Audiophile Review: HomePod 'Sounds Better' Than $999 KEF X300A Digital Hi-Fi Speakers

[falainber]

Who still uses speakers on a regular basis to listen to music? I used to when I was a kid but since then I always use headphones, unless I'm throwing a party or else at special occasions such as Christmas... Other than that I don't want to bother anyone with my music. Won't buy that piece of expensive rotten Apple.

Apparently some people still use speakers and why not? Headphones is a good way to listen to music if the speakers are not an option but they do not truly reproduce a music listening experience. There is a reason why they use speakers at the concerts and not the headphones. The sound delivery path in your body (mostly head but not exclusively) is different.

 

[_Refurbished_]

Without mentioning multiple timers, what would you say were, say, five other glaring examples of things that most people might reasonably use a smart speaker for that Siri can't do.

Siri, as an assistant, cannot match the reliability or context that other assistants provide. Being able to handle voice commands reliably is important for a voice controlled device.

“What time is “X” open until?

Siri gets the business name wrong. Google got it right. Siri being inept is nothing new.

 

[bopajuice]

How does one become an audiophile? Is it something you go to school for or does it apply to anyone who spends a lot of money on audio gear?

Audiophile is a subjective term. Some might think you need formal training or whatever, others feel a person could be called an audiophile because they spend thousands on equipment. I delved into the HiFi world for a while. Never really thought of my self as an audiophile, but I did develop an ear for sound. Once you listen to a high end audio set up for a while you start to hear more and become more critical of sound reproduction.

I have auditioned speakers that were taller than I am and cost thousands apiece. We are talking $25,000 or more. Speakers with titanium frames, electrostatic speakers, paper cones, carbon cones, metal cones, ribbon tweeters, cone tweeters, dome tweeters, the list goes on.

At what point does it really become absurd? I know guys who spent thousands on speaker cables. They also actually make little blocks to place under the speaker cables to keep them off the floor. Pieces of wood that cost 100's of dollars. The worst part is people swear they can hear a difference. Maybe they can. I cant... Does that mean I cant be an audiophile? To some the answer would be yes.

The old debate of whether to wire speakers directly to the posts or use gold plated connectors. Does bi-amping a set of speakers make a difference. What's the proper distance for speakers. Imaging, sound proofing, and the shape of your room. The list is endless.

All that, and we have not even got into debating which source is best? A $100,000 turntable vs CD, SACD, DVD audio, etc. Analog vs digital. Tubes or solid-state.

Years ago a company got caught basically putting a standard OPPO blu ray player into one of their easily recognizable metal faced frames and charged thousands more for the same $599 player. This all came about after a predominate reviewer claimed the imposter sounded better then the actual OPPO player. Was the exact same player. Debate went on for months. Some people even tired to defend the accused, claiming they made changes to the software. Some even argued the packaging was superior, or customer service was better. The bottom line is people still bought the high end copy because of the brand. Nothings changed.

So in conclusion, I have to laugh when I see Audiophile and HomePod in the same sentence. A true audiophile would not even consider a "Smart" device for any sort of critical listening. Like I have said before, I am sure the HomePod sounds great for it's intended use.

 

[OldSchoolMacGuy]

I've never heard of Kef, but $999 for a pair of passive listening speakers of that size/configuration seems a bit overpriced. You can get a quality set of 5" reference studio monitors for the same amount or even less. How does one determine or measure what is "audiophile grade" anyways? By the price? I think it is a bit silly when people use that term.
I'm sure the HomePod sounds really good. It is not like Apple to release a product like this that would sound bad, but come on with the "audiophile" nonsense. It just makes this guy sound like a paid shill.

If you haven't heard of KEF, your knowledge of sound quality isn't very much. It's like saying you know car engines extensively but have never heard or Porsche or Ferrari.

You also make clear in the rest of your statement that you don't understand the setup this was tested under nor do you understand the measurements taken.

Please just stop.

 

[oneMadRssn]

Right but OP was asking about lossless music. AppleMusic isn't lossless.

Correct, then AirPlay is the only way to go afaik.

 

[ke-iron]

Obviously, but I still don't agree with his opinion.

At the end of the day it is an opinion - but the fact remains what I said - there are two sound signitures. Revealing, flat, detailed, open and transparent. Or hyped, bassy, veiled and processed. The HomePod is the latter, it was always supposed to be the latter - if thats the sound you like and enjoy, that's fine.

For everyone else there are Studio Monitors, or Elac speakers or Adam's range.

HomePod would be an excellent mix checker though as that's the "sort" of sound most people listen to - if it sounds good on HomePod it'll sound good on Sonos and anything Bose, JBL, H&K, B&W make - and all the cheap bluetooth boomboxes and all the Soundbars. It's a bit like the new "car test".

Have you ever listened to the Zeppelin Wireless or anything from B&W? B&W makes better sounding speakers than Bose, JBL and H&K. I’m trying to understand the point to that comparison but I can’t find one. You seem to be just mouthing off and on a rampage, you’re not making much sense. B&W makes premium sounding speakers at any given price range. I’m disappointed you put their name with the likes of Bose and proceeded to say “and all the cheap bluetooth boomboxes and all the Soundbars“

Your credibility just went out the window.

 

[laz232]

"Audiophile" - the fella is a tit - he tried to tell me the HomePod has a perfectly flat frequency response. Even £10,000 studio monitors don't have a perfectly flat frequency response - further more the HomePod wasn't designed to have one.

His actual graphs show anything but perfectly flat, they show huge peaks and troughs everywhere

I disagree - for an untreated room the response seems pretty flat. I wonder what the phase response is though... (source: have measured response of B&W 805 monitors in my living room)

 

[sman789]

Apparently some people still use speakers and why now? Headphones is a good way to listen to music if the speakers are not an option but they do not truly reproduce a music listening experience. There is a reason why they use speakers at the concerts and not the headphones. The sound delivery path in your body (mostly head but not exclusively) is different.

I do, I want to feel the music. I listen to music through a stereo ~3-4 hours a day. I have floor speakers with 12" woofers/4" mids/tweeters, also a set of bookshelf speakers (for when I want to be less annoying to neighbors), each set up is connected to a 100-watt sub.

The HomePod is nice for what it is (a connected speaker) but I wouldn't buy one to replace my stereo.

 

[Leguna24]

Who still uses speakers on a regular basis to listen to music? I used to when I was a kid but since then I always use headphones, unless I'm throwing a party or else at special occasions such as Christmas... Other than that I don't want to bother anyone with my music. Won't buy that piece of expensive rotten Apple.

Nobody uses speakers anymore, that's why you'll never find any in electronics stores. And it's no secret that all speaker companies have closed down in the speaker crisis of the mid 2010's. So even if you are able to find speakers on Ebay, they are old and outdated. Simply because nobody makes speakers anymore .

 

[bluespark]

How does one become an audiophile? Is it something you go to school for or does it apply to anyone who spends a lot of money on audio gear?

Neither -- it simply describes someone who is obsessed with getting the best sound possible. While the best systems are extremely expensive, a person need not be rich to consider himself an audiophile. It simply means that at any particular price point, you are going to be valuing audio quality above other characteristics -- for example, ease of use, looks, etc. And no, there is no school or anything else official -- it's just a way that people describe their strong interest in sound reproduction.

 

[anson42]

Audiophile is a subjective term. [snip]

So in conclusion, I have to laugh when I see Audiophile and HomePod in the same sentence. A true audiophile would not even consider a "Smart" device for any sort of critical listening. Like I have said before, I am sure the HomePod sounds great for it's intended use.

I agree with you that the term audiophile is somewhat subjective and I tried to give it some perspective with a subjective post I wrote earlier. However, "critical listening" is a subjective term, too, because what's being critiqued? The sound quality? The musical quality? The music artist? Audiophiles who like music can enjoy the HomePod. Some audiophiles who prize "sound" might not but if they gave one a listen in spaces where it can shine, they just might. So I don't laugh when I see audiophile and HomePod in the same sentence.

 

[steve knight]

if the homepod came eariler that would be different. but now we have stereo pairs of sonos in the kitchen and bedroom and sonos powered floor speakers in the living room. now with alexa controlling the sonos and working as a played too homepod is not really needed. 2 years ago we would have several of them now its too late. plus siri is so far behind that it is still lagging our setup.

 

[bopajuice]

I agree with you that the term audiophile is somewhat subjective and I tried to give it some perspective with a subjective post I wrote earlier. However, "critical listening" is a subjective term, too, because what's being critiqued? The sound quality? The musical quality? The music artist? Audiophiles who like music can enjoy the HomePod. Some audiophiles who prize "sound" might not but if they gave one a listen in spaces where it can shine, they just might. So I don't laugh when I see audiophile and HomePod in the same sentence.

I dont agree. An audiophile may enjoy the HomePod but one does not support the other.

It would be like saying an art expert and critic could look at a child's finger painting and say it looks wonderful, but that does not turn a finger painting into a master work of art. Or like a race car driver driving a cheap import sedan and saying he likes the car. Does not magically turn the cheap sedan into a race car.

An audiophile can enjoy a HomePod the same way. Does not magically turn it into audiophile gear. Besides the whole HomePod concept with it's signal processing and acoustic modeling, would be the audio equivalent of using room correction software like Audyssey. An audiophile would not apply room correction software to a two channel setup. It alters the sound. In a good way for some, but to an audiophile manipulating the sound is something that equipment should not do. I use it for watching movies on my home entertainment system, but would never apply it to my two channel set up I use for listening to music.

You really cant compare the two, and I stand by the comment that HomePod and Audiophile should not be used the same sentence.

 

[bluespark]

There are no pro audiophiles. Most of them are laughed at by people who work with sound for living because they don't have a clue what they're talking about and they believe some of the most far fetched things you could imagine. They're often the audio version of flat earthers.

They can be, certainly. If you spend a lot of time on audiophile boards, you'll notice a split between those who favor a more scientific approach and those who do not. You'll also find plenty of "snake oil," invented to deprive others of their money for a perceived benefit with little to no actual benefit.

Overall, though, I think there are far fewer "flat earther" audiophiles at this point than many non-audiophiles assume. That's because the internet has provided a way for people to hear views that are contrary to the spin that manufacturers often develop around their products, and because it is easier than it once was to test many of the assertions that are made. That doesn't mean everyone understands all the science that's out there (indeed, few do); merely, that it's much harder to maintain an opinion contrary to science than it would have been years ago. There's plenty of misinformation out there, but also lots and lots of people who know how to listen and how to achieve a good result. The fact that many are willing to acknowledge Apple's achievement with the HomePod is testament to the fact that many who consider themselves audiophiles are nevertheless open minded.

 

[Mark Booth]

HomePod owners, ask Siri to play 'Hallelujah' by Pentatonix. OMG, it sounds absolutely incredible on this little speaker! And it sounds equally incredible regardless of where I'm sitting or standing around the room.

Apple has hit a grand slam home run with this little wonder and hit it so far out of the park that nobody can find the ball!

I was a major skeptic of Apple's plan with the HomePod. Prior to release, in my mind I was comparing HomePod to other "smart speakers" and their features. I was hung up on the "features" part. Why couldn't Apple match the features?

Those other speakers are voice control devices that also happen to play music. Apple went a different route. Apple designed a SPEAKER that also happens to have some voice control features. When you realize that accurate and incredibly wonderful music reproduction is HomePod's real purpose, you suddenly realize having fewer personal assistant voice command features isn't really as much of a deficit as you originally thought.

Well done, Apple, well done!

I'll buy more HomePods but only after multi-speaker/multi-room is working.

Mark

 

[deanthedev]

Mirroring: As usual, the "cheerleaders" here are crowning the HomePod supreme best of all speakers. Positive reviews (or only cherry-picked positive comments within reviews) are the only reviews that are right, fans offering glowing praise are the only legitimate judges, the HomePod has been pre-perfectioned on MacRumors, even long before any ears could hear it. Just another day on this forum.

I find it funny when someone claims to be neutral or objective yet clearly has a bias to one particular side.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

To what side am I biased? That reply was a joke mirroring an extremist post on one side.

I personally own a ton of Apple stuff and tend to be a big fan of much of it. I even make my living mostly on using Apple-made tools, using them every day to get things done for clients. So do tell me, which side is my bias?

 

[Lotusman]

You know what they say about assumptions, right?

Don’t have Spotify. Subscribed to Apple Music.

I wouldn’t purchase any of the smart speakers. Non of them are worthwhile for my usage. If I had to pick one, it would not be the HomePod.

The CarPlay example is not valid, as I am commenting on the product as a whole, not the individual needs as you suggest. On that matter, I would not buy a car without CarPlay. It’s a must have feature for me when I buy a car next year.

Lastly, I love deviled eggs. They’re one of my favorites.

So just to recap:
So you're on here slagging off a product you don't have for not supporting a product you don't have and you want neither. You choose a car based on the HiFi and you don't know what a picked egg is.

 

[lch6257]

Could anyone, who owns HomePod, and likes electronic music, give a listen to

TIPPER - AMBERGRIS
TIPPER - SCAPULA
TIPPER - DEAD SOON

and tell me, how does it sound?

The thing with Tipper’s music, is, that it is very skillfully mastered in surround sound.
Sounds good in stereo, sounds amazing in surround. Just would like to know if HomePod is good enough to reproduce the sound like this

Thank you

Ok, I'll bite.

TIPPER - AMBERGRIS - Siri would not comply - indicated unavailable for streaming
Tipper - SCAPULA - ok, this was available. This is some interesting techno/electronica. I love a lot of the genre, however, this track is not really for me. However, I gave it a go at mid, low and max volume. It sounds similar to most all other tracks that feeds Homepod, it is clean and tight with no discernible distortion at any volume level. Does it have depth? yes, but so does everything you feed this kit.
Tipper - Dead Soon - this is a completely different track, much more mellow, sedate even. This I enjoyed more. Again, the Homepod emulates the sounds with clarity, distinction without being overly bright, but super clean. I also detected a few really low bass drops around the 3 min mark, and they are clear and no distortion that I could discern.

As far as a full surround sound emulation as in fully surrounding you, hard to tell for me, everything that plays on the Homepod sounds "alive" to my ears, but if that is what you are really going for, 2 Homepod's would probably get you very close and would not disappoint.

 

[rjjacobson]

HomePod reviews from the tech press came thick and fast last week, and while the smart speaker's sound quality was consistently praised, most reviews were based on subjective assessments and didn't take into account professional-grade output measurements. Early on Monday, however, Reddit user WinterCharm posted exhaustive audio performance testing results for HomePod to the Reddit audiophile community............


Do you agree with WinterCharm's review? Let us know in the comments. And make sure to check out our HomePod roundup if you're new to HomePod or planning to purchase one -- it's got everything you need to know about HomePod along with a running list of our HomePod how tos.

​

Article Link: Audiophile Review: HomePod 'Sounds Better' Than $999 KEF X300A Digital Hi-Fi Speakers

Well for me after reading lots of reviews on how good the sound is for a small speaker in a room I took the plunge and got one. I am very impressed with the sound for me personally in my office and how I can use it. Like others said it also has potential for lots more. Yeah Siri is not the best but I am used to it on my apple ecosystem so not a big problem

Was easy to setup with my iPhone X not one issue sitting here listening to nice sounding music in my home office

 

[DakotaGuy]

well not according to my wife. she is blind so her ears are pretty tuned plus she trained as a audio engineer. but she is limited by money. her biggest complaints are it is not in stereo and siri sucks. sonos is much easier for her to stream from. but her speaker setup now that cost 300.00 each and a subwoofer powered by a sonos amp blows it away. but they also blow away her sonos 5 pair in the bedroom and costs less. She has no complaints about the sound quality for what it is. it is better in more locations then most speakers would be. but siri is worse then her ipad in understanding her and the music sources fewer. ith ad to be rebooted once as siri stopped working.

What is interesting is there are quite a few pretty popular reviewers on YouTube that are not blown away by it (good for what it is, but not a replacement for a proper mid to high end stereo system) and say that Siri is still bad. This guy is supposed to be an audiophile so I'm not sure who to believe. If it really is as good as this guy claims then it sounds like it could replace much more expensive book shelf speakers.

 

[anson42]

An audiophile would not apply room correction software to a two channel setup. It alters the sound. In a good way for some, but to an audiophile manipulating the sound is something that equipment should not do.

I disagree. There are audiophile products that do just that and are used in audiophile systems; e.g. digital equalizers, analog equalizers and any product professing to help your 2 channel system adjust to a room. What's worse is those who profess to keep signal purity will send an analog signal through some digital processing to achieve better sound. But because sound quality is subjective, live and let live. This is not Audessey, but software like Dirac running in a PC or in a separate component.

You really cant compare the two, and I stand by the comment that HomePod and Audiophile should not be used the same sentence.

We agree to disagree on this point!

 

[jjjjjooooo]

His actual graphs show anything but perfectly flat, they show huge peaks and troughs everywhere - which is fine,

He claims that measurements are not normally done in rooms like his (i.e. it would presumably look better in anechoic chamber or something).

"how is that bass coming from this"

Like a Soundlink Mini?

but they've gone for psycho-acoustic processing as well to make it even bigger.

Are you saying that having the perceived loudness of relative frequencies fluctuate as the listener adjusts the volume is “correct” or are listeners expected to listen to particular songs at particular decibel levels if they want to hear “true” sound the way it was intended?

To be honest this sort of sound is going to work well for most people, it's the sound signature they're used to.

“Most people” probably rarely hear more bass than an EarPod produces. (Are EarPods hyped?)

But it's a bit like getting a high end TV calibrated - some people watch with the shop "vivid" mode on their TV and some people want a perfectly calibrated TV.

If you asked, I’d guess most people would say they want their TV to be “accurate.”

“Vivid” presumably means “designed to look good on bright showroom floors.” If Apple ever sells a TV, I’d bet it doesn’t come with a user accessible “Vivid” mode.

It may come with something like True Tone “auto-calibration” though.

Many people would think the calibrated one looks flat, boring and too yellow, yet it's the accurate representation of what the original picture is.

I would guess that “many people” would quickly adjust and get used to it (or at least never cared to begin with), and if you later changed it back would think it loooked garish, unless it really was somehow “boring” for them. (I’m assuming the “accurate calibration” doesn’t require them to sit in pitch black rooms. Are you opposed to auto-brightness?)

(Maybe people would get used to “studio monitors” if they could be marketed to the public. Maybe someone has done or will do some testing along these lines. Maybe after a month with a studio monitor people will find their HomePods “garish.”)

The HomePod is a perfectly good "hyped" speaker, but it is anything but revealing, clear, detailed, open, transparent, flat, bright or even top end hi-fi.

Have you considered the possibility that you are self-calibrating?

“Everything not” sound is made on, and intended to be listened to on speakers almost no one has?

Have you heard of Phil Spector? Or “the loudness war.”

What would happen if a producer were to target HomePod?

It does however sound better than 90% of the stuff most people will have heard or bought before, which is all Apple needed to do

I guess it’s difficult for me to understand the distinction between sound signature they’re used to and sounds better than they’ve heard before.

 

[steve knight]

What is interesting is there are quite a few pretty popular reviewers on YouTube that are not blown away by it (good for what it is, but not a replacement for a proper mid to high end stereo system) and say that Siri is still bad, but this guy is supposed to be an audiophile so I'm not sure who to believe. If it really is as good as this guy claims then it sounds like it could replace much more expensive book shelf speakers.

yes it is a good speaker and it seems it would work better in more places. I had to build shelves for my wife's sonos 5's to get them closer to working great in stereo for her in bed. the hompods would have been much easier. though I wonder how they would deal with stereo in reality? they would be better then her pair of sonos' 1's in the kitchen but too late. and siri still sucks. alexa controls sonos beter though it does not hear as well. But she said the homepod would not replace her stereo setups except the sonos 1's but but I doubt she would want to buy another homepod since they cost so much and siri sucks so much. Plus sonos adjsut to rooms. you use your iphone without the case to go around the room while the speakers make sound and it is adjusted then the speakers make their own adjustments.

 

[bopajuice]

I disagree. There are audiophile products that do just that and are used in audiophile systems; e.g. digital equalizers, analog equalizers and any product professing to help your 2 channel system adjust to a room. What's worse is those who profess to keep signal purity will send an analog signal through some digital processing to achieve better sound. But because sound quality is subjective, live and let live. This is not Audessey, but software like Dirac running in a PC or in a separate component.



We agree to disagree on this point!

I run all my levels flat while listening to music. Bass and treble at zero. No EQ, no room correction. Direct sound. I may hear a difference if I use a tube amp vs a solid state amp, and even if I have the window in the room open or closed, but I never use room correction software or an EQ. I try not to get too critical, but even using a surge protector, power strip, or power conditioner makes a difference. That's why when I had my home built I added two dedicated 20amp wall outlets just for my audio gear.

Agree to disagree.