut in every area and it resulted in a worse version of a product from 5 years ago for the same price.

Theres no justification for having WiFi 4 on a 2023 smart speaker/Homehub. Especially for 300$. It’s that simple.

It’s “worse” because it’s using a wifi standard that is still overkill for what the device does? In what way do you think faster wifi would improve the experience of it? Other than slapping a check mark on a spec page, how would the product be tangibly better with faster wifi? Your streaming audio, not a 4K movie.

 

[Alan Wynn]

It’s not the kind of thing where you would know someone who specifically is using RCS, it’s supposed to be infrastructure level and unnoticed.

It is the thing I would notice, as it would have to be sent as an SMS to me (since I am on iOS), and none of them use SMS to chat with each other or with those of us on iOS.

 

[Dylan33x]

It’s “worse” because it’s using a wifi standard that is still overkill for what the device does? In what way do you think faster wifi would improve the experience of it? Other than slapping a check mark on a spec page, how would the product be tangibly better with faster wifi? Your streaming audio, not a 4K movie.

did you read the post or are you just pushing back on anyone bring up the wifi?

its literally an Entirely wireless smart speaker that doesn't utilize bluetooth (from what I've read) other than on setup. It serves as a hub for HomeKit, wireless home theater audio, Siri requests, and lossless audio. How is tech that's in a 2013 MacBook Pro overkill for an entirely wireless 300$ smart speaker?

I'm not making noise for the sake of it. This isn't a YT channel, and I'm not getting paid for clicks. it's a worse product for all the reasons I laid out. But i'll format them for you this time

It's the same product, same dimensions. 5 years later, same price.

the only improvements are

• larger screen that only displays colors
• decently faster processor
• temp/humidity sensor
• U1 Chip

the bottom 3 of which are already in a 99$ mini. So they must be cheap to add.

the downgrades are

• 2 less tweeters (new type of metal, so possible improvements there. Still 2 less)
• 2 less mics
• worse wifi capability (on a wireless speaker)

I want to be clear. I understand it isn't the end of the world, and that the wifi 4 will get the job done. Its the principle, mixed with the bigger picture. Apple made an incredible audio product - albeit niche - with the HomePod 2018. I love it, truly. It wasn't selling well and it used a processor they no longer manufactured. So they marked the price down. It still didn't sell off, so they discontinued it in order to clear stock. It worked, and people like myself bought up the remaining ones.

Then 5 years later they announce essentially the same product, with a small amount of modernization but a lot of cost cutting. More audio processing, but I'd have to hear it personally to believe you can computationally process the difference of 2 tweeters. They did this for higher margins and a clear upgrade path for a product they initially made too great.

We don't pay apple premiums for products that are good enough, or with 12 year old tech in them. if this speaker Was 199, I wouldn't say a word. But this is capitalism at it's finest - sacrificing something great in the name of having a better quarterly report. And it frustrates me to no end to see people defending the moves, on an Apple nerd forum of all places. The one place it should be okay to rightfully get into the weeds and criticize an increasingly - bean counting over making great products - company. instead we get into twittereqsue side A/Side B debates over fairly objective things.

 

[Dylan33x]

Just waded through 11 pages of bile. If you don’t want it with the Wi-Fi it has or the reduced tweeter count (irrelevant anyway) then just don’t buy it. I’ll be in the market for an extra Homepod so will give it a careful listen to decide if it’s better or worse than my original Homepod. Only then will I decide if it’s for me or to source an original model second hand. Like any audio product, try before you buy .

this is an apple fan site forum. Its not the reviews on Best Buy. This is where people discuss things in full

 

[Tagbert]

My apologies you’re correct that the OG homePod had WiFi 5 and not 6. It did however have BT 5.0 which Assumedly shows they were willing to modify the SOC then, but not now.

Let’s call it what it is, which is cost cutting. And if it was made in order to retain the same amount of tweeters or mics it would be more understandable. But corners were cut in every area and it resulted in a worse version of a product from 5 years ago for the same price.

Theres no justification for having WiFi 4 on a 2023 smart speaker/Homehub. Especially for 300$. It’s that simple.

Rather than cost cutting, it is really that Apple upgraded the HP to a new, faster SOC but that SOC had older chipsets for Wi-Fi and BT. Apple was not willing to engineer a new SOC just for the HomePods so it is a cost cutting measure in that sense. The HomePods likely don’t have the volume to justify custom SOCS. Dropping the old iPhone 6 SOC was not the cost cutting move. The cores in the new S7 SOC from the Watch are faster than that old A8 SOC and reports are that Siri and general options are faster. It seems to be a calculated decision to use hardware that improved performance where it mattered but not to invest in chipsets where the downside is minimal.

I hope, eventually Apple moves the Watch SOCs to a 3nm process node and maybe they will upgrade the Wifi and BT chipsets when they do that. There haven’t been substantial changes to the Watch SOCs in several years. I’m not even sure that it is on 5nm. Moving it 3nm might improve battery life on the Watch and might upgrade both the Watch and the HomePods to more modern Wifi and BT levels.

 

[NT1440]

@dylan

Wow that was quite a long way to say “it’s the principle”…

802.11n offers far and away more bandwidth more than low enough latency for everything this device does.

Some of you people want to chase specs, I prefer buying things I need and…idk, using them?

I’m and IT guy, I spend my days up to my eyeballs in tech. I buy Apple stuff because I have no interest in seeing Windows when I get home, and I haven’t had any interest in tweaking my stuff for the sake of it. I’d rather it work so I can get to my hobbies. I’m not upset about product revisions (nor will I bat an eye when a mid cycle game console gets less expensive to produce), and I’m not emotionally attached to tech. I gave up on that stuff a long time ago.