Apple Says HomePod is Delayed Until Early 2018

[Uofmtiger]

Here’s the thing. Is there the chance that your experience with sound equipment might blind you to possibilities of what Apple might be able to accomplish here?

I remember when Apple launched the first iPhone and the CEO of blackberry couldn’t understand how the iPhone could have the battery life it did. Turns out Apple effectively rewrote the rules of the game by shrinking the logic board and basically filling the phone with battery.

Same here. Apple controls the hardware and the software. I have always seen the HomePod as a computer with speakers, rather than being just another smart speaker. I won’t be surprised if Apple was able to use software to compensate for its otherwise limited form factor and offer better sound quality than one might otherwise expect.

So Siri sucks. Take it away and you still have a very capable speaker. One that people won’t mind paying a premium for.

I think many people continue to sell the HomePod short and underestimate it to their own detriment.

I typically agree with your posts, but if it didn’t have Siri I wouldn’t have any interest in it. It doesn’t have inputs, so it is limited (regardless of SQ) compared to my multi input receivers connected to speakers. I don’t agree that Siri sucks, either....

I realize Apple was marketing it for SQ, because at the time, there wasn’t a smart speaker option on the market with decent SQ ( unless you connected the Dot to a decent system or speaker). Heck, most people are happy with low resolution mp3s, so SQ is just one part of the picture. Audiophiles have been begging for Apple Music to add a lossless ( or high res) tier, but Apple obviously sees audiophiles as a small, insignificant market.

The bigger selling point for me is that it is part of the Apple ecosystem (HomeKit, Airplay 2, Siri, etc). I suspect that if they sell very many of these it will be because of how it ties into Apple services versus just the SQ.

 

[Regime2008]

I typically agree with your posts, but if it didn’t have Siri I wouldn’t have any interest in it. It doesn’t have inputs, so it is limited (regardless of SQ) compared to my multi input receivers connected to speakers. I don’t agree that Siri sucks, either....

I realize Apple was marketing it for SQ, because at the time, there wasn’t a smart speaker option on the market with decent SQ ( unless you connected the Dot to a decent system or speaker). Heck, most people are happy with low resolution mp3s, so SQ is just one part of the picture. Audiophiles have been begging for Apple Music to add a lossless ( or high res) tier, but Apple obviously sees audiophiles as a small, insignificant market.

The bigger selling point for me is that it is part of the Apple ecosystem (HomeKit, Airplay 2, Siri, etc). I suspect that if they sell very many of these it will be because of how it ties into Apple services versus just the SQ.

And this is one of the reasons why I really have started to have a dislike for Apple. Their designs and products lately really don't make much sense to me. What other reason would Apple not include any possible input method? Solely to control every possible aspect of it. This means they can offer only Apple music if they wanted to. Its not because other inputs and devices have a lack of sound quality. Heck I have been able to play Flac for yeaaaars, which just became native in one of the latest ios updates. I love the ability to cast from any device in my house, whether it be my phone, computer, tablet, etc. I can place phone calls from my Google Home, order pizza or items from nearby stores, and so much more. The homepod on the other hand doesn't seem like it has much to offer for its price point and pales in features compared to the competition.

Here’s the thing. Is there the chance that your experience with sound equipment might blind you to possibilities of what Apple might be able to accomplish here?

I remember when Apple launched the first iPhone and the CEO of blackberry couldn’t understand how the iPhone could have the battery life it did. Turns out Apple effectively rewrote the rules of the game by shrinking the logic board and basically filling the phone with battery.

Same here. Apple controls the hardware and the software. I have always seen the HomePod as a computer with speakers, rather than being just another smart speaker. I won’t be surprised if Apple was able to use software to compensate for its otherwise limited form factor and offer better sound quality than one might otherwise expect.

So Siri sucks. Take it away and you still have a very capable speaker. One that people won’t mind paying a premium for.

I think many people continue to sell the HomePod short and underestimate it to their own detriment.

My experience with sound equipment hasn't blinded me in what Apple might be trying to do. It just doesn't make sense. My response written above kinda sums it up for me. Its hard to preach SQ, when there will be a lack of what can be played on the homepod. I have music in multiple places over 10,000 songs I uploaded to my Google Play Music, Soundcloud, Flac albums on bandcamp, etc. Apple won't let me play any of these songs. I can't even connect to it. I'm pretty sure many households will skip the homepod just because someone owns a device outside of Apple's ecosystem. Not to mention the limited playback support.

 

[Uofmtiger]

And this is one of the reasons why I really have started to have a dislike for Apple. Their designs and products lately really don't make much sense to me. What other reason would Apple not include any possible input method? Solely to control every possible aspect of it. This means they can offer only Apple music if they wanted to. Its not because other inputs and devices have a lack of sound quality. Heck I have been able to play Flac for yeaaaars, which just became native in one of the latest ios updates. I love the ability to cast from any device in my house, whether it be my phone, computer, tablet, etc. I can place phone calls from my Google Home, order pizza or items from nearby stores, and so much more. The homepod on the other hand doesn't seem like it has much to offer for its price point and pales in features compared to the competition.

My experience with sound equipment hasn't blinded me in what Apple might be trying to do. It just doesn't make sense. My response written above kinda sums it up for me. Its hard to preach SQ, when there will be a lack of what can be played on the homepod. I have music in multiple places over 10,000 songs I uploaded to my Google Play Music, Soundcloud, Flac albums on bandcamp, etc. Apple won't let me play none of these songs. I can't even connect to it. I'm pretty sure many households will skip the homepod just because someone owns a device outside of Apple's ecosystem. Not to mention the limited playback support.

Apple can handle ALAC via iTunes, so that wasn’t my point. Apple Music has a Home Sharing feature that will allow people to play losslesss files from their own library and it can handle lossless files via FLAC capable apps or Tidal using AirPlay (which will be supported). However, both Google and Apple music services do not have a lossless audio tier in their respective music services. Tidal and Deezer have lossless, so it would makes sense for a premium brand to at least offer it... UNLESS..they feel the audiophile market is so small that it isn’t worth the trouble.

The issue with the lack of inputs is something that will hold it back from being in most main systems. A lot of people will want a digital input (at least) for TV audio, a game system, etc. Apple can’t make using better speakers for watching movies irrelevant, which is why I think that most people will use this like the Echo in convenient locations and be happy with the better sound quality. Then use it with AirPlay products to get audio to their more capable systems. Very few will buy this as their main speaker when it doesn’t have inputs. I am sure Apple knows this which is why they mentioned AirPlay 2 Control in their Keynote.

The Google mini or whatever they call it, is similar. A lot of people will buy it for its Casting features. Unlike the Dot, it doesn’t have analog out, so you need a receiving device with Casting capabilities built in on the other side. Personally, I prefer AirPlay because it is built right into my receivers (which automatically turn on when they get an AirPlay signal) rather than needing a seperate receiving device to capture the audio stream. The Dot can control Plex and J River on other devices, and send audio over Bluetooth, so it has some capabilities in this area, but it falls short when compared to AirPlay.

 

[Regbial]

lol Apple is doomed... RIP

 

[Regime2008]

Apple can handle ALAC via iTunes, so that wasn’t my point. Apple Music has a Home Sharing feature that will allow people to play losslesss files from their own library and it can handle lossless files via FLAC capable apps or Tidal using AirPlay (which will be supported). However, both Google and Apple music services do not have a lossless audio tier in their respective music services. Tidal and Deezer have lossless, so it would makes sense for a premium brand to at least offer it... UNLESS..they feel the audiophile market is so small that it isn’t worth the trouble.

The issue with the lack of inputs is something that will hold it back from being in most main systems. A lot of people will want a digital input (at least) for TV audio, a game system, etc. Apple can’t make using better speakers for watching movies irrelevant, which is why I think that most people will use this like the Echo in convenient locations and be happy with the better sound quality. Then use it with AirPlay products to get audio to their more capable systems. Very few will buy this as their main speaker when it doesn’t have inputs. I am sure Apple knows this which is why they mentioned AirPlay 2 Control in their Keynote.

The Google mini or whatever they call it, is similar. A lot of people will buy it for its Casting features. Unlike the Dot, it doesn’t have analog out, so you need a receiving device with Casting capabilities built in on the other side. Personally, I prefer AirPlay because it is built right into my receivers (which automatically turn on when they get an AirPlay signal) rather than needing a seperate receiving device to capture the audio stream. The Dot can control Plex and J River on other devices, and send audio over Bluetooth, so it has some capabilities in this area, but it falls short when compared to AirPlay.

Casting seems to be superior option to Airplay. I could explain it in detail, but this year old article pretty much sums it up.
https://chromeunboxed.com/chromecast-google-cast-vs-apple-tv-airplay-which-is-best/

AN EXAMPLE
Imagine you have a video you want to show on the big screen that is embedded in a website. If your TV has an Apple TV connected to it, you will need an Apple device to mirror your screen. You open up the video, swipe up from the bottom on your phone, click AirPlay, select the Apple TV, and your video is on the TV.

In this scenario, you are not free to use your phone for anything else while this playback is happening. Also, this video is being rendered and sent to the Apple TV by your phone, expending resources. And, without a solid Wifi connection, this mirroring can be a bit hit-or-miss with lots of artifacting during playback.

Now let’s back up. If we swap out the Apple TV for a Chromecast (or other device with Google Cast support), our options open right up. Since Google Cast is an API that works across many devices and apps, the device in your hand likely doesn’t matter. Windows, MacOS, Android, iOS and ChromeOS all work very well with Chromecast.

In this scenario, you simply open the video, click the cast button, and select the Chromecast device you want to stream to.

Once the playback is started, the Chromecast takes over and begins playback. All the load is taken off your device and the Chromecast is now streaming the content directly from YouTube. You are free to move to another app and do some other things while the video is playing and you are also free to leave the location completely. Since the Chromecast is connected and streaming directly from the service, your phone is no longer necessary.

You do retain volume and track controls while connected, though.

SO, WHICH IS BETTER?
From the perspective of streaming content from a personal device to a bigger screen, the Chromecast and Google Cast API win big. Casted video (Chromecast) looks better and is way more stable than mirrored video (AirPlay). It is also much less resource intensive on your personal device. On top of those things, casting via Google Cast can happen across multiple devices and doesn’t require any walled-garden content.

Additionally, while both services offer screen mirroring, only one can do this from Android and Apple devices. Chromecast.

It is no wonder we are seeing the Google Cast logo in more and more apps and services as time goes on. It is almost surprising now when I don’t see that icon in the corner of a video.

As 3rd party support goes from very strong to completely comprehensive, the growth of Chromecast will only continue. It is the best overall streaming strategy we believe exists right now, and the vast army of developers who’ve implemented it seem to agree.

 

[j0han]

You think Homepod would be able to recive audio from the ATV? So i might be able to skip the old reciver (Onkyo?) Could be possible with AirPlay 2?

 

[Uofmtiger]

Casting seems to be superior option to Airplay. I could explain it in detail, but this year old article pretty much sums it up.
https://chromeunboxed.com/chromecast-google-cast-vs-apple-tv-airplay-which-is-best/

I didn't read the article because I have first hand experience with both. Casting does not work with every iOS app like Airplay does. This means that if I want to use Apple Music or the popular Overcast Podcast app, Casting is useless. I don't use Android, so any advantage of picking up an Android device and having it work with Casting is irrelevant to the millions of people that use iOS.

The second issues is the fact that Casting isn't built into any receiver I own. I have 3 receivers and a Yamaha music streaming device that handle Airplay natively. I hit the Airplay button, the devices turn on, and they start playing music and I have full control over the receiving devices volume. Airplay is built into everything from McIntosh and Classe' Audio to Yamaha and Sony devices. Casting isn't.

There are upsides to Casting compared to Airplay in the way it works. But that has little to do with my personal situation. I need it to work with Apple Music and Overcast, which are my two main audio apps, and it doesn't. I do have a Chromecast, Nvidia Shield, Chromecast Audio, so I am very familiar with the technical upsides, but they don't come into play in my every day use.

As I have said several times in this thread, the main upside to the HomePod is Apple's ecosystem. If you don't have devices in their ecosystem already, it has less value.
[doublepost=1511279619][/doublepost]

You think Homepod would be able to recive audio from the ATV? So i might be able to skip the old reciver (Onkyo?) Could be possible with AirPlay 2?

If you use the AppleTV for everything, I would think it would work. I wonder if there would be any lip syncing issues with the audio stream, though? The AppleTV can already send audio to an Airplay device, but I have never used that feature with video. Works great for only audio, though.

 

[kdarling]

I remember when Apple launched the first iPhone and the CEO of blackberry couldn’t understand how the iPhone could have the battery life it did. Turns out Apple effectively rewrote the rules of the game by shrinking the logic board and basically filling the phone with battery.

On the contrary, RIM's CEO originally thought the iPhone's limited battery life was a huge negative compared to a Blackberry.

 

[deanthedev]

You can't even use a mouse on ios....(Jump Desktop or jailbreak doesn't count as its not natively built into the OS). It's definitely easier and a much better experience working with audio production on a REAL device, you know, like a computer. But I am glad you only nitpick my posts for the irrelevant stuff, but disregard everything else. Then again, you are asking "What does the number of devices that Google can connect to have to do with any of this?", Yet you are talking about mobile production in a thread that is about smart speakers...

Google Home Max has smart sound. Sonos has Trueplay. Auto EQ and TA isn't new to smart speakers. The lack of audio jack and even bluetooth really segregates what can be hooked up to the Homepod, not to mention all the questions on what generation of airplay devices can/cannot be used with it. Apple doesn't support multiple profiles on its devices, so will a family have to share a single account library of music? Their AI department is extremely lacking compared to Google/Amazon. This is what makes me wonder if the reason for a delay is because of the better devices that the competition offers.

I am using the Pioneer 80PRS. Burr brown 24bit dac, 28bit DSP, 5v preouts, and many other great features.
Here are the specs for it. Click on the details page.
Hopefully I am going to pull the plug, and get my hands on a Pioneer P99RS that's on sale right now.

Again proving you know nothing about audio production. I use iOS devices for some things and a Mac for others. Right tool for the right job. Except for Android, which remains a complete joke for audio. And what does a mouse have to do with anything? Clearly you’ve never used properly designed touch based software to make that ridiculous claim. Perhaps you’re used to Android, where developers are too lazy to optimize for tablets and just let Android take care of the scaling for them.

I brought up mobile to prove a point about your character, nothing more. And I got the expected result. You wasting time searching through my post history to take a comment out of context to try and make a point. How petty and pathetic. Why do you have to resort to lying?

Show me where the Google Max or Sonos has any time adjustments. I’d bet $$ they only do EQ. Which is ancient technology.

The deck you want to get is using technology that I’ve been using for 30+ years. My industry has moved light years beyond simple time delay and EQ - maybe in another 10 years car audio manufacturers will start innovating again. I seriously hope you’re not actually impressed by the technology in that P99RS.

 

[dfstock]

Bummer

 

[Phonephreak]

How does Sonos sound when you watch a YouTube video on your Mac and listen to the audio wirelessly on your Sonos system? Or watching and listening to a Netflix movie on your Mac, etc?

I tend to use the iPads speaker for YouTube. When I watch movies or listen to music I use the sound system.

 

[citysnaps]

I tend to use the iPads speaker for YouTube. When I watch movies or listen to music I use the sound system.

But my question was how does a wireless Sonos sound when watching YouTube vids on a Mac?

 

[ErikGrim]

True. "Hey HomePod" perhaps?

No. This is no longer an issue.

 

[albusseverus]

It cannot be stated how much of a blow not having this product available for Christmas is for Apple.
And despite Siri not being demonstrated at WWDC, adding Siri would be trivial, given it has a phone CPU inside.
There is a reason the WWDC demo was limited to the phenomenal sound of HomePod - that's all it's meant to be. A beautiful speaker, a vehicle for Apple Music, and Siri is a necessity to control the device - never a home assistant, beyond its current feature set (sports scores and turning lights on and off, and I don't think we know if HomePod will do sports scores).

What is plain every day to Siri users is that, despite Siri's brilliance, other products that take the low road and train the user to remember a limited set of input phrases deliver a narrower, but delightful user experience.
Apple tries to pooh-pooh that by saying they didn't build Siri to answer Trivial Pursuit questions. Problem is, that's exactly what customers want Siri to do… as well as its clever AI !!
And if Apple added trained functionality like that to Siri, Apple customers would be as delighted as Echo & Home customers have been for quite some time, now.
I doubt Apple will do that and this creates a MAJOR problem.

Here's a scenario for you… HomePod is ready, but the feedback is, with Siri the way it is, despite the beautiful sound and convenience of Apple Music, reviews are going to doom it for Holidays sales because Siri doesn't do what $50 devices from Amazon and Google do.

Faced with the scenario of poor reviews and no sales beyond Apple enthusiasts over the busiest and ideal sales quarter for such a device, did Apple choose to delay HomePod and release it after the Holidays when poor sales won't look so bad?

No doubt, Siri is improving all the time, but as Apple has stated, it's not meant to be an Echo. Short of adding Echo-style phrases and responses, Siri is never going to measure up to the 'competition' in the talking cylinder stakes. And I just don't see Apple going the low road, despite the dire need for that kind of functionality.

The proof will be in the shipping product. If Apple adds Trivial Pursuit questions/Echo/Home functionality, Apple genuinely wanted to make the experience better. If the shipping product is what we all expect - nice speaker, despite being limited to Apple Music and Siri doing what Siri has always done - we'll know Apple wanted to avoid an embarrassing Holiday sales quarter. Expectation is always high with Apple products. Despite EVERY attempt to hose down expectations of an Echo-like experience, public expectations are to the contrary and that's a bigger problem than not having HomePod for sale over the Holidays. Staggers the mind to think about that.

 

[ErikGrim]

Looks like this is all about AirPlay 2 not being ready for primetime yet. Even more so than Siri.

It’s a bummer, but if the product’s not 100% reliable best not to ship at all.

 

[Abazigal]

It cannot be stated how much of a blow not having this product available for Christmas is for Apple.
And despite Siri not being demonstrated at WWDC, adding Siri would be trivial, given it has a phone CPU inside.
There is a reason the WWDC demo was limited to the phenomenal sound of HomePod - that's all it's meant to be. A beautiful speaker, a vehicle for Apple Music, and Siri is a necessity to control the device - never a home assistant, beyond its current feature set (sports scores and turning lights on and off, and I don't think we know if HomePod will do sports scores).

What is plain every day to Siri users is that, despite Siri's brilliance, other products that take the low road and train the user to remember a limited set of input phrases deliver a narrower, but delightful user experience.
Apple tries to pooh-pooh that by saying they didn't build Siri to answer Trivial Pursuit questions. Problem is, that's exactly what customers want Siri to do… as well as its clever AI !!
And if Apple added trained functionality like that to Siri, Apple customers would be as delighted as Echo & Home customers have been for quite some time, now.
I doubt Apple will do that and this creates a MAJOR problem.

Here's a scenario for you… HomePod is ready, but the feedback is, with Siri the way it is, despite the beautiful sound and convenience of Apple Music, reviews are going to doom it for Holidays sales because Siri doesn't do what $50 devices from Amazon and Google do.

Faced with the scenario of poor reviews and no sales beyond Apple enthusiasts over the busiest and ideal sales quarter for such a device, did Apple choose to delay HomePod and release it after the Holidays when poor sales won't look so bad?

No doubt, Siri is improving all the time, but as Apple has stated, it's not meant to be an Echo. Short of adding Echo-style phrases and responses, Siri is never going to measure up to the 'competition' in the talking cylinder stakes. And I just don't see Apple going the low road, despite the dire need for that kind of functionality.

The proof will be in the shipping product. If Apple adds Trivial Pursuit questions/Echo/Home functionality, Apple genuinely wanted to make the experience better. If the shipping product is what we all expect - nice speaker, despite being limited to Apple Music and Siri doing what Siri has always done - we'll know Apple wanted to avoid an embarrassing Holiday sales quarter. Expectation is always high with Apple products. Despite EVERY attempt to hose down expectations of an Echo-like experience, public expectations are to the contrary and that's a bigger problem than not having HomePod for sale over the Holidays. Staggers the mind to think about that.

Your analysis simply does not hold water.

Given how late the HomePod was to have been released, it would not have sold in any sufficient quantity to matter for their first quarter earnings.

Think about it - you release a product in the first week of December. You have already missed Black Friday. The HomePod is likely going to be in limited quantities, like the Airpods. It’s going to be sold out very quickly and stock probably won’t be replenished in time for Christmas. Apple is not going to have a problem of unsold stock for the holidays.

The delayed release won’t have any significant impact on the competitiveness of the HomePod compared to other products such as the echo. If anything, the echo is so cheap that I can get one now and it’s no big deal to toss it when the HomePod does get released next year.

I don’t think Apple fears negative reviews. It’s still going to sell, and will sell well. For some reason, Apple is starting to have problems with mass production of new products and launching them on time. Is this a sign of Apple overextending itself? It did refresh a ton of its products this year, and the HomePod could be the straw which broke the camel’s back?

 

[ErikGrim]

Is this a sign of Apple overextending itself? It did refresh a ton of its products this year, and the HomePod could be the straw which broke the camel’s back?

I just have a feeling that audio products, and especially speakers like this is an interesting problem to manufacture at scale. There’s a lot of things that can go wrong with assembly, and yields are likely to be even more of an issue than with the AirPods.

 

[madeirabhoy]

Your analysis simply does not hold water.

Given how late the HomePod was to have been released, it would not have sold in any sufficient quantity to matter for their first quarter earnings.

Think about it - you release a product in the first week of December. You have already missed Black Friday. The HomePod is likely going to be in limited quantities, like the Airpods. It’s going to be sold out very quickly and stock probably won’t be replenished in time for Christmas. Apple is not going to have a problem of unsold stock for the holidays.

The delayed release won’t have any significant impact on the competitiveness of the HomePod compared to other products such as the echo. If anything, the echo is so cheap that I can get one now and it’s no big deal to toss it when the HomePod does get released next year.

I don’t think Apple fears negative reviews. It’s still going to sell, and will sell well. For some reason, Apple is starting to have problems with mass production of new products and launching them on time. Is this a sign of Apple overextending itself? It did refresh a ton of its products this year, and the HomePod could be the straw which broke the camel’s back?

sorry I'm on his side when it comes to the damage it will do to apple, although I don't agree with him on it being better than releasing something that doesn't get great reviews.

its not just about how many they would have sold, and yes you are right they would have delivered a less than huge amount. but lots would be ordered in the hope of arriving, and lots of people putting the money aside waiting on them.



I think I'm a pretty normal example of a lot of potential homepod buyers. I don't have a smart speaker, but I want one. ive been waiting for homepod. if they didn't say anything and released in small quantities id have one on order and id wait.

now, because I'm already planning for life with a smart speaker, and coveting Philips hue, I'm now looking at a back up plan, probably google home rather than amazon echo.

I could get a dot or a home mini just for the light control, expecting to get a homepod, but with black Friday sales the better models are only 70 quid in either brand.

and yes they are cheap enough that I could still get a homepod later, but ..... theres a good chance ill get a google and find it does the job.

its not going to kill the homepod, but imho itll cost a lot of its sales and make it much harder for it to be a big success any time soon


I agree with your last paragraph, and that's what makes me think the delay is production or hardware related and not improving siri. if it was that, apple would fire out the homepod, take the version 1 criticism and promise updates would make it better in a few months time.

 

[ErikGrim]

I agree with your last paragraph, and that's what makes me think the delay is production or hardware related and not improving siri. if it was that, apple would fire out the homepod, take the version 1 criticism and promise updates would make it better in a few months time.

Hardware is hard. Hardware at scale infinitely more so.

 

[MacBergin]

I bet early means a March release with Mac Pro

 

[Abazigal]

I bet early means a March release with Mac Pro

I am pegging the Mac Pro at end 2018, early 2019 more likely.

At least give the iMac Pro some time to warm its seat first.

 

[Phonephreak]

Maybe if you read my post you would see that i mentioned size and i was talking about air space for the enclosure. Start with that. Look at how small the airpod is, do you really think a 4" driver will be able to produce a range of low end frequencies, in such a small package? Do you REALLY think the woofer can move 20mm of excursion without going over it's mechanical limits? Do you realize it would have to get a bit of power to do that? My woofers can move about 60mm, peak to peak, and it takes quite some power to do that, and a really low frequency. Doubt the homepod will be playing much below 55hz. Please don't shift goal posts again, cause you have no clue what you are talking about. You just tried to flip the script and completely disregarded everything.

I doubt it will go much lower than 80 hz

 

[Regime2008]

I doubt it will go much lower than 80 hz

I was trying to give it the benefit of the doubt, but thinking more about it now, your probably right. Marketed to sound almost like its audiophile sound quality, yet can't play 20hz to 20khz.

 

[Uofmtiger]

I was trying to give it the benefit of the doubt, but thinking more about it now, your probably right. Marketed to sound almost like its audiophile sound quality, yet can't play 20hz to 20khz.

Are you serious? Do you think a speaker has to have that kind of range to produce decent sound? That would rule out every bookshelf speaker I am aware of. You would need huge speakers and/or a separate sub. I don’t think Apple is marketing it to people to replace their 655 pound $200,000 Wilson Audio Specialties Alexandria XLFs....which are only 19.5Hz–33kHz.

 

[Phonephreak]

I was trying to give it the benefit of the doubt, but thinking more about it now, your probably right. Marketed to sound almost like its audiophile sound quality, yet can't play 20hz to 20khz.

Yep. Thing is there is nothing wrong with having a hq wireless speaker. I’m sure it will sound pretty damn good too. But is not on the same level as a simple but true stereo setup.

Posters here are going with the assumption that it’s a stereo replacement. It’s not. It’s for casual music listening with better than most wireless speaker sound