I've come to understand that this is shameless duplication in advance...Quite interesting that these and the homePod look almost identical
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
HomePod First Listen Impressions: 'Incredible' Audio With Bass-Heavy Sound That Easily Beats Echo
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Quite interesting that these and the homePod look almost identical
[doublepost=1496884204][/doublepost]
Here is a screenshot from Apples homepage saying that two together will detect each other and work together for better sound.
Better sound does not equate to good sound. One could hardly envisage listening to something like Fauré's Requiem on a setup up such as this. I don't think Sonos et-al have much to fear.
Apple are taking audio 'downmarket' whilst at the same time charging the customer a premium for the privilege.
But I don't think that's the point. This device isn't shooting for perfect audio. No matter what they say in the keynote, I don't believe this is supposed to be your primary home listening device.
Right now I've got a pretty awesome sound system paired with a TV in the basement, but most of my music listening comes from my mediocre-sounding little echo as my wife and I prep dinner, eat, and clean up. I think his will be a great step up for people like me who want decent sound, but whose wives aren't going to allow them to drag a speaker system into the kitchen.
I will need to check into pairing up an echo dot with a sonos 3, but if the sound quality is even close, I'll probably go for the all-in-one just for ease of use.
This is exactly what Apple said the HomePod does, use the microphone array (6) to not only detect the space around the speaker, but also knowing where the user's voice is coming from. And they've specifically said they aren't trying to replicate "Stereo" L/R sound, that is my point. They aren't just going split the speakers down the middle, or claim it can replace a 2.1/5.1 speaker system (even considering that to be a standard to which to compare a music speaker is laughable, as if either of those actually mattered) - they are separating parts of a track and layering the sound using beamforming, creating a depth (background, foreground) instead of just L/R. The chip used to coordinate all of that is a powerhouse.
Not only that, but for small spaces (like apartments, or in-general bedrooms) beam-forming and reflected audio works very well.
Don't waste your money on a Sonos 3 - the Sonos 1 has incredible sound for such a small speaker and is largely replacing the 3 in sales.
In fact you could get a pair of Sonos 1's for the price of a single HomePod. I know where my money would be going.
And how do you power these light bubbles? There is already a power source there, just need to create a way to use it for something other than a light bubble
Last edited by a moderator:
True. I hope you're right and that as the release date nears, we'll learn more. If these things can sense one another in the same room somehow and build a proper stereo sound stage, then I'd totally consider getting a pair for the living room. If they sound awesome and can play tunes without even having a receiver then that's a pretty clean, beautiful music setup.
There was a time where I wanted to be an audiophile, but the prices were just too stupid for sooooo little return. Can you get better sound? Sure you can, but you gotta put out exponentially more cash each time to get barely detectable sound improvement. I thought I hit my "good enough" level long before I hit the right to call myself an audiophile. Regardless, I'm pretty happy with where I am today, but I'm not ready to give up stereo.
// get offa my lawn.
For the price of a true audiophile setup, I think it would be a better option to listen to the music in a live venue. It's true that for audiophiles you're looking at diminishing returns on a logarithmic scale. For me, I think I fall under mass music concept in that since I'm not listening to FLACs unless I'm on studio monitors and most of my music library is comprised of MP3s, Apple Music, Amazon Music, and random WAV files for mastering. When I'm at home, stereo doesn't even play a real role. I just have multiple Sonos 1s all play the same Apple Music playlist and do things while I hear (not listen) to music. I do have 5.1 Sonos setups as well as stereo pair Play 1 setups but I already know that the sound is not really an audiophile setup and instead just streamed music at slightly lower bit rates. Even listening to FLACs or high bit rate WAV files on studio monitors doesn't equate to a live performance. I think if given the choice, I would go for live performances over a true audiophile setup.
Quite interesting that these and the homePod look almost identical
[doublepost=1496884204][/doublepost]
Here is a screenshot from Apples homepage saying that two together will detect each other and work together for better sound.
But better isn't stereo. What I want to know is if for instance a drum roll in the recording begins to the left where the snare is and travels around the toms from left to right, will that replicate in this speaker? Will it if we have two of them? Or, will it just "sound good"?
I don't pretend to know how these things work, I just want things to sound right to my ears. In early Beatles recordings one instrument or vocal would be pushed entirely into the right or left channel. Will that be replicated, or is "better" now centralizing those elements and delivering them to me sounding "better"? Will the sound I hear sound like what the recording engineers wanted, or like what Apple wants me to hear?
I guess really the only thing to do is wait and listen to one (or two) when we can. Maybe all this is so much paranoia, and it'll all "just work" at which point, I will happily sit down.
You can actually put together a pretty decent two channel setup with the Dot ($50), T-amp ($30), and Elac Debut B6 bookshelves ($279) or something similar. I suspect you would get much better sound quality from that type of setup and you could always add an inexpensive preamp later if you wanted to add more sources down the road.
That being said, some people will buy this for the small footprint and the Siri interaction. Personally, I am fine with Siri on my Apple watch and having Echo control things in the home (because the Echo's skills are more extensive), but it would be nice to have Apple Music available without needing an iOS device and Bluetooth pairing, so I think they focused on Apple Music for a reason.
[doublepost=1496933834][/doublepost]
Not me. I would rather have a great setup at home if I was an audiophile. There are a couple issues with live venues. First off, your seats may suck, you may be sitting next to a loud moron that wants to scream every lyric, or the venue just isn't setup great for audio. In a lot of cases, they simply want it to be so loud that your ears ring for hours when you leave.
The second, and more important issue, is that Miles Davis, Bill Evans, John Coltrane, The Beatles, etc.. no longer perform and some great (living) artists are far from their peak years. The idea of a home system is to make it sound like you are there, but that is impossible unless you have a time machine.
Personally, I want my main system to have speakers that actually have published specs. I do listen to compressed music on Apple Music, but most people can't ABX that difference. Speakers, on the other hand, can make huge difference in sound quality.
Last edited:
I haven't done my full (or even much) research yet. I just threw that out because it was about the same price. As Sonos still doesn't support Echo and Homepod won't be available until December, I've got a bit of time.
I hope that, in the next few months, some independent reviewers will give us a better idea of where the homepod falls within the Sonos range. If it's between the 3 and 5, apple will get my money (again).
But better isn't stereo. What I want to know is if for instance a drum roll in the recording begins to the left where the snare is and travels around the toms from left to right, will that replicate in this speaker? Will it if we have two of them? Or, will it just "sound good"?
I don't pretend to know how these things work, I just want things to sound right to my ears. In early Beatles recordings one instrument or vocal would be pushed entirely into the right or left channel. Will that be replicated, or is "better" now centralizing those elements and delivering them to me sounding "better"? Will the sound I hear sound like what the recording engineers wanted, or like what Apple wants me to hear?
I guess really the only thing to do is wait and listen to one (or two) when we can. Maybe all this is so much paranoia, and it'll all "just work" at which point, I will happily sit down.
My reply about both working together was for another poster that didn't know if they would detect each other.
But you are quite correct. Listen to Susie Q from CCR. That's exact what you are referring to. His voice first comes from one side and then the other. Really sounds awesome that way. We will see when they came out and we get some reviews.
Some people can afford either of them. So a comparison, regardless of the price, seems reasonable toward informing a consumer whether or not the Apple device is 'worth the money.' If i have $500 to spend on a device of this type, why wouldn't i want to see how they compare to each other? If the Apple didn't sound as good as the Echo, i could 'save some money.' If the Apple sounds significantly better, i can decide if that difference is worth the difference in cost. What's "unfair" about this? There aren't that many similar devices. The HAVE to be compared to each other. This isn't like comparing a Bentley to a Chrysler 300.
My Carver speakers are over 21 years old now. I bought them when I was in college (it's called getting a job). When it comes to hi-fi, older doesn't mean crappier and a good pair can last half a lifetime. That's hardly comparable to ever-changing television standards and the latest/greatest computers. How many Mac owners on here buy a new Mac every other year? What's that cost? The Carvers were on closeout for $1175. That's not even a middle of the line 21" iMac. So I guess it depends on what your priorities in life are. If you need a $1000 iPhone just to do Facebook and texting and what not and think that's a "reasonable" price (as SO many Apple fans on here seem to think), why are you getting so upset at the idea that this Apple speaker is a joke (not even stereo)??? The Klipsch speakers I mentioned are around $150 a pair and I guarantee will blow away this Apple "pod" thing for a small to medium sized room.
Besides, if it were really about being poor, you wouldn't be on an Apple forum because Apple isn't exactly a brand that's all about bargain priced products.
[doublepost=1496970718][/doublepost]
One Apple Airport Express + Klipsch THX ProMedia 2.1 sub/sat speakers = $250. I guarantee that it will BLOW AWAY this POS for sound quality. Want voice commands? Add a FireTV to the room instead of the Airport Express (even if you don't ultimately use it for video) for $100. You're still at $250. You've got 4x better sound quality and saved $100. FireTV has Bluetooth. The Airport Express (if you can find one) has Airplay. FireTV + Kodi App installed will give you music Airplay as well on the FireTV. Why would I want this thing?
[doublepost=1496970759][/doublepost]
The problem is this product isn't smart. It's dumb.
Last edited:
After reading the comments I am still confused a but, is HomePod capable of playing 5.1 true surround sound. I have a few songs in 5.1 surround and also Digital Movies with surround sound. If HomePod is incapable of playing surround sound I think it's a waste of money, imho.
You mean, like the way you ignored all the rest of his post and only replied to a single line?
My Carver speakers are over 21 years old now. I bought them when I was in college (it's called getting a job). When it comes to hi-fi, older doesn't mean crappier and a good pair can last half a lifetime. That's hardly comparable to ever-changing television standards and the latest/greatest computers. How many Mac owners on here buy a new Mac every other year? What's that cost? The Carvers were on closeout for $1175. That's not even a middle of the line 21" iMac. So I guess it depends on what your priorities in life are. If you need a $1000 iPhone just to do Facebook and texting and what not and think that's a "reasonable" price (as SO many Apple fans on here seem to think), why are you getting so upset at the idea that this Apple speaker is a joke (not even stereo)??? The Klipsch speakers I mentioned are around $150 a pair and I guarantee will blow away this Apple "pod" thing for a small to medium sized room.
Besides, if it were really about being poor, you wouldn't be on an Apple forum because Apple isn't exactly a brand that's all about bargain priced products.
[doublepost=1496970718][/doublepost]
One Apple Airport Express + Klipsch THX ProMedia 2.1 sub/sat speakers = $250. I guarantee that it will BLOW AWAY this POS for sound quality. Want voice commands? Add a FireTV to the room instead of the Airport Express (even if you don't ultimately use it for video) for $100. You're still at $250. You've got 4x better sound quality and saved $100. FireTV has Bluetooth. The Airport Express (if you can find one) has Airplay. FireTV + Kodi App installed will give you music Airplay as well on the FireTV. Why would I want this thing?
[doublepost=1496970759][/doublepost]
The problem is this product isn't smart. It's dumb.
You're missing the point. People don't want a 6 device workaround. I'm not putting a 2.1 system, a fire tv, and an airport express on my kitchen counter. Of course you can assemble a better sounding sound system for cheaper if space is no concern. That's how sound systems have always been. But the homepod is an upmarket Echo. Eight million homes have Echos right now. It's pretty clear there's a market.
Anyone using Homekit will most likely want this HomePod. Even though it's not the real purpose of the HomePod, it's going to be important for anyone that has a HomeKit setup. The problem with Google Home and Echo is that they don't integrate great in a HomeKit setup and they are also recording everything you are saying and putting that to advertising service. I don't even know if Google or Amazon really market this part of their privacy invasion but it definitely says that they aggregate the info in the fine print when you set up a Google Home or Echo. The HomePod from Apple will at least privatize voice to an extent. While sound quality will probably take precedence on the HomePod, for the price of $349, I believe that they want a "slightly" better sounding speaker than most of the similarly priced competition. If it's put up against the Sonos Play 1, if the sound isn't better, it will be kind of sad. Google Home and Echo speakers are mediocre at best compared to a Sonos Play 1 since they are "The Internet of Things" (TIT? LOL) devices instead of decent mid priced speakers. I really hope that Apple just improves Siri so it can actually carry a conversation by 2018. Siri is pretty useless when driving and can only display information on the screen instead of talking back to you. The same is true of Siri controlling HomeKit right now.
Here is the sum total of our interaction:
As clearly indicated above, other unrelated posts were merged by the forum software, but I suppose this just serves as a corollary demonstration of the state of reading comprehension today.
Last edited:
I think someone can't count. That's 3 devices and an airport express can be tucked away almost anywhere. If a kitchen counter is all you need, though, perhaps it would work for you. It's not hard to put speakers in most rooms, though.
Well a 2.1 system is at least 3 pieces, and many need a source of power, making 4. That type of solution just isn't always practical. I have a 3.1 system in my basement. It's great, and it wasn't even that expensive all things considered. So I know what relatively good sound is. But I also have a wife. And there's no way in hell something like that would ever be in our kitchen or den. She's talked about installing speakers in the ceiling, which is a nice idea, but expensive for a pretty average sound quality. This, and/or Alexa-sonos, could a pretty reasonable compromise.
As I said, upmarket echo. And we use our echo daily. I'd be surprised if we didn't really like the apple version.
Last edited: