I guess I'm going to have to go find a Sonos One to listen to get some idea of what these will sound like... as I have no idea what that level of sound quality is (which this is supposedly better).
The first question is: Can two Sonos Ones be made to sound better than a single HomePod?
I suppose, though *I* don't care so much about that. I intend on using it pretty much as a living room home-speaker type of thing, anyway. I'm not intending to replace a proper stereo system with it, or even put it on my desk in place of some proper computer speakers or anything like that. But, I would like to know it has pretty good overall sound quality. (I'm also not caring too much if it has extremely good stereo simulation, etc. as if someone is moving around a room, they aren't going to get that from a regular pair of speakers either.)
Seems to me, the sound quality has to beat B&W, and the large Sonos speakers (not the One). If people can not replace their main music speakers, they can’t explain why spending £320 instead of £30 for a Dot. Anyone know if the sound is really properly good?
Are you high? You are high, amiright? Who says the HomePod is meant to replace discrete stereo speakers? You are not comparing apples to apples. You apparently can't envision more than one use case for having/adding a HomePod. But that's ok. If it's not for you, it's not for you.
And if you're namedropping B&W, why not throw in Wharfdale and Tannoy while you're at it. Clearly the HomePod won't sound 'proper good' to you regardless. And if I missed the silent /s tag, then I 'apologise'.
The man asked a good question.
I had envisioned two HomePod speakers replacing a sound bar set up on a television.
If the speakers sound as good as they were hyped, it seem logical to me.
Does this imply that the Google product would tell a person in your house about your meeting or to-do items if you not home. I like the fact the someone could not ask the Siri to tell them what my schedule looks like, I may had date with my girlfriend and would not want my wife to know about it.
In all seriousness, this is stuff Google does not think about, they through so much at a wall and wait to see if it stick or falls off. They apologies when they screw their customers, ops sorry I meant to say product since we are their product not their customer.
Google home works off voice recognition to identify who is talking. If I say to Google what is my name it tells me. If my wife asks Google what is my name it recognises her. Same for kids etc. So if I ask to set reminder or or ask for what's my next meeting it is personal to only my account.
Google home is really good, but as with everything these days, to get the best out of it you need to be in the google eco system. They've just added audio books, so you can ask Google home to read them out to you.
Does this imply that the Google product would tell a person in your house about your meeting or to-do items if you not home. I like the fact the someone could not ask the Siri to tell them what my schedule looks like, I may had date with my girlfriend and would not want my wife to know about it.
In all seriousness, this is stuff Google does not think about, they through so much at a wall and wait to see if it stick or falls off. They apologies when they screw their customers, ops sorry I meant to say product since we are their product not their customer.
Cmon now. You don’t have a girlfriend. 😏
In all seriousness this is over priced by at least a 100$.
I get it- this what they do. And usually I’m onboard. Someone else sets the goal post then they estimate how to improve it, implement the improvement and re brand the idea as well as raise the price of the “improved” or “designed” (whichever bs u prefer) offering.
But the public is now is wise to Apple.
thats never been the case before and People will openly and justifiably question the motives behind a 350$ mono speaker with a shitty voice assistant that is both occasionally awkward but can tell the name of the drummer in Quiet Riot...
dont buy this. Send a message to stop the fuckery and perfect the software and prioritize what’s already selling instead of what’s behind the curtain
this was pushed off until after Xmas for a reason and whatever it was finding out that’s ITS STILL NOT DEBUTING with its promised features is straight up dishonest.
Theyve been openly dishonest a lot lately...
Apple would never intentionally slow down an older handset to Apple intentionally throttles older handsets to preserve the life of the older batteries...
what other lies? Someone will be fired for this because our government and the EU already has an intense anti apple hatred and they apples given them a place to focus it
Lastly, the Sonos One is literally deaf and sucks so I’m addition to referencing your own terribly insufficient and pandering
Does this imply that the Google product would tell a person in your house about your meeting or to-do items if you not home. I like the fact the someone could not ask the Siri to tell them what my schedule looks like, I may had date with my girlfriend and would not want my wife to know about it.
In all seriousness, this is stuff Google does not think about, they through so much at a wall and wait to see if it stick or falls off. They apologies when they screw their customers, ops sorry I meant to say product since we are their product not their customer.
Cmon now. You don’t have a girlfriend. 😏
In all seriousness this is over priced by at least a 100$.
I get it- this what they do. And usually I’m onboard. Someone else sets the goal post then they estimate how to improve it, implement the improvement and re brand the idea as well as raise the price of the “improved” or “designed” (whichever bs u prefer) offering.
But the public is now is wise to Apple.
thats never been the case before and People will openly and justifiably question the motives behind a 350$ mono speaker with a shitty voice assistant that is both occasionally awkward but can tell the name of the drummer in Quiet Riot...
dont buy this. Send a message to stop the fuckery and perfect the software and prioritize what’s already selling instead of what’s behind the curtain
this was pushed off until after Xmas for a reason and whatever it was finding out that’s ITS STILL NOT DEBUTING with its promised features is straight up dishonest.
Theyve been openly dishonest a lot lately...
Apple would never intentionally slow down an older handset to Apple intentionally throttles older handsets to preserve the life of the older batteries...
what other lies? Someone will be fired for this because our government and the EU already has an intense anti apple hatred and they apples given them a place to focus it
Lastly, the Sonos One is literally deaf and sucks so I’m addition to referencing your own terribly insufficient and pandering
bradford_kirby said: thats never been the case before and People will openly and justifiably question the motives behind a 350$ mono speaker with a shitty voice assistant that is both occasionally awkward but can tell the name of the drummer in Quiet Riot...
Well, there are $5 speakers and $1000+ speakers, so this partly depends on how good it actually is. Also, it's technically more than stereo, just not two separate units with x number of 'tweeters' in each. If they do the beam-forming right, it might sound better than if you had two individual speakers but weren't in the exact right location in the room.
And, as I mentioned above regarding the voice assistant... if it can turn the volume up/down, pause/play, skip tracks, etc. that's all some of us care about in terms of voice assistant. I really don't need a device that's constantly listening and sending marketing data back to the mothership and answering trivial pursuit questions. That would get old really quick.
...but for $350, I think it's going to have to sound as good or better than other small speaker systems or 'smart' speakers in the ~$300-400 range. If it sounds like a $99 speaker(s) just with Siri, it isn't going to cut it.
Absolutely, mediocre sound with Siri will 'not cut it'. Not at all.
But I don't know that it will have to directly compete audibly with dedicated audio speakers in the same price category. The accessibility to Apple Music and Siri will count for a lot for many people. So that HomePod be as fine an audio product as competition in the same price range and provide Siri assistance ˆ still sell for $349 is being unrealistic. Not that it couldn't or won't happen. But I think it's an unreal expectation. So I think the audio / convenience convergence will be somewhere between $99 and $400, not an either or situation.
Some bleeding edgers have chosen to order an HP sound unheard. I'm debating it. I don't know that Siri will be better on it than on my phone or watch, except for the far-field capability. That's one of the main reasons I want one. For that functionality, I'm willing to compromise on traditional imagine, i.e. a sound stage.
The other is audio quality. Nobody yet has provided us with a typical audio review befitting an audio product— speakers. That's yet to come. DSP isn't new but previously employed two speakers. Among the basic audio qualities we want, reproducing an accurate sound stage is one. I'm wondering if this is what Apple is promising, or is it just a 'spacial experience' of some sort coupled with a personal assistant. Will the be an aural equivalent to iTunes visualizers that appear to have little relation to the music?
Filling every space with reasonably (subjectivity alert) good sound for casual listening and Siri access whenever, will make the HP worth the money for me. Using two to get traditional stereo imaging would make it even more attractive.
I'll wait to see some in-depth reviews. Auditioning one in an Apple Store won't be particularly revealing methinks (no dedicated listen room), but that's probably what has to happen before plunking down the plastic ching.
I had envisioned two HomePod speakers replacing a sound bar set up on a television.
If the speakers sound as good as they were hyped, it seem logical to me.
What— 'are they properly good?'
That's not what I is was addressing. First what is 'properly good'? That's not a spec I've ever seen in any audio gear in the last 60yrs. What I've learned in that time is that audio quality is subjective. The fact that he states the HP must sound as good as B&W speakers is ludicrous.
Second, Apple isn't marketing this as a replacement for existing audio speakers (and their support systems) as Jobs did with the HiFi. (Or at least he said he replaced his expensive audio equipment with it.) There is no reason that the HP can augment a listening environment and provide digital assistance.
Now that some people might chose to replace some speakers with a HomePod or two is a different story, and probably a mostly unexpected bonus for Apple. Or maybe they assume a few people will. Given the aural quality of most sound bars, it could happen. But without direct (wired or optical) input to the HP from a TV, latency will very likely be a problem. So we'll just have to 'see' how that shakes out.
But no one who actually enjoys listening to B&W speakers will be replacing them with a HomePod. Or two. That is not logical to me. Well, all generalizations are false, so there's always a possibility. But to suggest that the HP must meet B&W audio quality is the babbling of a substance abuser.
But I don't know that it will have to directly compete audibly with dedicated audio speakers in the same price category. ... So I think the audio / convenience convergence will be somewhere between $99 and $400, not an either or situation.
Some bleeding edgers have chosen to order an HP sound unheard. I'm debating it. ...
The other is audio quality. Nobody yet has provided us with a typical audio review befitting an audio product— speakers. That's yet to come. DSP isn't new but previously employed two speakers. Among the basic audio qualities we want, reproducing an accurate sound stage is one. I'm wondering if this is what Apple is promising, or is it just a 'spacial experience' of some sort coupled with a personal assistant. Will the be an aural equivalent to iTunes visualizers that appear to have little relation to the music?
True. For people who'd buy a pair of speakers and an amp, and add something AirPlay, I suppose they'll easily beat the sound quality, especially if they already have some of the equipment like an amp or AirPort Express. This is more a 'set it and forget it' type product, so it's competing in a whole other market. Still, you can't get a heck of a lot of 'traditional stereo' setup for $350.
I guess aside from Google, Amazon, Sonos, etc. I was thinking more about 'computer speakers' from Logitech or such, as they are powered and people often plug them into a computer or Airport Express type box and have similar functionality sans Siri. My hope is that it would sound better than any of that kind of stuff (as the bar is quite low).
I think people who buy one now will be OK, as I doubt the hardware will change a whole lot over the next few years. It has plenty of processing power and can expand via software updates. The speaker quality and such won't likely change a bunch. BUT, this seems more like a v0.7 product at this point, so I hope the early adopters aren't too impatient, or have too high of expectations (aside from product-category-relevant sound quality).
re: sound stage - I'm not sure if you can simulate that or not. But, given what it is, a traditional stereo system isn't going to fare too well either if the listeners aren't sitting in the right spot. So, as an 'around the house' kind of device, I guess I'm more concerned about general sound quality than proper sound-stage.
Comments
I had envisioned two HomePod speakers replacing a sound bar set up on a television.
If the speakers sound as good as they were hyped, it seem logical to me.
While analysts fret over next quarter sales of iPhoneX, they seem to ignore equations like this:
HomePod + Watch + Pair of AirPods = 1 iPhoneX
And that of course makes Music and many apps stickier. Equation unthinkable several years ago.
Google home is really good, but as with everything these days, to get the best out of it you need to be in the google eco system. They've just added audio books, so you can ask Google home to read them out to you.
In all seriousness this is over priced by at least a 100$.
I get it- this what they do. And usually I’m onboard. Someone else sets the goal post then they estimate how to improve it, implement the improvement and re brand the idea as well as raise the price of the “improved” or “designed” (whichever bs u prefer) offering.
But the public is now is wise to Apple.
thats never been the case before and People will openly and justifiably question the motives behind a 350$ mono speaker with a shitty voice assistant that is both occasionally awkward but can tell the name of the drummer in Quiet Riot...
dont buy this. Send a message to stop the fuckery and perfect the software and prioritize what’s already selling instead of what’s behind the curtain
this was pushed off until after Xmas for a reason and whatever it was finding out that’s ITS STILL NOT DEBUTING with its promised features is straight up dishonest.
Theyve been openly dishonest a lot lately...
Apple would never intentionally slow down an older handset to Apple intentionally throttles older handsets to preserve the life of the older batteries...
what other lies? Someone will be fired for this because our government and the EU already has an intense anti apple hatred and they apples given them a place to focus it
Lastly, the Sonos One is literally deaf and sucks so I’m addition to referencing your own terribly insufficient and pandering
And, as I mentioned above regarding the voice assistant... if it can turn the volume up/down, pause/play, skip tracks, etc. that's all some of us care about in terms of voice assistant. I really don't need a device that's constantly listening and sending marketing data back to the mothership and answering trivial pursuit questions. That would get old really quick.
But I don't know that it will have to directly compete audibly with dedicated audio speakers in the same price category. The accessibility to Apple Music and Siri will count for a lot for many people. So that HomePod be as fine an audio product as competition in the same price range and provide Siri assistance ˆ still sell for $349 is being unrealistic. Not that it couldn't or won't happen. But I think it's an unreal expectation. So I think the audio / convenience convergence will be somewhere between $99 and $400, not an either or situation.
Some bleeding edgers have chosen to order an HP sound unheard. I'm debating it. I don't know that Siri will be better on it than on my phone or watch, except for the far-field capability. That's one of the main reasons I want one. For that functionality, I'm willing to compromise on traditional imagine, i.e. a sound stage.
The other is audio quality. Nobody yet has provided us with a typical audio review befitting an audio product— speakers. That's yet to come. DSP isn't new but previously employed two speakers. Among the basic audio qualities we want, reproducing an accurate sound stage is one. I'm wondering if this is what Apple is promising, or is it just a 'spacial experience' of some sort coupled with a personal assistant. Will the be an aural equivalent to iTunes visualizers that appear to have little relation to the music?
Filling every space with reasonably (subjectivity alert) good sound for casual listening and Siri access whenever, will make the HP worth the money for me. Using two to get traditional stereo imaging would make it even more attractive.
I'll wait to see some in-depth reviews. Auditioning one in an Apple Store won't be particularly revealing methinks (no dedicated listen room), but that's probably what has to happen before plunking down the plastic ching.
That's not what I is was addressing. First what is 'properly good'? That's not a spec I've ever seen in any audio gear in the last 60yrs. What I've learned in that time is that audio quality is subjective. The fact that he states the HP must sound as good as B&W speakers is ludicrous.
Second, Apple isn't marketing this as a replacement for existing audio speakers (and their support systems) as Jobs did with the HiFi. (Or at least he said he replaced his expensive audio equipment with it.) There is no reason that the HP can augment a listening environment and provide digital assistance.
Now that some people might chose to replace some speakers with a HomePod or two is a different story, and probably a mostly unexpected bonus for Apple. Or maybe they assume a few people will. Given the aural quality of most sound bars, it could happen. But without direct (wired or optical) input to the HP from a TV, latency will very likely be a problem. So we'll just have to 'see' how that shakes out.
But no one who actually enjoys listening to B&W speakers will be replacing them with a HomePod. Or two. That is not logical to me. Well, all generalizations are false, so there's always a possibility. But to suggest that the HP must meet B&W audio quality is the babbling of a substance abuser.
I guess aside from Google, Amazon, Sonos, etc. I was thinking more about 'computer speakers' from Logitech or such, as they are powered and people often plug them into a computer or Airport Express type box and have similar functionality sans Siri. My hope is that it would sound better than any of that kind of stuff (as the bar is quite low).
I think people who buy one now will be OK, as I doubt the hardware will change a whole lot over the next few years. It has plenty of processing power and can expand via software updates. The speaker quality and such won't likely change a bunch. BUT, this seems more like a v0.7 product at this point, so I hope the early adopters aren't too impatient, or have too high of expectations (aside from product-category-relevant sound quality).
re: sound stage - I'm not sure if you can simulate that or not. But, given what it is, a traditional stereo system isn't going to fare too well either if the listeners aren't sitting in the right spot. So, as an 'around the house' kind of device, I guess I'm more concerned about general sound quality than proper sound-stage.