How HomePod leverages Apple's silicon expertise to deliver advanced audio performance

1246

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 117
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 6,070member
    danvm said:

    danvm said:
    tmay said:
    danvm said:
    danvm said:
    It would be impossible to cobble a similar platform out of the terrible speakers built into existing Echo and Dot appliances, and neither Amazon, Google, Samsung, Spotify or other speaker makers really have to clout to produce such a sophisticated, premium speaker and sell it to a critical mass of users globally.

    Based in many reviews, the HomePod sound quality is very similar to the Google Home Max, and I wouldn't consider neither of them premium speakers.  And to say that Samsung is not capable of doing sophisticated premium speaker is non sense.  They own Harman Audio, which includes companies like Harman-Kardon, AKG, Infinity and Revel, among others.  Those companies have years of experience in the audio market.  We'll have to see the results of the final product, but I wouldn't count them out.  

    The kicker on that sentence is "and sell it to a critical mass of users globally."

    Samsung developed a Gear watch platform, Tizen, Galaxy Player, all manner of tablets, and no doubt it can make a speaker. But to create an audio platform that matters, it would need to learn how to sell those products to people who would pay any money for them.

    Google hardware is a bullshit exercise in Verge fapping and nobody buys any of it in commercially relevant volumes. It doesn't matter that some bloggers can't tell the difference between a basic speaker and HomePod. If those reviews mattered Google would be a significant hardware seller rather than a source of billowing hot bullshit.
    What about the other terms that are in the sentence, "sophisticated, premium speaker"?  Isn't that more important than "sell it to a critical mass of users globally"?  For a customer, it should be, and for me, it is.  Apple didn't make a premium speaker.  They made a smart speaker that sound as good as the competition, and even below them when you consider how far is Siri from Alexa and Google Assistance.  Even in the AppleInsider comparison of the HomePod with Google Home Max the reviewer conclude "Fortunately, there isn't enough of a difference between the two to justify buying one or the other for sound quality reasons alone."  But it seems like you are focused in sales numbers, while I'm more in the line of sound quality.  


    DanVM,

    Since you haven't listened to the speakers, and Daniel has, maybe you really don't know if the HomePod is a "sophisticated, premium speaker", but the HomePod is certainly an order of magnitude more "sophisticated" in its audio design than any other company's product in the smart speaker space, and likely more sophisticated that many of the AudioPhile speakers that you are referencing that are quite a bit more expensive.

    Care to explain how important is the "sophisticated" audio design in the HomePod when the results, based in the AppleInsider comparison with the Home Max, is that "there isn't enough of a difference between the two to justify buying one or the other for sound quality reasons alone."?  And that's the same feedback I had read in many side-to-side comparisons.  BTW, when you mention audiophile speakers in your post, do you really think that the HomePod it's at that level of sound quality?
    http://www.loopinsight.com/2018/01/24/on-homepod-and-audio-quality/

    The room correction applied after probing its own position isn’t simplistic DSP of frequency response, as the speaker has seven drivers that are used to create a beamforming speaker array,. so they can direct specific sound in specific directions. The only other speakers that do this is the Beolab 90, and Lexicon SL-1. The Beolab 90 is $85,000/pair, and no price tag is set for the Lexicon, but the expectation in the industry is “astronomical”.

    All that technology, and it's sounds as good as the competition. 
    Again, not according to the many sources of reviews and redditors. Aside from Pogue’s quite flawed test, the general consensus is it it sounds better than the more expensive options in this form factor.
    edited February 28 watto_cobra
  • Reply 62 of 117
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 6,070member

    danvm said:
    danvm said:
    tmay said:
    danvm said:
    tmay said:
    danvm said:
    It would be impossible to cobble a similar platform out of the terrible speakers built into existing Echo and Dot appliances, and neither Amazon, Google, Samsung, Spotify or other speaker makers really have to clout to produce such a sophisticated, premium speaker and sell it to a critical mass of users globally.

    Based in many reviews, the HomePod sound quality is very similar to the Google Home Max, and I wouldn't consider neither of them premium speakers.  And to say that Samsung is not capable of doing sophisticated premium speaker is non sense.  They own Harman Audio, which includes companies like Harman-Kardon, AKG, Infinity and Revel, among others.  Those companies have years of experience in the audio market.  We'll have to see the results of the final product, but I wouldn't count them out.  

    Gee, seems like Samsung is going to play ketchup, yet again!

    Meanwhile, Apple just created another $billion plus a year revenue stream. 


    Definitely they are behind in this market, same as Apple is.  But I wouldn't say that Samsung is not capable of designing a premium speaker, considering they own a company like Harman Audio.  
    Samsung is further behind in this market than Apple, since Apple has the premiere distribution network, and customers, as Daniel noted.
    I'll rephrase, Samsung is not behind, they are not in the market yet.
    By that same logic Apple wasn’t behind in the market, despite what everyone else has been saying for a year. 

    If that's the case, Apple is behind, considering that have a product in the market.
    Apple isn’t behind because they’re ahead in audio quality, which is the job-to-be-done this product is positioned for. You can rate it on an a digital assistant scale, but that simply isn’t its use case. They’re quite clear that it’s positioned for music. It’s ahead, not behind. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 63 of 117
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 6,070member

    danvm said:
    danvm said:
    jcs2305 said:
    danvm said:
    It would be impossible to cobble a similar platform out of the terrible speakers built into existing Echo and Dot appliances, and neither Amazon, Google, Samsung, Spotify or other speaker makers really have to clout to produce such a sophisticated, premium speaker and sell it to a critical mass of users globally.

    Based in many reviews, the HomePod sound quality is very similar to the Google Home Max, and I wouldn't consider neither of them premium speakers.  And to say that Samsung is not capable of doing sophisticated premium speaker is non sense.  They own Harman Audio, which includes companies like Harman-Kardon, AKG, Infinity and Revel, among others.  Those companies have years of experience in the audio market.  We'll have to see the results of the final product, but I wouldn't count them out.  

    If these two speakers aren't premium than please elaborate what you would consider premium?  Also Samsung has barely owned Harman for a year so don't go acting like they are suddenly deeply involved in design with these companies as of yet.

    I don't consider speaker the size of the HomePod or Sound Max premium.  When you listen to high end speakers, that cost thousands of dollars, the definition of premium changes.  IMO, the HomePod may sound good for a $350 small speaker, but that doesn't means it's a premium quality speaker.  And yes, the Samsung acquisition was recent, that could be the reason they don't have a smart speaker in the market. 
    What you consider is largely irrelevant, as “quality” is a relative term that doesn’t imply a given form factor size. The use case for the HP is a shelf speaker, not a hifi system. So indeed it can be a high-quality speaker for this use case and form factor. We’re comparing like to like here. 
    If you noticed, I use the term "high end speakers" and not "high quality" as you mention.  Yes, the HomePod, Home Max and Sonos can be considered "high quality" speakers in the smartspeaker category.  But they are not "high end" speakers.
    Actually that’s exactly what you said:

    ”that doesn't means it's a premium quality speaker”

    ...to which I said yes, it is a quality speaker. (Tip: click on “show previous quotes” to review what is being replied to). 
    watto_cobraapplepieguy
  • Reply 64 of 117
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 6,070member

    danvm said:
    danvm said:
    danvm said:
    It would be impossible to cobble a similar platform out of the terrible speakers built into existing Echo and Dot appliances, and neither Amazon, Google, Samsung, Spotify or other speaker makers really have to clout to produce such a sophisticated, premium speaker and sell it to a critical mass of users globally.

    Based in many reviews, the HomePod sound quality is very similar to the Google Home Max, 

    That isn’t what I’ve read at all. 
    I suppose you already read the AppleInsider comparison with the Sound Max, and they concluded "Fortunately, there isn't enough of a difference between the two to justify buying one or the other for sound quality reasons alone."  

    There are a few blind tests, with the same results,

    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/head-head-apple-homepod-really-sound-best-160346138.html

    And the one I think you trust more, the Consumer Reports review, which said that the competition is better.
    https://www.consumerreports.org/smart-speakers/apple-homepod-early-test-results/

    Pogue’s test was hopefully flawed - not double blind, used a non acoustically-neutral curtain, and ordered the test playback in the same order every time. 

    And CR is a joke. 

    What I’ve read from people on reddit and the blogosphere said HP is notably better, and cheaper. 


    First you said "that isn’t what I’ve read at all", but it seems you have read those reviews before.  If you don't agree with them is another story.  Again, not all reviews agree that the HomePod are the best speakers compared to Google and Sonos products. 

    Both statements are of course true. I read these two outliers, which are flawed as I conveniently pointed out for you, and which you conveniently ignored, and I read the majority of other reviews that said otherwise.

    (Psst — your agenda is showing)   
    jony0watto_cobraapplepieguy
  • Reply 65 of 117
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 6,070member

    danvm said:
    jcs2305 said:
    danvm said:
    It would be impossible to cobble a similar platform out of the terrible speakers built into existing Echo and Dot appliances, and neither Amazon, Google, Samsung, Spotify or other speaker makers really have to clout to produce such a sophisticated, premium speaker and sell it to a critical mass of users globally.

    Based in many reviews, the HomePod sound quality is very similar to the Google Home Max, and I wouldn't consider neither of them premium speakers.  And to say that Samsung is not capable of doing sophisticated premium speaker is non sense.  They own Harman Audio, which includes companies like Harman-Kardon, AKG, Infinity and Revel, among others.  Those companies have years of experience in the audio market.  We'll have to see the results of the final product, but I wouldn't count them out.  

    If these two speakers aren't premium than please elaborate what you would consider premium?  Also Samsung has barely owned Harman for a year so don't go acting like they are suddenly deeply involved in design with these companies as of yet.

    I don't consider speaker the size of the HomePod or Sound Max premium.  When you listen to high end speakers, that cost thousands of dollars, the definition of premium changes.  IMO, the HomePod may sound good for a $350 small speaker, but that doesn't means it's a premium quality speaker.  And yes, the Samsung acquisition was recent, that could be the reason they don't have a smart speaker in the market. 
    What you consider is largely irrelevant, as “quality” is a relative term that doesn’t imply a given form factor size. The use case for the HP is a shelf speaker, not a hifi system. So indeed it can be a high-quality speaker for this use case and form factor. We’re comparing like to like here. 

    Why waste time on this troll? The only downside to blocking trolls (as I've done with this one) is when they are quoted by others and I see their garbage again.
    Yeah it’s about time to PLONK this guy. 
    williamlondonjony0watto_cobraapplepieguy
  • Reply 66 of 117
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 6,070member

    gatorguy said:

    danvm said:
    danvm said:
    It would be impossible to cobble a similar platform out of the terrible speakers built into existing Echo and Dot appliances, and neither Amazon, Google, Samsung, Spotify or other speaker makers really have to clout to produce such a sophisticated, premium speaker and sell it to a critical mass of users globally.

    Based in many reviews, the HomePod sound quality is very similar to the Google Home Max, and I wouldn't consider neither of them premium speakers.  And to say that Samsung is not capable of doing sophisticated premium speaker is non sense.  They own Harman Audio, which includes companies like Harman-Kardon, AKG, Infinity and Revel, among others.  Those companies have years of experience in the audio market.  We'll have to see the results of the final product, but I wouldn't count them out.  

    The kicker on that sentence is "and sell it to a critical mass of users globally."

    Samsung developed a Gear watch platform, Tizen, Galaxy Player, all manner of tablets, and no doubt it can make a speaker. But to create an audio platform that matters, it would need to learn how to sell those products to people who would pay any money for them.

    Google hardware is a bullshit exercise in Verge fapping and nobody buys any of it in commercially relevant volumes. It doesn't matter that some bloggers can't tell the difference between a basic speaker and HomePod. If those reviews mattered Google would be a significant hardware seller rather than a source of billowing hot bullshit.
    What about the other terms that are in the sentence, "sophisticated, premium speaker"?  Isn't that more important than "sell it to a critical mass of users globally"?  For a customer, it should be, and for me, it is.  Apple didn't make a premium speaker.  They made a smart speaker that sound as good as the competition, and even below them when you consider how far is Siri from Alexa and Google Assistance.  Even in the AppleInsider comparison of the HomePod with Google Home Max the reviewer conclude "Fortunately, there isn't enough of a difference between the two to justify buying one or the other for sound quality reasons alone."  But it seems like you are focused in sales numbers, while I'm more in the line of sound quality.  
    Every review I’ve read said it sounds notably better than the other speakers, including more expensive products like the Max.
    There have been a few reviewers that found better sound from a HomePod competitor, Sonos and Home Max being ones off the top of my head, but yeah the HomePod is the one getting most of the attention. That some folks like "not-a-HomePod" sound better shouldn't be any real surprise since your perception of sound is subjective as is everyone else's.
    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/head-head-apple-homepod-really-sound-best-160346138.html
    As i’ve already detailed on this very threat Pogue’s methods are suspect and the flaws pointed out on other sites. Not double blind. Not an acoustically clear sheet draped in front. Same order of devices during playback (should be changed to prevent last-is-best bias, etc). 

    Poor “test”. For a tech writer Pogue is pretty clueless. After his star days ended he seemed to shift his style, (not unlike Mossberg when he went to, uh, the Verge, king apple troll rag). 
    edited February 28 jony0watto_cobra
  • Reply 67 of 117
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 1,405member

    k2kw said:
    danvm said:
    It would be impossible to cobble a similar platform out of the terrible speakers built into existing Echo and Dot appliances, and neither Amazon, Google, Samsung, Spotify or other speaker makers really have to clout to produce such a sophisticated, premium speaker and sell it to a critical mass of users globally.

    Based in many reviews, the HomePod sound quality is very similar to the Google Home Max, and I wouldn't consider neither of them premium speakers.  And to say that Samsung is not capable of doing sophisticated premium speaker is non sense.  They own Harman Audio, which includes companies like Harman-Kardon, AKG, Infinity and Revel, among others.  Those companies have years of experience in the audio market.  We'll have to see the results of the final product, but I wouldn't count them out.  

    The kicker on that sentence is "and sell it to a critical mass of users globally."

    Samsung developed a Gear watch platform, Tizen, Galaxy Player, all manner of tablets, and no doubt it can make a speaker. But to create an audio platform that matters, it would need to learn how to sell those products to people who would pay any money for them.

    Google hardware is a bullshit exercise in Verge fapping and nobody buys any of it in commercially relevant volumes. It doesn't matter that some bloggers can't tell the difference between a basic speaker and HomePod. If those reviews mattered Google would be a significant hardware seller rather than a source of billowing hot bullshit.
    I think Google has put the assistant into other third party speakers.  By coming out with the Home Max Google is acting like a Scorpion again with their Partners.   The HomeMax seems more likely to under cut Sonos's Play:5.   Looks a little like a copy too.

    HomePod looks impressive and would have been great if Siri had been significantly better.   I'll be intested when Apple comes out with a sound bar and bigger HomePodPlus.
     I wouldn’t hold your breath. Becoming a home theater speaker company doesn’t seem like a core part of Apple in the way that music is “in their DNA” as they like to say. 
    I understand and agree.  I think that if Apple expands the HomePod into a family of speaker Products it will still be at least 3 year before another product shows up.  Maybe 5 years.  Apple has plenty of other things to work on.
  • Reply 68 of 117
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,451member

    gatorguy said:

    danvm said:
    danvm said:
    It would be impossible to cobble a similar platform out of the terrible speakers built into existing Echo and Dot appliances, and neither Amazon, Google, Samsung, Spotify or other speaker makers really have to clout to produce such a sophisticated, premium speaker and sell it to a critical mass of users globally.

    Based in many reviews, the HomePod sound quality is very similar to the Google Home Max, and I wouldn't consider neither of them premium speakers.  And to say that Samsung is not capable of doing sophisticated premium speaker is non sense.  They own Harman Audio, which includes companies like Harman-Kardon, AKG, Infinity and Revel, among others.  Those companies have years of experience in the audio market.  We'll have to see the results of the final product, but I wouldn't count them out.  

    The kicker on that sentence is "and sell it to a critical mass of users globally."

    Samsung developed a Gear watch platform, Tizen, Galaxy Player, all manner of tablets, and no doubt it can make a speaker. But to create an audio platform that matters, it would need to learn how to sell those products to people who would pay any money for them.

    Google hardware is a bullshit exercise in Verge fapping and nobody buys any of it in commercially relevant volumes. It doesn't matter that some bloggers can't tell the difference between a basic speaker and HomePod. If those reviews mattered Google would be a significant hardware seller rather than a source of billowing hot bullshit.
    What about the other terms that are in the sentence, "sophisticated, premium speaker"?  Isn't that more important than "sell it to a critical mass of users globally"?  For a customer, it should be, and for me, it is.  Apple didn't make a premium speaker.  They made a smart speaker that sound as good as the competition, and even below them when you consider how far is Siri from Alexa and Google Assistance.  Even in the AppleInsider comparison of the HomePod with Google Home Max the reviewer conclude "Fortunately, there isn't enough of a difference between the two to justify buying one or the other for sound quality reasons alone."  But it seems like you are focused in sales numbers, while I'm more in the line of sound quality.  
    Every review I’ve read said it sounds notably better than the other speakers, including more expensive products like the Max.
    There have been a few reviewers that found better sound from a HomePod competitor, Sonos and Home Max being ones off the top of my head, but yeah the HomePod is the one getting most of the attention. That some folks like "not-a-HomePod" sound better shouldn't be any real surprise since your perception of sound is subjective as is everyone else's.
    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/head-head-apple-homepod-really-sound-best-160346138.html
    As i’ve already detailed on this very threat Pogue’s methods are suspect and the flaws pointed out on other sites. Not double blind. Not an acoustically clear sheet draped in front. Same order of devices during playback (should be changed to prevent last-is-best bias, etc). 

    Poor “test”. For a tech writer Pogue is pretty clueless. After his star days ended he seemed to shift his style, (not unlike Mossberg when he went to, uh, the Verge, king apple troll rag). 
    So was Apple's when they did their head-to-head comparison with the Max and Sonos for the invited few before it went on sale. You did read Pogue's description of the Apple setup. You didn't say you had any issue with that one. I suspect that's because it had results you liked. If Pogue had come up with the same "HomePod wins!" you'd still like him too rather than stretching to question whether a curtain hanging in front of each and every one of them was "acoustically clear" and calling Pogue clueless.
    edited February 28 muthuk_vanalingamrogifan_new
  • Reply 69 of 117
    danvmdanvm Posts: 693member
    danvm said:

    danvm said:
    tmay said:
    danvm said:
    danvm said:
    It would be impossible to cobble a similar platform out of the terrible speakers built into existing Echo and Dot appliances, and neither Amazon, Google, Samsung, Spotify or other speaker makers really have to clout to produce such a sophisticated, premium speaker and sell it to a critical mass of users globally.

    Based in many reviews, the HomePod sound quality is very similar to the Google Home Max, and I wouldn't consider neither of them premium speakers.  And to say that Samsung is not capable of doing sophisticated premium speaker is non sense.  They own Harman Audio, which includes companies like Harman-Kardon, AKG, Infinity and Revel, among others.  Those companies have years of experience in the audio market.  We'll have to see the results of the final product, but I wouldn't count them out.  

    The kicker on that sentence is "and sell it to a critical mass of users globally."

    Samsung developed a Gear watch platform, Tizen, Galaxy Player, all manner of tablets, and no doubt it can make a speaker. But to create an audio platform that matters, it would need to learn how to sell those products to people who would pay any money for them.

    Google hardware is a bullshit exercise in Verge fapping and nobody buys any of it in commercially relevant volumes. It doesn't matter that some bloggers can't tell the difference between a basic speaker and HomePod. If those reviews mattered Google would be a significant hardware seller rather than a source of billowing hot bullshit.
    What about the other terms that are in the sentence, "sophisticated, premium speaker"?  Isn't that more important than "sell it to a critical mass of users globally"?  For a customer, it should be, and for me, it is.  Apple didn't make a premium speaker.  They made a smart speaker that sound as good as the competition, and even below them when you consider how far is Siri from Alexa and Google Assistance.  Even in the AppleInsider comparison of the HomePod with Google Home Max the reviewer conclude "Fortunately, there isn't enough of a difference between the two to justify buying one or the other for sound quality reasons alone."  But it seems like you are focused in sales numbers, while I'm more in the line of sound quality.  


    DanVM,

    Since you haven't listened to the speakers, and Daniel has, maybe you really don't know if the HomePod is a "sophisticated, premium speaker", but the HomePod is certainly an order of magnitude more "sophisticated" in its audio design than any other company's product in the smart speaker space, and likely more sophisticated that many of the AudioPhile speakers that you are referencing that are quite a bit more expensive.

    Care to explain how important is the "sophisticated" audio design in the HomePod when the results, based in the AppleInsider comparison with the Home Max, is that "there isn't enough of a difference between the two to justify buying one or the other for sound quality reasons alone."?  And that's the same feedback I had read in many side-to-side comparisons.  BTW, when you mention audiophile speakers in your post, do you really think that the HomePod it's at that level of sound quality?
    http://www.loopinsight.com/2018/01/24/on-homepod-and-audio-quality/

    The room correction applied after probing its own position isn’t simplistic DSP of frequency response, as the speaker has seven drivers that are used to create a beamforming speaker array,. so they can direct specific sound in specific directions. The only other speakers that do this is the Beolab 90, and Lexicon SL-1. The Beolab 90 is $85,000/pair, and no price tag is set for the Lexicon, but the expectation in the industry is “astronomical”.

    All that technology, and it's sounds as good as the competition. 
    Again, not according to the many sources of reviews and redditors. Aside from Pogue’s quite flawed test, the general consensus is it it sounds better than the more expensive options in this form factor.
    How do you know that those positives reviews aren't as flawed as Pogue's tests?  I find interesting how the negatives reviews are, in your opinion flawed, while positive ones are to be trusted. Could it be that your agenda is showing too?... :D
    muthuk_vanalingamrogifan_new
  • Reply 70 of 117
    danvmdanvm Posts: 693member

    danvm said:
    danvm said:
    tmay said:
    danvm said:
    tmay said:
    danvm said:
    It would be impossible to cobble a similar platform out of the terrible speakers built into existing Echo and Dot appliances, and neither Amazon, Google, Samsung, Spotify or other speaker makers really have to clout to produce such a sophisticated, premium speaker and sell it to a critical mass of users globally.

    Based in many reviews, the HomePod sound quality is very similar to the Google Home Max, and I wouldn't consider neither of them premium speakers.  And to say that Samsung is not capable of doing sophisticated premium speaker is non sense.  They own Harman Audio, which includes companies like Harman-Kardon, AKG, Infinity and Revel, among others.  Those companies have years of experience in the audio market.  We'll have to see the results of the final product, but I wouldn't count them out.  

    Gee, seems like Samsung is going to play ketchup, yet again!

    Meanwhile, Apple just created another $billion plus a year revenue stream. 


    Definitely they are behind in this market, same as Apple is.  But I wouldn't say that Samsung is not capable of designing a premium speaker, considering they own a company like Harman Audio.  
    Samsung is further behind in this market than Apple, since Apple has the premiere distribution network, and customers, as Daniel noted.
    I'll rephrase, Samsung is not behind, they are not in the market yet.
    By that same logic Apple wasn’t behind in the market, despite what everyone else has been saying for a year. 

    If that's the case, Apple is behind, considering that have a product in the market.
    Apple isn’t behind because they’re ahead in audio quality, which is the job-to-be-done this product is positioned for. You can rate it on an a digital assistant scale, but that simply isn’t its use case. They’re quite clear that it’s positioned for music. It’s ahead, not behind. 
    Remember, not everyone think they are ahead in sound quality, including AppleInsider comparison with the Home Max.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 71 of 117
    danvmdanvm Posts: 693member

    danvm said:
    danvm said:
    danvm said:
    It would be impossible to cobble a similar platform out of the terrible speakers built into existing Echo and Dot appliances, and neither Amazon, Google, Samsung, Spotify or other speaker makers really have to clout to produce such a sophisticated, premium speaker and sell it to a critical mass of users globally.

    Based in many reviews, the HomePod sound quality is very similar to the Google Home Max, 

    That isn’t what I’ve read at all. 
    I suppose you already read the AppleInsider comparison with the Sound Max, and they concluded "Fortunately, there isn't enough of a difference between the two to justify buying one or the other for sound quality reasons alone."  

    There are a few blind tests, with the same results,

    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/head-head-apple-homepod-really-sound-best-160346138.html

    And the one I think you trust more, the Consumer Reports review, which said that the competition is better.
    https://www.consumerreports.org/smart-speakers/apple-homepod-early-test-results/

    Pogue’s test was hopefully flawed - not double blind, used a non acoustically-neutral curtain, and ordered the test playback in the same order every time. 

    And CR is a joke. 

    What I’ve read from people on reddit and the blogosphere said HP is notably better, and cheaper. 


    First you said "that isn’t what I’ve read at all", but it seems you have read those reviews before.  If you don't agree with them is another story.  Again, not all reviews agree that the HomePod are the best speakers compared to Google and Sonos products. 

    Both statements are of course true. I read these two outliers, which are flawed as I conveniently pointed out for you, and which you conveniently ignored, and I read the majority of other reviews that said otherwise.

    (Psst — your agenda is showing)   
    So you think that negatives reviews are flawed, but did you research how positives one were done?  Because from what I have read, most reviews were done in a similar way, having speaker side by side. 
    edited February 28 muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 72 of 117
    dewmedewme Posts: 1,810member
    cpsro said:
    cpsro said:
    Too bad it (re)produces infrasound found in many live audio streams.  Very annoying.
    What does that mean?  
    https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/02/27/ice-schaaf-warning-of-recent-sweep-was-irresponsible-decision/
    tmay said:
    cpsro said:
    Too bad it (re)produces infrasound found in many live audio streams.  Very annoying.
    Infrasound is below the limits of human hearing, first of all, and almost certainly below the limits of what the HomePod can reproduce.
    Infrasound is below the frequency where you'd hear a "tone," but it's very perceptible as pressure waves hitting the eardrums.  The HomePod is quite capable of producing annoying infrasound--predictable from the high excursion subwoofer it contains--and as evidenced by my personal experience listening to NPR radio on the device. Outdoor venues often have wind noise and in-studio programs sometimes pick up people blowing on the mic as they speak.
    Infrasonic tones are indeed below the threshold of human hearing (but not elephants) but remember that what the original recording captured, what the speaker emits, and your ears detect is complex sound, not discrete frequencies like you see displayed on a frequency analyzer that decomposes complex sound into discrete frequencies using Fourier transformation (typically using FFT processing). Complex sound means that all of the contributing frequencies are superimposed on top of one another in time and amplitude, which is also referred to as “beat” or “beating.” Since different frequencies overlapped in time have different phases some of the combined/complex sound will overlap constructively and some will overlap destructively. For any two differing frequencies/tones superimposed in this way by you’ll see four discrete frequencies being generated, the sum of the two frequencies, the difference between the two frequencies, and the two original frequencies. This artifact of superposition/beating can result in infrasonic tones leading to the generation of tones that are in the range of human hearing (nominally 20 Hz - 20 kHz). 

    Incidentally, this superposition/beat behavior is exactly how active noise canceling (ANC) headphones suppress unwanted tones. If you superimpose a tone with the same exact frequency as the unwanted tone but 180 degrees out of phase and at the same amplitude it will cancel out the unwanted tone. This of course must be done in real time by sampling the complex sound, decomposing it to find the exact frequency and amplitude of the unwanted tone, and then injecting the cancellation tone at exactly the right amplitude and phase. There’s no reason why ANC could not be used to remove the infrasonic components from the HomePod speaker. I’ve never knowingly detected any degradation due to infrasonic effects, but I don’t have a trained ear or even know what to listen for. But these frequencies would absolutely show up on a spectrum analyzer. 
    GG1jony0watto_cobra
  • Reply 73 of 117
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,248member
    gatorguy said:

    gatorguy said:

    danvm said:
    danvm said:
    It would be impossible to cobble a similar platform out of the terrible speakers built into existing Echo and Dot appliances, and neither Amazon, Google, Samsung, Spotify or other speaker makers really have to clout to produce such a sophisticated, premium speaker and sell it to a critical mass of users globally.

    Based in many reviews, the HomePod sound quality is very similar to the Google Home Max, and I wouldn't consider neither of them premium speakers.  And to say that Samsung is not capable of doing sophisticated premium speaker is non sense.  They own Harman Audio, which includes companies like Harman-Kardon, AKG, Infinity and Revel, among others.  Those companies have years of experience in the audio market.  We'll have to see the results of the final product, but I wouldn't count them out.  

    The kicker on that sentence is "and sell it to a critical mass of users globally."

    Samsung developed a Gear watch platform, Tizen, Galaxy Player, all manner of tablets, and no doubt it can make a speaker. But to create an audio platform that matters, it would need to learn how to sell those products to people who would pay any money for them.

    Google hardware is a bullshit exercise in Verge fapping and nobody buys any of it in commercially relevant volumes. It doesn't matter that some bloggers can't tell the difference between a basic speaker and HomePod. If those reviews mattered Google would be a significant hardware seller rather than a source of billowing hot bullshit.
    What about the other terms that are in the sentence, "sophisticated, premium speaker"?  Isn't that more important than "sell it to a critical mass of users globally"?  For a customer, it should be, and for me, it is.  Apple didn't make a premium speaker.  They made a smart speaker that sound as good as the competition, and even below them when you consider how far is Siri from Alexa and Google Assistance.  Even in the AppleInsider comparison of the HomePod with Google Home Max the reviewer conclude "Fortunately, there isn't enough of a difference between the two to justify buying one or the other for sound quality reasons alone."  But it seems like you are focused in sales numbers, while I'm more in the line of sound quality.  
    Every review I’ve read said it sounds notably better than the other speakers, including more expensive products like the Max.
    There have been a few reviewers that found better sound from a HomePod competitor, Sonos and Home Max being ones off the top of my head, but yeah the HomePod is the one getting most of the attention. That some folks like "not-a-HomePod" sound better shouldn't be any real surprise since your perception of sound is subjective as is everyone else's.
    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/head-head-apple-homepod-really-sound-best-160346138.html
    As i’ve already detailed on this very threat Pogue’s methods are suspect and the flaws pointed out on other sites. Not double blind. Not an acoustically clear sheet draped in front. Same order of devices during playback (should be changed to prevent last-is-best bias, etc). 

    Poor “test”. For a tech writer Pogue is pretty clueless. After his star days ended he seemed to shift his style, (not unlike Mossberg when he went to, uh, the Verge, king apple troll rag). 
    So was Apple's when they did their head-to-head comparison with the Max and Sonos for the invited few before it went on sale. You did read Pogue's description of the Apple setup. You didn't say you had any issue with that one. I suspect that's because it had results you liked. If Pogue had come up with the same "HomePod wins!" you'd still like him too rather than stretching to question whether a curtain hanging in front of each and every one of them was "acoustically clear" and calling Pogue clueless.
    I complained about both CR's and David Pogue's test, due to obvious flaws, and a fundamental inability to comprehend the differing technologies, and even I threw Apple in with those two for staging a bullshit demo.

    Even now, I find way too much bullshit thrown around by self appointed audio experts, aka audiophiles, of which I am not, by the way; I received a certificate in a cereal box!

    As I've stated in the past, I find many commentators lazy and incurious, and prone to dogma. Mostly just parochial arguments.
    gatorguywatto_cobra
  • Reply 74 of 117
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,248member
    dewme said:
    cpsro said:
    cpsro said:
    Too bad it (re)produces infrasound found in many live audio streams.  Very annoying.
    What does that mean?  
    https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/02/27/ice-schaaf-warning-of-recent-sweep-was-irresponsible-decision/
    tmay said:
    cpsro said:
    Too bad it (re)produces infrasound found in many live audio streams.  Very annoying.
    Infrasound is below the limits of human hearing, first of all, and almost certainly below the limits of what the HomePod can reproduce.
    Infrasound is below the frequency where you'd hear a "tone," but it's very perceptible as pressure waves hitting the eardrums.  The HomePod is quite capable of producing annoying infrasound--predictable from the high excursion subwoofer it contains--and as evidenced by my personal experience listening to NPR radio on the device. Outdoor venues often have wind noise and in-studio programs sometimes pick up people blowing on the mic as they speak.
    Infrasonic tones are indeed below the threshold of human hearing (but not elephants) but remember that what the original recording captured, what the speaker emits, and your ears detect is complex sound, not discrete frequencies like you see displayed on a frequency analyzer that decomposes complex sound into discrete frequencies using Fourier transformation (typically using FFT processing). Complex sound means that all of the contributing frequencies are superimposed on top of one another in time and amplitude, which is also referred to as “beat” or “beating.” Since different frequencies overlapped in time have different phases some of the combined/complex sound will overlap constructively and some will overlap destructively. For any two differing frequencies/tones superimposed in this way by you’ll see four discrete frequencies being generated, the sum of the two frequencies, the difference between the two frequencies, and the two original frequencies. This artifact of superposition/beating can result in infrasonic tones leading to the generation of tones that are in the range of human hearing (nominally 20 Hz - 20 kHz). 

    Incidentally, this superposition/beat behavior is exactly how active noise canceling (ANC) headphones suppress unwanted tones. If you superimpose a tone with the same exact frequency as the unwanted tone but 180 degrees out of phase and at the same amplitude it will cancel out the unwanted tone. This of course must be done in real time by sampling the complex sound, decomposing it to find the exact frequency and amplitude of the unwanted tone, and then injecting the cancellation tone at exactly the right amplitude and phase. There’s no reason why ANC could not be used to remove the infrasonic components from the HomePod speaker. I’ve never knowingly detected any degradation due to infrasonic effects, but I don’t have a trained ear or even know what to listen for. But these frequencies would absolutely show up on a spectrum analyzer. 
    Dewme,

    That's a detailed explanation, but the problem cpsro described appears to be the streaming source, not the speaker. You could use Machine Learning, and lots, and lots of research at Apple to define unwanted tones, as a way to solve this in the future, but the best solution is for cpsro to contact the culprit, NPR, and get them provide a better stream!
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 75 of 117
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,451member
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:

    gatorguy said:

    danvm said:
    danvm said:
    It would be impossible to cobble a similar platform out of the terrible speakers built into existing Echo and Dot appliances, and neither Amazon, Google, Samsung, Spotify or other speaker makers really have to clout to produce such a sophisticated, premium speaker and sell it to a critical mass of users globally.

    Based in many reviews, the HomePod sound quality is very similar to the Google Home Max, and I wouldn't consider neither of them premium speakers.  And to say that Samsung is not capable of doing sophisticated premium speaker is non sense.  They own Harman Audio, which includes companies like Harman-Kardon, AKG, Infinity and Revel, among others.  Those companies have years of experience in the audio market.  We'll have to see the results of the final product, but I wouldn't count them out.  

    The kicker on that sentence is "and sell it to a critical mass of users globally."

    Samsung developed a Gear watch platform, Tizen, Galaxy Player, all manner of tablets, and no doubt it can make a speaker. But to create an audio platform that matters, it would need to learn how to sell those products to people who would pay any money for them.

    Google hardware is a bullshit exercise in Verge fapping and nobody buys any of it in commercially relevant volumes. It doesn't matter that some bloggers can't tell the difference between a basic speaker and HomePod. If those reviews mattered Google would be a significant hardware seller rather than a source of billowing hot bullshit.
    What about the other terms that are in the sentence, "sophisticated, premium speaker"?  Isn't that more important than "sell it to a critical mass of users globally"?  For a customer, it should be, and for me, it is.  Apple didn't make a premium speaker.  They made a smart speaker that sound as good as the competition, and even below them when you consider how far is Siri from Alexa and Google Assistance.  Even in the AppleInsider comparison of the HomePod with Google Home Max the reviewer conclude "Fortunately, there isn't enough of a difference between the two to justify buying one or the other for sound quality reasons alone."  But it seems like you are focused in sales numbers, while I'm more in the line of sound quality.  
    Every review I’ve read said it sounds notably better than the other speakers, including more expensive products like the Max.
    There have been a few reviewers that found better sound from a HomePod competitor, Sonos and Home Max being ones off the top of my head, but yeah the HomePod is the one getting most of the attention. That some folks like "not-a-HomePod" sound better shouldn't be any real surprise since your perception of sound is subjective as is everyone else's.
    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/head-head-apple-homepod-really-sound-best-160346138.html
    As i’ve already detailed on this very threat Pogue’s methods are suspect and the flaws pointed out on other sites. Not double blind. Not an acoustically clear sheet draped in front. Same order of devices during playback (should be changed to prevent last-is-best bias, etc). 

    Poor “test”. For a tech writer Pogue is pretty clueless. After his star days ended he seemed to shift his style, (not unlike Mossberg when he went to, uh, the Verge, king apple troll rag). 
    So was Apple's when they did their head-to-head comparison with the Max and Sonos for the invited few before it went on sale. You did read Pogue's description of the Apple setup. You didn't say you had any issue with that one. I suspect that's because it had results you liked. If Pogue had come up with the same "HomePod wins!" you'd still like him too rather than stretching to question whether a curtain hanging in front of each and every one of them was "acoustically clear" and calling Pogue clueless.
    I complained about both CR's and David Pogue's test, due to obvious flaws, and a fundamental inability to comprehend the differing technologies, and even I threw Apple in with those two for staging a bullshit demo.

    Even now, I find way too much bullshit thrown around by self appointed audio experts, aka audiophiles, of which I am not, by the way; I received a certificate in a cereal box!

    As I've stated in the past, I find many commentators lazy and incurious, and prone to dogma. Mostly just parochial arguments.
    I knew there was a reason I liked you. :)
  • Reply 76 of 117
    robin huberrobin huber Posts: 3,203member
    danvm said:
    tmay said:
    danvm said:
    It would be impossible to cobble a similar platform out of the terrible speakers built into existing Echo and Dot appliances, and neither Amazon, Google, Samsung, Spotify or other speaker makers really have to clout to produce such a sophisticated, premium speaker and sell it to a critical mass of users globally.

    Based in many reviews, the HomePod sound quality is very similar to the Google Home Max, and I wouldn't consider neither of them premium speakers.  And to say that Samsung is not capable of doing sophisticated premium speaker is non sense.  They own Harman Audio, which includes companies like Harman-Kardon, AKG, Infinity and Revel, among others.  Those companies have years of experience in the audio market.  We'll have to see the results of the final product, but I wouldn't count them out.  

    Gee, seems like Samsung is going to play ketchup, yet again!

    Meanwhile, Apple just created another $billion plus a year revenue stream. 


    Definitely they are behind in this market, same as Apple is.  But I wouldn't say that Samsung is not capable of designing a premium speaker, considering they own a company like Harman Audio.  
    Often when big name companies are bought, it is mainly the name that the buyer wants. Then they slap it on their own crap. I have a Subaru with a premium “Harmon Kardon” sound system from the Subaru factory. It’s okay, but not much better than the standard unit in my older Subie. I have Panasonic Bluetooth headphones with a “Harmon Kardon” badge slapped on. My AirPods sound better. It’s just marketing. 
    pscooter632old4funrandominternetpersonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 77 of 117
    sirozhasirozha Posts: 413member
    Kuyangkoh said:
    My MB has harmon Kardon speakers and sounds terrible for a premium car...just saying..
    Maybe it’s just me....
    The audio equipment that most premium cars get installed at the factory is the cheap crap made by third parties. The audiophile labels are slapped onto this cheap crap under licensing agreements for which the audiophile companies get licensing fees. I didn't know this until recently when a car audio place showed me the speakers with an audiophile label that a luxury car brand installs in their cars. Then, they showed me exactly the same speaker made by the same no-brand Chinese company without the audiophile label. The speakers were identical and cost $15 each.

    Only the most expensive luxury cars use the real audiophile equipment. We are talking cars that cost significantly north of $100,000. 
    edited February 28 watto_cobra
  • Reply 78 of 117
    sirozhasirozha Posts: 413member
    fallenjt said:
    danvm said:
    It would be impossible to cobble a similar platform out of the terrible speakers built into existing Echo and Dot appliances, and neither Amazon, Google, Samsung, Spotify or other speaker makers really have to clout to produce such a sophisticated, premium speaker and sell it to a critical mass of users globally.

    Based in many reviews, the HomePod sound quality is very similar to the Google Home Max, and I wouldn't consider neither of them premium speakers.  And to say that Samsung is not capable of doing sophisticated premium speaker is non sense.  They own Harman Audio, which includes companies like Harman-Kardon, AKG, Infinity and Revel, among others.  Those companies have years of experience in the audio market.  We'll have to see the results of the final product, but I wouldn't count them out.  

    If you look for a premium speaker, HomePod is not the solution. If you look for a Smart speaker, then it is. Either you can buy a premium powered speaker and connect an iPod Touch to it for the same function or an iOS docking speaker. I'd take HomePod over that setup regardless it's Bose SoundLink of Klipse or whatever.
    It's not very smart due to Siri. 
  • Reply 79 of 117
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,469member
    danvm said:
    It would be impossible to cobble a similar platform out of the terrible speakers built into existing Echo and Dot appliances, and neither Amazon, Google, Samsung, Spotify or other speaker makers really have to clout to produce such a sophisticated, premium speaker and sell it to a critical mass of users globally.

    Based in many reviews, the HomePod sound quality is very similar to the Google Home Max, and I wouldn't consider neither of them premium speakers.  And to say that Samsung is not capable of doing sophisticated premium speaker is non sense.  They own Harman Audio, which includes companies like Harman-Kardon, AKG, Infinity and Revel, among others.  Those companies have years of experience in the audio market.  We'll have to see the results of the final product, but I wouldn't count them out.  

    The kicker on that sentence is "and sell it to a critical mass of users globally."

    Samsung developed a Gear watch platform, Tizen, Galaxy Player, all manner of tablets, and no doubt it can make a speaker. But to create an audio platform that matters, it would need to learn how to sell those products to people who would pay any money for them.

    Google hardware is a bullshit exercise in Verge fapping and nobody buys any of it in commercially relevant volumes. It doesn't matter that some bloggers can't tell the difference between a basic speaker and HomePod. If those reviews mattered Google would be a significant hardware seller rather than a source of billowing hot bullshit.
    I see your 'Verge tapping' and raise you 'Audiophile glopping'
    edited March 1 watto_cobra
  • Reply 80 of 117
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,469member
    This Airplay2 stuff sounds really interesting.

    I wonder if Apple is thinking of using Airplay2 for its headsets.
    watto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.