Tim Cook Says HomePod Experience Will Blow People Away

[AdonisSMU]

The Apple boys love to use superlatives such as 'unbelievable, amazing, and incredible' when pumping new products but you can't change the law of physics when pushing air through a small speaker.(s)
I find this product intriguing, but the killer for me is Apple's walled garden in respect to streaming music. If I can't stream my choice of music services (Spotify or Google Music) and only Apple Music, $349 seems like a hell of a lot of money for what's included.

Like Apple wont give these services an api they can hook into.,.
[doublepost=1496762799][/doublepost]

Says who? Apple released the iPhone when they didn't have development tools that they could give to third parties. As soon as that changed, the App Store was there.

Yeah he didnt. He was overruled. Steve thought html5 apps could replace native apps and it didnt work so well.

 

[AustinIllini]

Says who? Apple released the iPhone when they didn't have development tools that they could give to third parties. As soon as that changed, the App Store was there.

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jul/10/business/la-fi-tn-if-steve-jobs-apple-app-store-20130709

 

[spazzcat]

It sounds like he doesn't want to be spied on with regards to being connected to the net with the 'always on' microphones.

Even though Tim said in the keynote that it's all encrypted and anonymous...

My point is, how does he know if his smart phone mic isn't always listening...

 

[H2SO4]

I'm skeptical of the whole concept of heavily processed music reproduction. Amplifiers from companies like Yamaha and Onkyo have had DSP-driven soundfield processing for many years. I never use these features because I prefer a natural sound with as little processing as possible. It's hard for me to imagine that one tiny speaker can compete with a good Hifi setup.

I’ve always disagreed with this line of thinking. I’m not sure if when you say processing you mean digital processing or if you include analogue sound shaping too.
Never forget going into a high end shop years back looking for a graphic equaliser. The guy looked at me with obvious disgust like I was a heathen.
He then set up a demo room with music that I don't listen to and told me that I don;t need tone controls as that’s not how the composer intended me to hear the music. I told him that first off, my listening room isn’t the same size and shape as his demo room. It has different furnishings, position of furnishings, floor type and lacks carpets hung against the walls. Secondly the composer didn't record that music in my front room so it will NEVER sound the same. He couldn’t answer that and also declined a listening test where he was the ‘blind’ one whilst I changed the regular speaker cables for the ones that were £100/m.

 

[jacksmith21006]

The iPod HiFI was a terrific speaker hat was insanely high quality and also expensive. This looks to be the sequel to that terrific product, only with an even better industrial design. Otherwise, this is a great looking product that will probably sound awesome. I don't get the hate at all.

Apple is a luxury brand. Deal with it. Pay up or leave.

But the ipod hifi was on market for 18 months and pulled do to poor sales. It was also $350 but was not competing against the Google Home which face it is just going to be smarter.
[doublepost=1496772157][/doublepost]

Is $349 expensive? I don't get it. What people are comparing this to? Many Bluetooth speakers are already on $200-$300 price point, and they are just speakers. $349 is really cheap.

Seriously, are people comparing this to $20 speakers or something?

Google Home is $100 on sale and has Chromecast support so can buy a better speaker and locate away from the main unit, support multiple speakers in sync, have a much smarter speaker and still have some money in my pocket.

Prefer my setup with a Google Home on nightstand and speakers away and point towards me.

 

[whtrbt7]

Where are the midrange drivers? Apple's presentation has 7 tweeters set up in a 360 and a downward facing sub. From a speaker standpoint, this covers high and low ranges but no mention of the midrange. I also question the 7 tweeters set up in a 360 degree array which essentially leads me to believe that they are using sound reflection to project the full range. I like the fact that it is Siri, Homekit, Airplay 2 and privacy enabled but since I just set up my house with a whole Sonos setup and have access to 5.1 audio from Apple TV 4s, these new HomePods only serve to replace my Sonos Play 1 speakers (maybe?). Can we set up 5 of these speakers to get 5.1 or 7 to get 7.1? There are so many questions. The price is also relatively low compared to the Sonos Play 1 speakers that are $200 a piece retail. I really want to have some of these Homepods in my house but it doesn't address Home Theater and it doesn't address how sound is produced. I wonder how the Homepod would do in a heads up sound comparison to the Sonos Play 1s.

 

[chiefsilverback]

Two pages into the comments, lots of conjecture and speculation on a device that no one has had any experience with and not a single comment about how annoying the video in the main story was of someone reporting on the interview they had conducted. Why not just show the interview, then you wouldn't need to tell us what you asked Tim Cook, we would know, because we would hear you asking it before he answered!

As for the HomePod, having seen the initial opinions on sound quality I'm actually changing my plans for the kitchen remodel I've got underway at the moment. My plan was to install in-ceiling speakers powered by an amp/AirPort Express combo, but now I'm thinking a HomePod would be a nice add. To that end I'm going to run the cable for in-ceilings, and a second pair for some small bookshelf speakers to sit onto of the cabinets between now and December. Once I get a chance to hear/try the HomePod I can decide whether you finish the in-ceiling install, or slap a HomePod on the countertop...

 

[kdarling]

Steve didn't believe in the App Store either.

Says who?

Said Jobs himself, along with insiders, a board member, and his biographer.

"... Jobs initially resisted (apps). He didn't want outsiders to create applications for the iPhone that could mess it up, infect it with viruses, or pollute its integrity." -- Jobs Biography (pg 501, hardback)

"I don’t want people to think of this as a computer,” (Jobs) said. “I think of it as reinventing the phone.” “We define everything that is on the phone,” he said. “You don’t want your phone to be like a PC. The last thing you want is to have loaded three apps on your phone and then you go to make a call and it doesn’t work anymore. These are more like iPods than they are like computers.” --Jobs New York Times interview (1/11/2007)

“You need it to work when you need it to work. Cingular doesn’t want to see their West Coast network go down because some (third party) application messed up.” -- Jobs Newsweek interview (1/11/2007)

--

According to his biography, Jobs was also initially unconvinced that apps would benefit Apple or its iOS platform.

"When it first came out in early 2007, there were no apps you could buy from outside developers, and Jobs initially resisted allowing them," writes Isaacson. "He didn't want outsiders to create applications for the iPhone that could mess it up, infect it with viruses, or pollute its integrity."

Hence no external apps for the first iPhone. However, the book explains that behind the scenes, Apple board member Art Levinson and SVP of worldwide product marketing Phil Schiller were pressing Jobs to change his mind.

"I called him a half dozen times to lobby for the potential of the apps," says Levinson, while Schiller adds that "I couldn't imagine that we would create something as powerful as the iPhone and not empower developers to make lots of apps. I knew customers would love them."

- http://www.theguardian.com/technology/appsblog/2011/oct/24/steve-jobs-apps-iphone

 

[Rigby]

I’ve always disagreed with this line of thinking. I’m not sure if when you say processing you mean digital processing or if you include analogue sound shaping too.

It doesn't matter much. You can do what you call "analog sound shaping" in the digital domain too (which is what most modern consumer equipment does).

What I meant specifically with regard to the homepod (based on how it was described during the keynote) is that it seems to isolate parts of the sound (say, what it identifies as specific instruments or ambient noise) and manipulate them through complex algorithms (e.g. assigning them to virtual sound fields) to make the whole thing sound "good" (whatever that means), as opposed to playing back what was intended. If, for example, you have a high-quality live recording of a concert, this kind of processing is almost guaranteed to screw up the sound stage and other things, which good recording engineers spend a lot of work trying to preserve.

He then set up a demo room with music that I don't listen to and told me that I don;t need tone controls as that’s not how the composer intended me to hear the music. I told him that first off, my listening room isn’t the same size and shape as his demo room. It has different furnishings, position of furnishings, floor type and lacks carpets hung against the walls.

Part of what I would call a good hifi setup is to make sure that the room sounds reasonably neutral (e.g. by making sure there are not too many reflections, speakers are properly placed etc.). Recordings meant for release to the consumer market are specifically tuned for a typical home listening environment during post production. Digital tinkering on the playback side is likely to make things worse in most cases.

 

[Bboss]

That trippy outside is giving my iPhone screen fits when I scroll.....
[doublepost=1496709080][/doublepost]
Have to disagree, good speakers that do this really are this price and more. Alexa and others sound okay but I would never really listen to music on them and expect them to fill the room. It is a speaker that happens to have Siri. I think most people who don't follow tech will struggle with this though, probably saying something like "but the (insert assistant here) is only (blah) much."

I think where I (and maybe you) struggle is that I don't need a music blasting speaker. I would get a Siri assistant for 100 though. But that's not really what Apple was making all along was it?

What are the chances they make the homepod work with Apple TV to be a TV speaker?

 

[Pbrutto]

What are the chances they make the homepod work with Apple TV to be a TV speaker?

That's a great idea, but I doubt they will, mostly because it makes too much sense. I think they could drive the sale of pairs if they made it work with the Apple TV, but only if you have 2.

 

[matrix07]

349? Who's gonna buy this?

Me. 3 of them. A pair for my living room and one for my bedroom.

I'm considering Devialet for the past 2 years. The sound is nice. The price is high but what kills it for me is it's not AirPlay built-in. This fits my need perfectly plus much more cheaper.

If you balk at this price then there are many cheaper ones out there. You get what you pay for and all that.

 

[Sill]

Where are the midrange drivers? Apple's presentation has 7 tweeters set up in a 360 and a downward facing sub. From a speaker standpoint, this covers high and low ranges but no mention of the midrange.

Have you never seen a standard 2-way bookshelf speaker? By design and definition, they don't have a dedicated midrange driver, but that doesn't mean the speaker can't reproduce the midrange. Woofers can produce midrange, so can tweeters, they're just not as efficient at that as a dedicated midrange driver. Many high end companies put out bookshelf speakers that do a tremendous job reproducing midrange with just one small woofer between 4 and 6.5 inches and a single tweeter. I've put together plenty of mobile hifi systems that used 4x6 plate mount dash speakers, each plate containing a 4 inch mid-woofer and a 10mm or 14mm Audax tweeter. You can get incredibly good midrange out of that setup with a simple 1st order crossover, crossed around 180-200hz.

I also question the 7 tweeters set up in a 360 degree array which essentially leads me to believe that they are using sound reflection to project the full range.

Probably. I see more and more manufacturers going towards reflection games like that. I'm a purist, I believe every reflection adds artifacts. Most people don't care, unfortunately. People are easily fooled, lets just leave it at that.

Can we set up 5 of these speakers to get 5.1 or 7 to get 7.1? There are so many questions. The price is also relatively low compared to the Sonos Play 1 speakers that are $200 a piece retail. I really want to have some of these Homepods in my house but it doesn't address Home Theater and it doesn't address how sound is produced. I wonder how the Homepod would do in a heads up sound comparison to the Sonos Play 1s.

I'm eager to hear that comparison myself. The Play:1 speaker is exceptional.

I wouldn't get too wrapped up in the whole HT thing. Apple has to get their feet wet with the speaker market before they go whole hog on HT. Let them build some momentum and see what comes next. Sonos needs to update their product line for that matter. The DTS thread on their forum has hundreds of posts, complaints from people who want to be able to play Blu-ray discs without having to search for a transcoding BR player. They want HDMI inputs. A large number of them want to eliminate the Playbar and go to strict 5.1/7.1 with standalone Players and a center speaker with a built-in decoder. Apple doesn't have to catch up to anyone, they have to find their own way.
[doublepost=1496805247][/doublepost]

It will most likely stream music from iTunes, so requiring internet. I still don't get this, do you not have a smart phone?

I don't stream music. I have an enormous library. I don't want my machine hooked up to the net streaming anything, and listening in to my life with microphones. What does having a smart phone have to do with anything?

 

[Karma*Police]

'no way to hack into it physically'

'no way' + 'physically' statements are both throwing me off here.
[doublepost=1496724862][/doublepost]

it is a bit overpriced but maybe not CRAZY overpriced.

whenever they have to make comparisons to an equivalent product as a preface, you know they're gonna lay on the heat a little.

Like saying a comparable spec'd machine would cost $7000, and pricing iMac pro at $5000 like its some crazy steal.

Overpriced? Compared to what? My JBL L8 AirPlay speaker cost almost twice as much, and while they sound fantastic, like most speakers, good placement is key, and they push out sound in one direction.

HomePod apparently gets around that and is supposed to sound great no matter where you put it.. this is the "magical" part that a lot of people seem to be missing.

To say that a speaker is overpriced without hearing it sounds more like it's a budget issue for you and/or you don't really care about sound quality. Because to anyone who cares about sound quality, $350 for speakers is considered cheap. Heck, my headphones cost that much.

 

[H2SO4]

It doesn't matter much. You can do what you call "analog sound shaping" in the digital domain too (which is what most modern consumer equipment does).

What I meant specifically with regard to the homepod (based on how it was described during the keynote) is that it seems to isolate parts of the sound (say, what it identifies as specific instruments or ambient noise) and manipulate them through complex algorithms (e.g. assigning them to virtual sound fields) to make the whole thing sound "good" (whatever that means), as opposed to playing back what was intended. If, for example, you have a high-quality live recording of a concert, this kind of processing is almost guaranteed to screw up the sound stage and other things, which good recording engineers spend a lot of work trying to preserve.
Part of what I would call a good hifi setup is to make sure that the room sounds reasonably neutral (e.g. by making sure there are not too many reflections, speakers are properly placed etc.). Recordings meant for release to the consumer market are specifically tuned for a typical home listening environment during post production. Digital tinkering on the playback side is likely to make things worse in most cases.

Point taken, but……if you never knew what the original soundstage was supposed to be like, (because it wasn't recorded in your house), are you that much worse off?
Never knew they tailored recordings to the average home. But there again have they not altered/ruined the composition?

 

[pika2000]

Google Home is $100 on sale and has Chromecast support so can buy a better speaker and locate away from the main unit, support multiple speakers in sync, have a much smarter speaker and still have some money in my pocket.

Prefer my setup with a Google Home on nightstand and speakers away and point towards me.

This is not competing against Google Home. Apple called it a speaker for a reason, it is a speaker. Considering many desktop Bluetooth speakers are already in $200-$300 price range, Apple's price is not out of the ordinary. Apple is adding value to those consumers who would normally buy a desktop Bose compact speaker (example), as now they can buy a smarter speaker.

As for your solution, you are looking for a home personal assistant. You are not the target market, and the HomePod is not even the right product. It doesn't mean the HomePod is overpriced.

 

[RHD 42]

I was very excited by this speaker and was going to put money aside for it but on closer inspection I read that you have to have Apple Music to make it work.

I don't want Apple Music, I'm fine with iTunes where I have an extensive library I wish to play.

Does anyone know yet if there's a work around to the Apple Music requirement?

I can live without Siri too, it drives me nuts!
[doublepost=1496838749][/doublepost]

I don't stream music. I have an enormous library. I don't want my machine hooked up to the net streaming anything, and listening in to my life with microphones. What does having a smart phone have to do with anything?

Thank god!
I thought it was just me.
I was very keen on this speaker until I discovered that you apparently have to have Apple Music for it to work.
Deal breaker right there.

 

[MrGimper]

Just for you Sonos peeps, TruePlay tuning doesn't work on iOS 11 beta.

 

[Sill]

I was very excited by this speaker and was going to put money aside for it but on closer inspection I read that you have to have Apple Music to make it work...
I was very keen on this speaker until I discovered that you apparently have to have Apple Music for it to work.
Deal breaker right there.

That would be second on my list of deal-breakers, after the ever-present microphones. But I agree with you.
[doublepost=1496846502][/doublepost]

So would I, I was meaning as alternative to the HomePod. I certainly think for the price point I would rather make the most of the gear I already have.

I feel the same way. I'll be putting my own B&W speakers back into service as soon as I fix my preamp; there is nothing available from Apple, Sonos, or any of the other tech companies that can rival that system. And I'm fine with that.

Interesting view, certainly something to consider. I haven't experimented with anything like that, will try and have a listen to the Play:1 sometime.

While the soundstage you experience through the Sonos Players is generally lacking, and also completely dependent upon the production techniques involved, the sound quality itself is generally very good to excellent. Newer music, especially strings and vocals, comes across beautifully on the Play:1. If you have time to give it a try, pick one up from BestBuy, and take advantage of their return policy if you don't like it.

c.e: The controller app leaves a lot to be desired (Mac version kind of reminds me of the old Audio Galaxy PtP site, and can't be reskinned, iOS app requires too much jumping around) but is still adequate and gets the job done.

 

[Rigby]

Point taken, but……if you never knew what the original soundstage was supposed to be like, (because it wasn't recorded in your house), are you that much worse off?

Have you ever listened to a high-quality concert recording on a very good stereo system? It can sound almost three-dimensional. This relies on amplitudes and phase of the sound being preserved exactly, as opposed to being selectively manipulated to create an artificial "presence".

Never knew they tailored recordings to the average home. But there again have they not altered/ruined the composition?

Not if the audio engineer was any good.

 

[Dysnomia]

Thats nice of you to say, but I'm enjoying my stay on MR/the Internet. Not really sure how this contributes to the conversation

Because "they" are watching you everywhere already. The Home Pod doesn't add any new monitoring. It doesn't record you, it just listens for "hey Siri."

 

[whtrbt7]

Have you never seen a standard 2-way bookshelf speaker? By design and definition, they don't have a dedicated midrange driver, but that doesn't mean the speaker can't reproduce the midrange. Woofers can produce midrange, so can tweeters, they're just not as efficient at that as a dedicated midrange driver. Many high end companies put out bookshelf speakers that do a tremendous job reproducing midrange with just one small woofer between 4 and 6.5 inches and a single tweeter. I've put together plenty of mobile hifi systems that used 4x6 plate mount dash speakers, each plate containing a 4 inch mid-woofer and a 10mm or 14mm Audax tweeter. You can get incredibly good midrange out of that setup with a simple 1st order crossover, crossed around 180-200hz.



Probably. I see more and more manufacturers going towards reflection games like that. I'm a purist, I believe every reflection adds artifacts. Most people don't care, unfortunately. People are easily fooled, lets just leave it at that.



I'm eager to hear that comparison myself. The Play:1 speaker is exceptional.

I wouldn't get too wrapped up in the whole HT thing. Apple has to get their feet wet with the speaker market before they go whole hog on HT. Let them build some momentum and see what comes next. Sonos needs to update their product line for that matter. The DTS thread on their forum has hundreds of posts, complaints from people who want to be able to play Blu-ray discs without having to search for a transcoding BR player. They want HDMI inputs. A large number of them want to eliminate the Playbar and go to strict 5.1/7.1 with standalone Players and a center speaker with a built-in decoder. Apple doesn't have to catch up to anyone, they have to find their own way.
[doublepost=1496805247][/doublepost]

I don't stream music. I have an enormous library. I don't want my machine hooked up to the net streaming anything, and listening in to my life with microphones. What does having a smart phone have to do with anything?

I agree that I'm jumping the gun. I want the future now. While I recognize that tweeters and woofers can reproduce mid-tones to a decent degree, it's in my opinion what keeps the Apple HomePod from being a phenomenal speaker. The same goes for the reflection tech since it does create artifacts unless you have rugs or sound proofing in the room (but then reflection doesn't work and you have a speaker that can't create full bodied sound). Regarding the whole HT thing, I've seen the threads on DTS and DSP for the Sonos. Sonos isn't really a HiFi system IMO but rather a connected wireless system for the home. It does a good enough job of being that connected wireless system. HT is a part of that system but Sonos hasn't really fleshed out how to deal with DSP, DTS, 7.1, HDMI, etc.... I wish Sonos would put HDMI on their playbar or have a way to separate channels properly for HT systems. The HomePod on the other hand is basically starting as just a music speaker which I realize that they have to start somewhere. The concept isn't bad for mass market, it's just that for us Sonos owners, we want a replacement since development seems slow.

 

[LordQ]

I have a SONY SRS-X7 so not sure if I might want to get this. Interested nonetheless

 

[H2SO4]

Have you ever listened to a high-quality concert recording on a very good stereo system? It can sound almost three-dimensional. This relies on amplitudes and phase of the sound being preserved exactly, as opposed to being selectively manipulated to create an artificial "presence".
Not if the audio engineer was any good.

Yes, I used to be into audio in a big way when I was younger. Basically audio is like food. Start with good ingredients and tailor to your taste.

 

[Sill]

Yes, I used to be into audio in a big way when I was younger. Basically audio is like food. Start with good ingredients and tailor to your taste.

So true.
[doublepost=1496885295][/doublepost]

I agree that I'm jumping the gun. I want the future now. While I recognize that tweeters and woofers can reproduce mid-tones to a decent degree, it's in my opinion what keeps the Apple HomePod from being a phenomenal speaker.

I'd put a 20 year old pair of Canton bookshelf speakers against that opinion. Throw a hundred watts and a good source at some Ergo, Plus F, or Karat minis and see how much you miss those midrange drivers.

The same goes for the reflection tech since it does create artifacts unless you have rugs or sound proofing in the room (but then reflection doesn't work and you have a speaker that can't create full bodied sound). Regarding the whole HT thing, I've seen the threads on DTS and DSP for the Sonos. Sonos isn't really a HiFi system IMO but rather a connected wireless system for the home. It does a good enough job of being that connected wireless system. HT is a part of that system but Sonos hasn't really fleshed out how to deal with DSP, DTS, 7.1, HDMI, etc.... I wish Sonos would put HDMI on their playbar or have a way to separate channels properly for HT systems. The HomePod on the other hand is basically starting as just a music speaker which I realize that they have to start somewhere. The concept isn't bad for mass market, it's just that for us Sonos owners, we want a replacement since development seems slow.

The consensus amongst people on the forums is that Sonos was holding out for the Apple checkbook, hoping that Cook would see value in their company. He certainly thought a headphone manufacturer was worth about 6 times what it should have been, so they had a good chance, especially with Apple-level design and build quality. They were abandoned at the altar though. That was before the PlayBase was announced, so maybe they were redirecting resources to what they thought was important the whole time, which was... making a TV stand speaker when the lion's share of the market was using wall mounts?
Sonos is being left behind in a big way. I'll never get rid of mine, but its sad to see any promising company waste a commanding lead all the while proclaiming they're exactly where they always wanted to be.