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

[ke-iron]

I don't think you understood his point. Good speakers are designed to produce the "concert" as closely as possible to what you would hear if you were at the concert. That's not what the HP does. Or even tries to do. That's the issue.

Not quite correct because it’s not only the sound at concerts it’s designed to replicate, it’s designed to replicate the sound of everything accurately. Concert, studio, street, where ever...

I'm starting to think it isn't the Amazon Echo or Google Home that the Homepod will kill off, but the expensive audiophile grade studio monitors. When only one little Homepod can outperform two expensive speakers like these I'd say the speaker companies that market 'audiophile' grade speakers should be very worried.

I don’t think so. Studio monitors are designed to produce a neutral and natural sound. The attempt to reproduce the sound to the listener as it was recorded or played live.

While the HomePod sounds great, it does not do this. The HomePod does not always play the sound or song back as it was recorded. When the HomePod is against a wall, it focuses voices towards the middle of the room. I’m sure it sounds great in reality and you get more clarity and a sense of liveliness, but that may not always have been how the song was recorded. That is a dynamic change by the HomePod spatial awareness and other technology thanks to Apple engineering. Does it sound better than a studio monitor to our ears? Maybe. But keep in mind that it’s not how the song was meant to be heard. Is it a bad thing that Apple is doing what they want with the acoustics of a song? Up to the listener to decide I guess.

Some people want a great sounding speaker like the HomePod.
Some people want a truer sounding (also great sounding) speaker like studio monitors and high end brands produce.

 

[anson42]

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.

I do admire your ability to do that and I also try to run flat as possible. But sometimes good music comes in badly mastered forms so EQ is a necessity, be it analog or digital. Basically, no one system or setting can make all music sound good. So one either accommodates these recordings or not listen to them at all

And I'm not even getting into the room EQ side of things. Either the room accommodates the system (with drapes, no overly reflective surfaces, bass traps, treble traps, speaker placement) or the system must accommodate the room.

 

[ani4ani]

That's not what some people here want to hear!

I would argue, if that is what they hear, then they need their hearing looked at.

 

[ipponrg]

Based on some other reviews I've read today, it sounds like the HomePod has a very V-shaped sound ... which isn't surprising. It's what most casual listeners like. "Audiophiles" labels gets thrown around all over the place, and honestly I don't trust the OP reviewer. Generally if someone likes a V-shaped sounding speaker, they are not going to enjoy other types of speakers. So this "sounds better than 999 kef" statement is very subjective.

 

[peter2]

"Apple has managed to extract peak performance from a pint sized speaker" tells it all. Audiophile speakers would not compromise on sound to stay miniature in size. In a similar way, one can claim that the trashcan Mac Pro is a peak performing workstation, for its size that is ;-)

 

[Mtmspa]

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.

I do and so do a lot of other people. Why would I want to use headphones when I am home?
[doublepost=1518460118][/doublepost]

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.

And you just used audiophile and HomePod in the same sentence. Just sayin.

 

[theluggage]

I'm starting to think it isn't the Amazon Echo or Google Home that the Homepod will kill off, but the expensive audiophile grade studio monitors.

Nope, neither: its up against the ultra-compact single-unit "connected" speakers from the likes of Bose and Muso that use high-tech patented tricks (including a lot of signal processing malarkey) to get a "big sound" out of a tiny box.... and winning, by the sound of it. Except many of those will also plug into your TV set or CD player with a strange thing called a "cable" - so you have to weigh that in.

The sound from proper "studio monitors" isn't to everybody's taste anyway unless you like hearing compression artefacts (in both the analog and digital senses of the word) - I heard someone compare it to installing daylight lightbulbs in your living room.

 

[Krevnik]

Some people want a great sounding speaker like the HomePod.
Some people want a truer sounding (also great sounding) speaker like studio monitors and high end brands produce.

And some go with B when they can, and A when B doesn't fit the space or make sense. In my case, the HomePod slots into that space where what I'd like to run isn't going to work. A bedroom/kitchen speaker which takes up just as much space as it needs, and no more, and while I don't get the soundstage that I like from my other speakers, I'm not getting much critical listening done anyways in the kitchen or bedroom.

 

[ignatius345]

Wow! I have to admit I was *very* skeptical of this device and assumed that my very good bookshelf speakers would be better. Starting to really reconsider this.

 

[Fodowsky]

For many, the HP may deliver the quality of sound that they want, and that’s good enough. I think that’s awesome. Music is meant to be enjoyed, whatever that means for you.

For me, the HP is the best smart speaker available today (that I have heard) AND it fits in my Apple environment. It sounds pretty good. Being able to tweak the EQ in some of my apps that play lossless files makes it sound much better to me. I am able to EQ the bass and the upper mids/highs for better balanced and make the vocals more transparent. This results in a sound that is closer to my reference speakers. I like that.

I would never replace a quality 2-speaker system with something like the HP (or even the best headphones). If you’ve never heard a good stereo system that is well set up, it’s an amazing experience. You turn on the music and the electronics are replaced by artists performing in 3 dimensional space right in front of you. Nothing like it, IMO.

 

[Keirasplace]

Not quite correct because it’s not only the sound at concerts it’s designed to replicate, it’s designed to replicate the sound of everything accurately. Concert, studio, street, where ever...



I don’t think so. Studio monitors are designed to produce a neutral and natural sound. The attempt to reproduce the sound to the listener as it was recorded or played live.

While the HomePod sounds great, it does not do this. The HomePod does not always play the sound or song back as it was recorded. When the HomePod is against a wall, it focuses voices towards the middle of the room. I’m sure it sounds great in reality and you get more clarity and a sense of liveliness, but that may not always have been how the song was recorded. That is a dynamic change by the HomePod spatial awareness and other technology thanks to Apple engineering. Does it sound better than a studio monitor to our ears? Maybe. But keep in mind that it’s not how the song was meant to be heard. Is it a bad thing that Apple is doing what they want with the acoustics of a song? Up to the listener to decide I guess.

Some people want a great sounding speaker like the HomePod.
Some people want a truer sounding (also great sounding) speaker like studio monitors and high end brands produce.

good god, it tries to reproduce the sound closest to what it sounded like IN THE SPACE YOUR LISTENING IT IN. Everything else you say is just goggleleegook.

 

[theluggage]

It's most certainly not mono.

This is mono.

True. Forget the vinyl revival - bring back shellac!

 

[DopamineHigh]

"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 - which is fine, it's a consumer hifi product and Apple haven't designed it to be flat, they've used every trick in the book to get big sound from a small speaker and to make it sound "wow" when you first play something through it "how is that bass coming from this" - the woofer is plenty big enough to get good bass, but they've gone for psycho-acoustic processing as well to make it even bigger.

To be honest this sort of sound is going to work well for most people, it's the sound signature they're used to. The way sound is presented only starts to change if you listen on studio monitors which are designed to be neutral flat and revealing - many people may find that sound "boring" or overly "clinical" compared to a HomePod type sound though. But when you get into the £300+ headphone market that is what they try to do as well, the £1000 Sennheiser HD-800's are more or less as flat as you can get in a headphone. The idea being to just present the music in as much detail as possible as it was from the studio without applying any sort of EQ curve or enhancement to it in anyway.

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. 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. Horses for courses - depends if you want hyped or accurate, you can't have both.

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. 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 (and yes it destros the entire Echo range and easily puts Sonos to shame, not that i'd ever want to listen to either for extended periods)

Response from the testers here: https://reddit.com/r/audiophile/comments/7wwtqy/_/du4rp5j/?context=1

 

[Ploki]

As long as you expect a very very "hi-fi" sound and nothing like decent headphones or your studio monitors you'll be ok.

Still haven't tried that mono mix test yet, but it does act as we guessed it would - in that anything mid range and below is only being done by the woofer so is obviously very mono, obviously it can't defy physics.

I imagine you'd want to boost the top end like I desperately want to do - the bass is very impressive, but there's just no brightness to it.

ah. My Focal's beryllium tweeters have spoiled me.

Wonder what smart stuff it does when two are connected for stereo though!
[doublepost=1518460490][/doublepost]

It's most certainly not mono.

This is mono.

Tbh, that says nothing. a *single* homepod is still predominantly mono, it simply cannot technically achieve stereo width of a spaced pair.

 

[steve knight]

And some go with B when they can, and A when B doesn't fit the space or make sense. In my case, the HomePod slots into that space where what I'd like to run isn't going to work. A bedroom/kitchen speaker which takes up just as much space as it needs, and no more, and while I don't get the soundstage that I like from my other speakers, I'm not getting much critical listening done anyways in the kitchen or bedroom.

yes thats where it shines. it would be better then our pair of sonos ones in the kitchen but I doubt they will get replaced with 700.00 worth of speakers.

 

[Keirasplace]

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.

Contrary to those hacks on youtube, and yes I've those so called reviews, he seemingly has done some of the work to make his point stand. Also the whole "replacement for a proper mid end stereo system" is a hoot, cause those things would be at a minimum 3 times more expensive and would not fit where the Homepod will be put generally: aka it is a big ass straw man.

These thing will be bought in drove to put in kitchens, bedrooms, hallways, studies and even in many small living rooms.
The systems those people are saying this thing is no way beating are not bought anymore in volume because of cost, space and not sounding as good as it could be for the space they're in the cost.

 

[DakotaGuy]

Also the whole "replacement for a proper mid end stereo system" is a hoot, cause those things would be at a minimum 3 times more expensive and would not fit where the Homepod will be put generally: aka it is a big ass straw man.

That's not a straw man. Listen to what some Apple execs said themselves about what sort of systems the Homepod can replace and you'll see that claim is not far from the truth at all. If it can perform at that level that is pretty amazing.

 

[Keirasplace]

That's not a straw man. Listen to what some Apple execs said themselves about what sort of systems the Homepod can replace and you'll see I am just restating what they have claimed themselves.

I've actually read it buddy. Got that.
Yes, what they're saying are straw man and yes I've seen the youtubber crappy so called "reviews".

 

[johngordon]

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.

Fair enough. It would be interesting to know how many businesses you asked each for though?

 

[smirking]

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?

I think Apple's going to do for the word "Audiophile" the same that it did for the word "Pro", which is to say it'll create endless consternation, debate, and teeth gnashing over the true meaning of the word. Of course ultimately, most of us will conclude that there is no such thing as a dividing line that separates the elite class from the rest of us schmucks... that even the elites are all over the shop when you break it all down.

 

[ke-iron]

good god, it tries to reproduce the sound closest to what it sounded like IN THE SPACE YOUR LISTENING IT IN. Everything else you say is just goggleleegook.

First, speak properly when talking to adults. Second, I wasn’t bashing the HomePod so stop riding. Reread and take a seat.

By adjusting the treble and other acoustics of the song so users can hear vocals clearer, no matter how big or small the room, is tampering with how it was meant to be heard.

This is exactly why studio monitors when played at very low or high volumes, the listener is still able to hear and enjoy the same intricacies withought change. Big or small room, all they need is to adjust the volume. No need for adjusting bass or treble here like the HomePod.

The HomePod at different volumes and different positions in a room should not always sound the same because spatial awareness dynamically changes how the audio sounds. Based on how Apple explained these changes I don’t see how it can sound the same. The prime example I used was increased vocals directed towards a user when it’s placed against a wall. Let me break it down. A HomePod in a 14x14’ room against a wall vs a HomePod in a 14x14’ room in the center of the room will sound different to the listener no matter where they stood in the room. I’m sure the vocals and instruments sound realistic, but the various levels of detail volumes would have been adjusted based on position of the HomePod in the room. That’s like an artist singing louder because he’s standing in the corner of a room as opposed to standing in the middle of the room. So while the sound it produces might be realistic, it isn’t a true reproduction of how it sounded with the music in the recording studio.

Like I said I was not bashing the HomePod and I have no doubt it will sound great no matter the user configuration. I’ll reiterate, at the end of my previous post I said, some people like great sounding speakers like the HomePod. While other people like TRUER sounding speakers like studio monitors and other high end brands. The end.

 

[smirking]

Anyway, Apple seem to know about tiny speakers - the iPad speakers are incredible for their size

The main reason I'm so intrigued by HomePod is that I'm stunned at how good the sound is coming from my 2016 MBP. There is no way music coming from such an inhospitable enclosure should be sounding this good.

 

[vipergts2207]

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.

 

[smirking]

Could the grapes in this thread be any more sour?

It's no different than every other discussion topic here. It's an overrepresentation of some very extreme personalities. I'm sure the people who come here to argue all the time could have a go at the idea that fire isn't hot enough and water isn't wet enough.

 

[ocnitsa]

That’s what I was wondering. It sure seems like the term is thrown around a lot. Maybe there are objective things that can be measured but I would still argue whether something sounds good or not is mostly subjective.

I agree with you...but on the other hand, I think it's easier to tell if something sounds bad.