Apple's Phil Schiller on HomePod: We Want to Create a New Kind of Music Experience in the Home That Sounds Incredible

[Chupa Chupa]

What's with all the HomePod articles? I get the device is launching soon but it's a freaking speaker. It doesn't need 10 articles every day.

It's basic marketing. Not everyone goes to the same sources for news or reviews. It's wise to spread out as wide as possible to "hit" a diverse section of consumers. Plus a lot consumers like to read multiple reviews to even out any bias of the reviewer.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Right...buying two would give you two woofers and thus two channels for low frequency reproduction, which technically fulfills the definition of "stereo". But that doesn't change the fact that a single HomePod will still split the mid/high range into more than one channel with the seven tweeters, which means that it's definitely not a mono speaker.

That's not what Apple is saying. You're twisting the definition of stereo into a quantity of woofers instead of taking Apple themselves at their own (written) word.

 

[gnasher729]

Orrrrrrrrrrr Apple realizes, "People might not buy our $350 smart speaker if we allow our hardware to access other speakers that easily."

I think Apple's profit on a top of the range iPhone is a lot more than the profit on a HomePod. So if they don't like compatibility, it might be between a Samsung phone and a HomePod, but compatibility between iPhone 8 and Sonos is a much smaller problem for Apple.

 

[DNichter]

Feeling the same way.

I'd love to get a HomePod, I just can't figure out a place in the house where it would make sense being a great speaker and a "smart" speaker.
In the living room we already have a decent HiFi system (quite out of HomePod league) connected to a first gen AirPort Express (802.11g), and there isn't really another place where neither HomePod's audio quality nor smarts would be wasted.

Same boat here. I already have a high end receiver hooked up to decent speakers which are connected to my TV/Apple TV. I also have an Echo in the same room. I am considering building a gym in the basement so maybe I'll get one for down there.

 

[doelcm82]

Hop back to the first post in this thread. The image grab that talks about buying 2 Has for stereo is from Apple's own website, in Apple's own words. Apple says we need to buy 2 AND take advantage of a future software upgrade to get stereo from HP. We keep spinning this and spinning this while seemingly ignoring Apple's own words on this topic. Or, in this case, selecting taking something Apple says while ignoring they very tangible convey we need 2 Hrs + future software for stereo.

That's not hater opinions. That's not making up something that isn't true. That's APPLES OWN WORDS IN WRITING ON THEIR WEBSITE RIGHT NOW. Go see for yourself: HP overview page, about halfway down.

I see where it says the sound is diffused into left and right channels and bounced off the wall. That doesn’t sound like mono. Not quite stereo with a single HP, but definitely not mono. Then it says that you can create stereo by adding a second HP. But it goes on to say, “a HomePod pair is able to create a wider, more immersive soundstage than a traditional stereo pair.”

So, a single HP is somewhere between mono and stereo, and a pair is like stereo on steroids.

If we’re going to take Apple’s words, then don’t refer to it as a mono speaker. That’s ignoring Apple’s words when they don’t support your cause, and cherry-picking the words that do.

 

[gnasher729]

Why invest hundreds into these speakers unless you can make it work for the TV as well? A 700 dollar stereo homepod system (that can't expand into anything more) in some corner of the house isn't what I'm really in the market for. Having Siri built in isn't any benefit to me as I hate using Siri unless I have to and even then it's simply simple things like setting alarms.

If you are talking about an arbitrary TV, with no HomePod compatibility planned, it's high time that someone builds a box with stereo input or digital input, and an Airplay transmitter. So you can plug it into anything that plays music and send it to AirPlay speakers or HomePod. (There are plenty of devices the other way round, that receive AirPlay and have stereo output so you can use your ten year old + very very expensive HiFi equipment as an AirPlay device).

 

[sofila]

Really irritated by the "fake reviews" of the new Homepod and Mac Pro. The staged and controlled release to a small number of youtube influencers to get positive buzz before real reviewers are allowed to try the product. It's so transparently manipulative.

Absolutely, when proper reviewers get there hand on it they will sit it side by side with products from Amazon, Google and Sonos and compare features, quality etc... This is where the real analysis will come about and reviews will start to be helpful.

- Is the sound better than its peers, or are some of them better?
- How accurate is the AI at listening and understanding your commands
- How quick does the AI get you the stuff you want
- what third party content is available?
- Does it cause conflicts with your phone, apple tv and watch?
- How expandable is the system?
- Is it worth the price premium, or other solutions better value?

Can't help but think that with this analysis a proper picture will emerge, rather than the controlled apple based reviews so far, where they have seemingly only had one hour with the product and probably told to focus on the sound quality rather than any other feature, and no side by side comparisons.

The worst part is those self-proclaimed expert audio engineers who blatantly repeat "Adaptive Beamforming" every single post about Homepod since the rumors before presentation. And never heard the speaker in person. Reliable as...they've always been

 

[gnipgnop]

To be more succinct, I'm not sure what problem HomePod fixes for me. I would enjoy a collection of Siri speakers throughout my home. HomePod doesn't solve that because of cost.

Part of what Apple is selling is the auto-setup for adjusting sound to the room + the accelerometer that tells the HomePod when it's been moved...so the idea is that it's easy to move around the house. It's small. It's light. It doesn't require you to walk around the room with your phone microphone to maximize audio quality for the space.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I see where it says the sound is diffused into left and right channels and bounced off the wall. That doesn’t sound like mono. Not quite stereo with a single HP, but definitely not mono. Then it says that you can create stereo by adding a second HP. But it goes on to say, “a HomePod pair is able to create a wider, more immersive soundstage than a traditional stereo pair.”

So, a single HP is somewhere between mono and stereo, and a pair is like stereo on steroids.

If we’re going to take Apple’s words, then don’t refer to it as a mono speaker. That’s ignoring Apple’s words when they don’t support your cause, and cherry-picking the words that do.

I didn't refer to it as mono- that's those making the argument that it's already stereo.

 

[Cesar Battistini]

So, basically, Sonos.

Far from Sonos in audio tech! Apples aproach is way superior.

 

[gnipgnop]

That's not what Apple is saying. You're twisting the definition of stereo into a quantity of woofers instead of taking Apple themselves at their own (written) word.

No, you're twisting the definition of "mono". Apple has said that buying two gives you stereo. Apple has also said that a single HomePod splits music into left/center/right channels. How can both be true at the same time? Both can be true if the seven tweeters can split the mid/high range into more than one channel, while a single woofer cannot split the the low range into more than one channel.

 

[doelcm82]

I didn't refer to it as mono- that's those making the argument that it's already stereo.

You responded to refute someone who said “it’s not a mono system”.

 

[gnasher729]

So, 99% of customers wouldn't care about buying an expensive speaker because a "normal" speaker or headphones is perfectly fine. Got it.

Traditional expensive speakers are not just expensive, they are also big. Big speakers are a problem. You (or your wife / girlfriend) don't want big speakers. Traditional expensive speakers also take up a lot of space in your room, and if you want the sound quality that the _can_ deliver, you have to put them into a good space.

HomePod is small. If some proper audio magazine does some proper reviews, I'd want them to also check how HomePod compares to other speakers if you put it into a corner, or take two and don't have them exactly aligned along a wall with exactly equal distances to both sides, or how they work with heavy curtains on one wall and bare walls reflecting everything on the other side. Many people have the money to pay $2,000 for a pair of speakers, but these things are just inconvenient.

This really falls into the snake oil category for apple. If you know anything about how sound waves propagate, no amount of cheap tricks or speaker bouncing nonsense is going to change that this is a very basic speaker setup that's nowhere near even a cheap pair of speakers in terms of audio performance per dollar.

That's your opinion, with not a bit of facts currently supporting it.

 

[MrUNIMOG]

How convenient that revolutionary hardware for "best quality sound" can pair with "good enough" software to be perfect for everyone. Amazing!

Here a bunch of us are pushing HP on the concepts of up-to-audiophile sound quality, rationalizing the generally higher price on the vital importance of best quality sound (which happens to align with Apple's main push points too). However, since Apple doesn't seem to be rolling out a higher quality of source files, we'll simultaneously argue that 256kbps AAC is "good enough" as source files because people can't hear the difference (of better quality audio).

Back with the headphone jack jettison, we made the very same "good enough" argument the other way. That is, inferior bluetooth audio hardware is "good enough" because people don't care about the quality of audio. That leaned on the same supply of audio files too.

So which is it? Is inferior hardware good enough because people don't care (or can't hear a difference) or is superior hardware the most important thing? Because what's feeding both inferior bluetooth hardware and apparently superior HP hardware is the EXACT SAME SOURCE FILES.

You don't seem to even want to understand what I meant:

• 256 kbit/s AAC on HomePod vs. 256 kbit/s AAC on Alexa or Google Home: Big difference in quality, apparently.
• 500-1000 kbit/s Apple Lossless on HomePod vs 256 kbit/s AAC on HomePod: No significant difference, for sure.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Wow. EVERY SPEAKER one can buy bounces sound off the walls in a room. Take any one you happen to have now. Put it anywhere in a room. Play anything through it. If you could see the sound waves, you'd see them spread out from the speaker until they hit every wall.

Another way to think about it. Take a "true" mono speaker. Sit in front of it. If I point it hard left so that the bulk of it's sound is (first) hitting the left wall, is it a left channel speaker now? 180 degree turn. Is it a right channel speaker now?

With all due respect to the wonders- even potential- of the "beamforming" concept, let's get real here. Faux stereo is not stereo. Faux surround is not surround. Is there room for ears to be reasonably fooled by either faux? Of course. But pretending faux is not faux when even Apple is communicating in writing "it takes two" seems suspect to me.

Is Apple lying to us by saying it takes 2 for stereo? Or are you going back to the 2 woofers = stereo argument? And if so, why is Apple also saying it takes a software upgrade for stereo if THEY agree that 2 woofers = stereo?

 

[gnasher729]

No, you're twisting the definition of "mono". Apple has said that buying two gives you stereo. Apple has also said that a single HomePod splits music into left/center/right channels. How can both be true at the same time? Both can be true if the seven tweeters can split the mid/high range into more than one channel, while a single woofer cannot split the the low range into more than one channel.

"Stereo" has a fixed meaning. The meaning of "Stereo" is two speakers, both transmitting different sound. One single HomePod is not two speakers, therefore not "stereo". The HomePod gives your ears directional information in a different way. Which is better than a plain old mono speaker, but not having heard them, I can't tell you how much better. Two HomePods are stereo, but in addition they give you directional information. So two HomePods are better than traditional stereo; how much better, nobody knows yet.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

You responded to refute someone who said “it’s not a mono system”.

I responded to someone claiming it IS a stereo speaker.

 

[Dizzy714]

I’ve never owner a smart speaker setup so I’ve been one that’s thinking about the HomePod. But honestly, I would also like Alexa support. Sonos One doesn’t look to have the sound quality I’m looking for. Does anybody have any experience with the Libratone Zipp? I believe I read somewhere that its sound quality is on par with the HomePod. Granted it is not a smart speaker, but can easily be connected to an echo dot. Which leads me to my question, is there really any added benefits/functionality of having Alexa built into a speaker you simply do not get by adding an echo dot to make your speaker smart? That Libratone Zipp really does look enticing, and will also support AirPlay 2.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

"Stereo" has a fixed meaning. The meaning of "Stereo" is two speakers, both transmitting different sound. One single HomePod is not two speakers, therefore not "stereo". The HomePod gives your ears directional information in a different way. Which is better than a plain old mono speaker, but not having heard them, I can't tell you how much better. Two HomePods are stereo, but in addition they give you directional information. So two HomePods are better than traditional stereo; how much better, nobody knows yet.

Relative to this side conversation, I'll buy this cut at this topic myself for now. And I (too) will look forward to both hearing HP and reading real reviews about the sound it produces.

 

[MrUNIMOG]

https://warmleftovers.com/2012/08/0...es-what-it-actually-is-and-why-its-important/

"The file format only matters in one situation: when it audibly distorts or degrades the recording. General consensus seems to be that this happens at or around 128Kbps when using MP3, but this greatly depends on your ears. Anything above that generally will not provide noticeable improvement for most people using most sound equipment. There are a sizable percentage of persons who may benefit from 192Kbps given their listening equipment or hearing, and an infinitesimal group that might hear a difference at 256Kbps or 320Kbps (though I tend to seriously doubt those people, that or they have extraordinary hearing)."

Thank you.

And I might add: that is about MP3, and 256 kbit/s AAC is generally considered about equal in quality to 320 kbit/s MP3. So 256 kbit/s AAC from Apple Music should be well enough for even aforementioned infinitesimal group of sophisticated listeners and their high end equipment.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I’ve never owner a smart speaker setup so I’ve been one that’s thinking about the HomePod. But honestly, I would also like Alexa support. Sonos One doesn’t look to have the sound quality I’m looking for. Does anybody have any experience with the Libratone Zipp? I believe I read somewhere that its sound quality is on par with the HomePod. Granted it is not a smart speaker, but can easily be connected to an echo dot. Which leads me to my question, is there really any added benefits/functionality of having Alexa built into a speaker you simply do not get by adding an echo dot to make your speaker smart? That Libratone Zipp really does look enticing, and will also support AirPlay 2.

No. One of the best things about the Dot-type products is that they isolate the "brains" from the speaker, making it possible to pair those brains with ANY quality of speaker. For example, if this HP had a hardware input, one could potentially pair a Dot-type brain to it and use Alexa or Google, etc as the brains of a HP speaker instead of Siri.

 

[Rodney Dangerfield]

So, basically, Sonos.

...Sonos rocks!

 

[Rcbooth14]

I have a generalized question. Once Airplay2 is released why would I select the HomePod over 2 Sonos One speakers? Will the Sonos not do the same exact thing as the HomePod?

You won’t be able to send text messages or take phone calls as easily with the Sonos system. It may still be possible over Bluetooth but certainly not ideal. You also won’t be able to control any homekit devices that are not also Alexa compatible.

 

[Rodney Dangerfield]

Over the weekend, Apple marketing chief Phil Schiller did a quick fifteen minute interview with Sound & Vision, where he once again explained some of the technology behind the HomePod, shed some light on why Apple ultimately decided to create an in-home speaker, and explained how the HomePod will stand out among other smart speakers on the market.

Schiller believes that Apple is in a position to create a "new kind of music experience" that not only "sounds incredible," but is also "fun to interact with." He says that's the driving force behind Apple's work on the smart speaker. Apple's focus, though, isn't on a single product -- the company wants to design a unified experience that's the same throughout the day.

Schiller says that Apple Music, Siri advancements in personal music discovery, and Apple's innovative audio work "come together" in the HomePod to deliver an "amazing music experience" to customers.

He went on to explain many of the technological advancements that improve sound quality in the HomePod, including machine learning to allow the HomePod to sense and adapt to its environment, the A8 chip for real-time acoustic modeling, audio beam-forming, and echo cancellation, and a more advanced thinking of speaker arrays to "create a wide soundstage."

Schiller also explained in detail how the HomePod's spatial awareness features work. From the moment it's plugged in, the HomePod senses its location. The built-in microphone array listens to how sound reflects from neighboring surfaces to determine where it's located in a room and what's nearby, adjusting audio accordingly. The A8 chip beams center vocals and direct energy away from walls that are detected, while also reflecting ambient reverb and back-up vocals against the wall for better dispersion into the room.Thus far, it appears Apple's efforts to focus on sound quality have been successful. While full HomePod reviews have not yet been shared, initial first impressions from reviewers who were able to spend a short amount of time with the HomePod have been positive. Many reviewers were highly impressed with the sound quality of the device, which has been described as "warm," "astonishing," "precise," and an "aural triumph."

Apple will, however, need to convince its customers that sound improvements are worth the premium price the company is charging for the device. HomePod is more expensive than competing products from Google and Amazon, but some reviewers have questioned whether the average consumer will value sound quality more than affordability.

Phil Schiller's full interview, which goes into more detail about Apple's aim with the HomePod, how voice recognition works, HomeKit integration, and more can be read over at Sound & Vision.

The HomePod, which is priced at $349 in the United States, can be pre-ordered from the online Apple Store. The first HomePod orders will be delivered to customers starting on Friday, February 9, the official launch date of the device.

Article Link: Apple's Phil Schiller on HomePod: We Want to Create a New Kind of Music Experience in the Home That Sounds Incredible

Coming to Canada anytime soon?

 

[Shlooky]

I think this would be a great addition to my home once it's here in Canada. It's more convenient than starting my home theater with Apple TV every time I want to listen to music from another room.
Maybe even two for stereo