Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

funny how you don't know how to read, that's not a live thing. It is in no way similar.
Man, can't believe this crap.
[doublepost=1517053002][/doublepost]
Nice. Would you want your kids playing with a 1000 dollar piece of kit?

Blows my mind, my sister gives her phone to her kids to play with. 2 phones dropped in the bath tub, one urinated on(the person at Apple said it had water damage and she was like, yeah.... water damage), and the last one dropped. Yet she still gives it to them to play with. She now has a 7 which offers some water protection, but just a matter of time until it Gets broken.

Well, I'm pretty sure eventually phones will be like the Apple Watch with speaker that expel water, then she'll be set.
 
I have to admit that this worried me too, so I contacted Apple and they assured me that other people can play their music on a HomePod. I don't think that that is quite the same as "having an account" on the HomePod, but so long as my family can play their own music on the HomePod then that seems fine to me. They also said (by the way) that "You will be able to use your Home Pod without having a subscription and by using any music App that you wish", so some of the suggestions coming out of the early reviews appear (reassuringly) to be wrong.
Woah! So not Apple Music subscription required? Apple throws this in free if you buy the Homepod?
 
funny how you don't know how to read, that's not a live thing. It is in no way similar.
Man, can't believe this crap.
[doublepost=1517053002][/doublepost]

Well, I'm pretty sure eventually phones will be like the Apple Watch with speaker that expel water, then she'll be set.
So please tell us why it needs to be done live? Do you walk around with your speaker or do you leave it in place? I typically dont keep moving my speakers, so live beam forming:rolleyes: is nothing different other than running a set up calibration on the Bose. Run this once and be done.

Why the bad attitude? Just makes you appear silly and childish.
 
66451193cd035195dd9ceacfdfa462c7.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: smr
Maybe, but I like the design of the homepod and also the tight integration in the apple ecosystem.

I wasn't trying to talk you out of it- just point out that your originally-stated want can be met in a lot of ways with the same budget. You already have the "tight integration in the apple ecosystem" with that :apple:TV (me too). It has the integrated connection to AM and offers Siri voice control & search. Since you are wanting these speakers to be used with your television, whether you buy these or any others, they're probably going to be positioned near the TV and thus near the :apple:TV. You may already have HP "smarts" in another Apple product already sitting right there.

Apple themselves are NOT pushing these as home theater speakers. If that was the intent, they would because HT speakers tend to be bought in groups of 2(.1) or 5(.1) or 7(.1), etc. Certainly Apple would rather sell each person 2-5-7+ of these at a time instead of just 1 and then maybe 2 after they "just one software update" later this year to make them work as a stereo pair.

Your (original) post made it sound like you are looking for good speakers for TV watching. These are probably NOT the best for that application. An ideal TV setup is going to build right into at least a 5.1 setup (front LEFT & RIGHT as stereo, CENTER mostly for good clean voices emanating from close to the screen, surround (slightly behind you) LEFT & RIGHT for Sports, TV show and Movie 5.1 tracks to make audio meant to sound behind you actually come from behind you. This is not that. At it's very best, it tries to fake multi-speaker sound as good as it can.

Closet marketers here are slinging around "beamforming" etc, like that is going to do such tricks such that our ears won't be able to tell the difference but I doubt any of us will be able to go to any theater soon and find they've stripped out all of their speakers all around the auditorium and replaced them with one of these down front, center, underneath the big screen... because the audience won't be able to hear a difference.

Will this sound great as a smart speaker? Probably. Apple makes great stuff and they've hung their marketing hat on "great sounding speaker" here. Early reviews from the Apple press are gushing at the sound. But is it an ideal speaker for the TV/HT application? Even Apple doesn't push it as that (and there would be a lot more money for Apple if they did). Apple even explicitly disclaims it as a stereo speaker setup if you buy 2 right now, writing on their own site that stereo will come "later this year" with a software update.

All that written: if it's about looks of a speaker, it certainly looks like an Apple-attractive design. If "tight integration" is key, it is extraordinarily tightly integrated... so much so that any buyer had better be tightly committed to that ecosystem because that's pretty much all that the "smarts" side can access.

Yes, one can airplay everything else to it but the airplay option drops the "smarts" making it just an airplay speaker. You (and I) already have that too because we can airplay anything through our :apple:TV to any quality of speakers we choose to feed from that :apple:TV.

Again, none of this is meant to talk you out of (or into) making a purchase- just offering some points of consideration based upon what you say you want. The first post sounded like you wanted some great TV sound. The second post sounds like you want a HP, so you want to get more specific in wants to make HP up to the only speaker choice that can fit the requirements. Of course, buy whatever you want.

Personally, HP to me looks like up to a terrific choice for mostly music listeners outside of anyone's home theater room: the kitchen, the garage, the spare room, a bedroom, etc. Rooms where you might not already be wired up for audio and/or rooms where some of the virtual assistant features might also be pretty handy. But it really looks like it's overwhelmingly a MUSIC speaker... and an AM (via subscription) music speaker at that.

I don't see much about it that makes me think it's a HT speaker foundation, nor get any sense that it's "just TWO software upgrades away from being able to synch into a 5.1 or 7.1 surround setup. Beamforming, shmeamforming- faux surround is not the same as the real thing. Could it be BETTER than the speakers built into a TV? Almost certainly- anything can typically beat the speakers built into TVs. But there are lots of choices for that at a budget of $349 per speaker.
 
Last edited:

Any Airplay speaker can do this. The "but it can via airplay" spin makes it a play-anything speaker. But the price of that is dropping the "smarts" and using it as a "dumb"(?) airplay speaker.

There's a big difference here. If you want to control and interact with it using the Siri virtual assistant, Siri will apparently NOT be able to "see" your own ripped music, in iTunes, on your own Mac... just as voice control searches via Siri on :apple:TV can't see our own ripped video content in iTunes on our own Macs. But, accept the airplay option and we can also airplay any of that media- video or music- to the :apple:TV that we already have and play it on the probably great speakers already fed by that :apple:TV too.

We keep posting this like we are either fooled by the airplay option ourselves- "so it CAN play any of our ripped music too. Let me share this good news with everyone"... or we recognize the difference ourselves but want to help fool others that may not quite be as smart as us.

Yes, via Airplay, it can play ANYTHING one can Airplay. That includes Spotify, Pandora, etc too. But...

No, you won't be using the "smarts" part of the speaker to do any of that. Instead, YOU will be functioning as the "smarts" by "throwing" what you want it to play manually from controlling the Airplay source device... just like you can do now to ANY speakers hooked up to any airplay-compatible device.

Other comparable devices have their "smarts' set up so you can use their VA's to play from many other sources of music. I hope this clarifies the difference. Some may not care, but if you have to lean on airplay for a lot of what you want, there are a TON of options for you. And if you have an airplay-capable device like an :apple:TV (of which you can buy 2 for the price of about 1 HomePod), you can airplay every bit of the same to any quality of speaker you choose to attach.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: frumpy16 and robbyx
Any Airplay speaker can do this. The "but it can via airplay" spin makes it a play-anything speaker. But the price of that is dropping the "smarts" and using it as a "dumb"(?) airplay speaker.

There's a big difference here. If you want to control and interact with it using the Siri virtual assistant, Siri will apparently NOT be able to "see" your own ripped music, in iTunes, on your own Mac... just as voice control searches via Siri on :apple:TV can't see our own ripped video content in iTunes on our own Macs. But, accept the airplay option and we can also airplay any of that media- video or music- to the :apple:TV that we already have and play it on the probably great speakers already fed by that :apple:TV too.

We keep posting this like we are either fooled by the airplay option ourselves- "so it CAN play any of our ripped music too. Let me share this good news with everyone"... or we recognize the difference ourselves but want to help fool others that may not quite be as smart as us.

Yes, via Airplay, it can play ANYTHING one can Airplay. That includes Spotify, Pandora, etc too. But...

No, you won't be using the "smarts" part of the speaker to do any of that. Instead, YOU will be functioning as the "smarts" by "throwing" what you want it to play manually from controlling the Airplay source device... just like you can do now to ANY speakers hooked up to any airplay-compatible device.

Other comparable devices have their "smarts' set up so you can use their VA's to play from many other sources of music. I hope this clarifies the difference. Some may not care, but if you have to lean on airplay for a lot of what you want, there are a TON of options for you. And if you have an airplay-capable device like an :apple:TV (of which you can buy 2 for the price of about 1 HomePod), you can airplay every bit of the same to any quality of speaker you choose to attach.

I posted it as others had questioned on here if it even worked via airplay
 
  • Like
Reactions: smr
Gruber has a post up about HomePod’s priorities. I think most people saying the critics don’t get this device are confused themselves. Critics get it they just think Apple focused on the wrong priority. What I don’t get is why it has to be an either/or thing. Why couldn’t Apple make the best voice assistant wireless speaker that also sounds amazing? Why couldn’t both be priorities? And wouldn’t HomePod be a great jumping off point to turn Siri into a full fledged platform vs just an OS appendage? As it is now I don’t know what problem HomePod is solving. The market for people that are looking for an audiophile quality portable speaker has to be quite niche. And my guess is true audiophiles will be skeptical that Apple can deliver and/or already have setups with equipment that’s more expensive and better sounding than HomePod. So then it comes down to Siri and Apple Music. I’m not sure either of those are enough to sell this device in large quantities.

https://daringfireball.net/2018/01/homepod_priorities

https://www.imore.com/siri-needs-become-platform
 
  • Like
Reactions: OllyW
From the same article:



Seems everyone is missing this point. That's why this will be the first speaker in my house that listens to me even when I forget it is. I don't trust Amazon at all, and Google only marginally...

This alone, IMHO, is worth the price of the HomePod and the reason I refuse to have any of the Amazon or Google speakers in our home. It is entirely too "big brother" to have speakers around the house that are constantly "on" and recording all sounds in the house. While I understand the metadata arguments, it has become very apparent that the individual recordings from those devices can be accessed. I absolutely love that HomePod is completely "off" until summoned and that the information is only processed through the servers without any identifying information attached. I do have a SONOS 5.1 setup for our big screen TV, but plan to gradually add the HomePod to a few other rooms.

Too late?, Too expensive?...........Nope. The HomePod is the only option for anyone who values their privacy; wants a smart speaker; and wants decent quality sound from their music.
 
  • Like
Reactions: the future
Agreed, there is a lot of confusion over this. Apple have also confirmed that the HomePod will indeed play ripped CDs via AirPlay from a Mac without an Apple Music subscription in an AppleStore chat:
View attachment 748760

Good to see more info is coming out

I’m sure review units will be out start of February before release to help users with more information
 
  • Like
Reactions: smr
I think WE spun up "audiophile" sound to help ourselves rationalize the $349 price (to ourselves or others). If we want to spin this as "audiophile" then we have to shine a big bright light on the source audio too. That means all of the primary source of music- via AM- probably needs a big upgrade to take advantage of the "audiophile" quality of the speaker. Or we need to take a new look at a competing source like Tidal which hangs it's hat on this very thing. (not pushing Tidal here, just pointing out that selectively spinning the hardware for audiophiles begs for the software to be upgraded for audiophiles too). A million dollar smart speaker is still going to be limited to the quality of audio that is fed into it.

Besides, we're the very same crowd that justified jettisoning the headphone jack on the concept that people don't care about audiophile sound quality anymore and that bluetooth is "good enough" sound for the masses. Where are all those people now? Apparently, lower quality sound was "good enough" then to help rationalize that Apple product BUT now we have to spin up to audiophile sound here to help sell this product hanging it's hat on "better quality sound." BOTH are playing the very SAME sound files. So which is it?

In turn, I think it's US who decided to spin up comparison to Sonos too, because Sonos pricing could make $349 seem lower vs. some of their offerings. As objectively I can look at this thing, I see it as Deluxe Echo ++ at best. Apple is not spinning it as a home theater speaker or even as a stereo pair(able) speaker (yet). It looks like Echo done up as good as Apple can do an Echo.

Those wanting an Echo but not an Amazon device... a Google smart speaker but not made by Google, etc... have a tangible, quality, Apple-made option at a typically (higher) Apple price. For what it is, it probably is great. Because it's Apple's version, it can ride the Apple halo and sell very well. Lots of people who buy it will be very happy with the purchase.

Is this for audiophiles? Without even hearing one, the pricing at only $349 is not audiophile (speaker) territory. 256kbps source files are not audiophile source quality. Etc. Is this maybe best of the lot for "smart speakers." Probably for those that measure them on this product's strengths... or for those that are already entrenched and can quickly marginalize the benefits of the competition that aren't arriving in this product.

It's very likely not Apple's next iPhone-type product and it's not a complete bomb (dud) either- what was Apple's last real dud? It is very much a niche product- but all the others are too. And this niche probably has upwards of at least millions of unit sales still out there to be won... probably tens of millions just as a start (whether this eat up most of that opportunity or only competes for some of it is still TBD).

Bottom line: we should welcome a new competitor because competition is always good for us consumers. Choices are good for us. And then take that modestly widened choice and choose wisely... or pass if we don't see enough here to want one of these (from anyone). I'm glad Apple took their best crack at this kind of product. I hope it sells well.
 
You can make fun of it all you want but it is a basic feature Sonos has had forever and there are some people who like music in their bathrooms... ;)

Guilty! Jetted tub, candles, glass of wine; and soft jazz coming from a Sonos 3 (soon to be HomePod). Heaven.
 
Agreed, there is a lot of confusion over this. Apple have also confirmed that the HomePod will indeed play ripped CDs via AirPlay from a Mac without an Apple Music subscription in an AppleStore chat:
View attachment 748760
Airplay isn't a very exciting feature here. It just means you can push a song to the HomePod from your Mac. It doesn't mean you can say "Hey Siri, play 'Hotel California' from my iMac"
 
I do understand it.....It's a pretty simple concept. However, it's not going to gain much really. It's quite amusing you all hold onto "beam forming" as something that is worth it and the premium it carries whereas in real life, you won't be able to tell. Have fun justifying it, my stocks appreciate it.

To the average consumer, beam forming means NOTHING. People would rather be able to play music from services like pandora, spotify, and other services deeply more entrenched than apple music and the HomePod doesn't allow this....but hey, it has beam forming. whop-pa-de-doo

"I do understand it.....It's a pretty simple concept. However, it's not going to gain much really."
I don't think you do. To you it's just a word. If you did, you'd clearly understand the benefits and potential.

Please elaborate on your assertion that "its not going to gain much." I'm listening and would love to hear your nuanced assessment leading to your conclusion.


"To the average consumer, beam forming means NOTHING."
That's true. It's the superior sound from a relatively small desktop speaker, and features, that will be immediately apparent to consumers.

Similarly, the average consumer, including yourself, have no idea that cellular phone systems routinely employ beamforming, and have been doing so for 20 years. Without it, cellular phone service would not exist in metropolitan areas. Since you understand what beamforming is about and its tradeoffs, and feel it's a waste, lets have a discussion about the technology. You're up.
 
I just wish Siri was half as useful as Echo. I really don't want to use Echo but it integrated 20 times easier to my home automation and has so many plugins. I literally was having to write little Go code apps to get proper integration into my existing system. PLEASE fix Siri.

Me: Hey Siri, turn on the living room lights
Siri: Can't find upsidedown lights

Me: Hey Siri, turn on the living room lights
Siri: Chewbaca is a character in the Star Wars moviees

Me: arghhhhhhh!!!!!!!


Me: Alexa, turn on the living room lights
Alexa: Ok
 
  • Like
Reactions: mostlynameless
Replace the word "HomePod" with "iPod" in the critical analysis quotes. We all know how that turned out for the iPod.

Yes, to be precise, call it iPod HiFi II. We all know how well that turned out for the iPod HiFi.
 
Yeah, but they don’ t have room eq, and that is pretty important to get good sound.
In my experience equalization usually hurts more than it helps. Also, I fail to see how the Homepod can possibly do this properly without a microphone at the listener position (which is what all the better AVRs with automatic room setup use).

Generally, I have some concerns with their "filling the room" concept. Even if they get the equalization right, I doubt very much that the stereo sound stage (once stereo mode becomes available) will be properly maintained with all the heavy processing that they are doing, and that is a key part of the fascination of many high quality music recordings. Even minute phase shifts can ruin it.
Of course there are better deals out there, to get better sound, especially wired.
I have 5 b&w speakers and a b&w subwoofer, and an arcam receiver and an apple tv. Great for movies and music.
But it is 5000 euros, and all the hassle with wires, and the fact that my living room looks cluttered.
I don't think you'll have to invest remotely that much to best the Homepod in terms of sound. And with powered speakers hooked up to an ATV3 or the like there is only one additional wire (the one connecting the stereo speakers).

Of course, the Homepods aren't only about good sound. I think the product is targeted more towards people who are primarily interested in convenience and looks.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.