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.
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.
I'm also looking forward to a HomePod App Store. This could include apps from Radio stations, sleep tracker when a HomePod is in the bedroom, multiple timers, ... probably more in the form of companion apps like for AppleWatch.
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.
So you state that it reproduces the stream; I would hope so.
What would you like Apple to provide in a utility to alter this; a soft limit on speaker excursion, or a filter that probably makes things worse?
I'm not going to tell Apple how to fix it (but if they don't fix it, I won't buy it). Apple also needs to support streaming of far more Internet "radio" stations on the HomePod. There's no reason the same stations listed in iTunes can't be supported.
Infrasound is 20 Hz and lower.
HomePod's response is -12 db at 40 Hz, 4 db at 70 hz, so it isn't infrasound that you are concerned with.
What you want is an equalizer app to reduce low frequency volume, which would have to effect of reducing speaker excursion. Better would be a filter that would filter out the specific frequencies of wind noise of that particular stream.
Even better would be source material that removed or mitigated that noise in the first place.
In essence, you won't want to buy the HomePod until it has an equalizer app, though you can do that via AirPlay.
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?
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.
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?
Actually, since I haven't listened to the HomePod, I don't personally know, but I would note that those audiophile speakers are only as good as the placement, the room's acoustics, and an individuals equalization adjustment, and since the HomePod excels at setting itself up, I would argue that you will almost certainly get peak results with a HomePod over a poor installed two way bookshelf speaker pair. What is left to find out, is how much benefit a second HomePod offers, Daniel noted having listened to this setup, and that awaits a software release sometime in the future.
In the meantime, I'm not convinced that those side by side tests are all that reliable, so I will withhold judgement, something that you obviously aren't inclined to do.
Pitty its not SiliconE expertise, there wouldn't be rings left on tables. Teehee
I have a (new) theory on that.
Small amounts of Platinum are used as a catalyst for curing silicone. Might Silicone oil on table surface be curing from contact with Platinum in/on the surface of the HomePod base?
I'm an engineer, not a chemist, so I'd appreciate someone's thought's on this with more chemistry knowledge than I.
Fortunately, I am a chemist, and no, as it can fade in a short period of time, if not just hours.
Given Occam's Razor, the simpler explanation is the silicone oil on the base of the HomePod is reacting with some treatment oils without silicone in it that has been applied to the wood surfaces.
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.
Pitty its not SiliconE expertise, there wouldn't be rings left on tables. Teehee
I have a (new) theory on that.
Small amounts of Platinum are used as a catalyst for curing silicone. Might Silicone oil on table surface be curing from contact with Platinum in/on the surface of the HomePod base?
I'm an engineer, not a chemist, so I'd appreciate someone's thought's on this with more chemistry knowledge than I.
Fortunately, I am a chemist, and no, as it can fade in a short period of time, if not just hours.
Given Occam's Razor, the simpler explanation is the silicone oil on the base of the HomePod is reacting with some treatment oils without silicone in it that has been applied to the wood surfaces.
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.
Once again a person that hasn't heard or seen a Homepod making sweeping remarks about it's quality..hahahaha Please get over yourself.
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.
Samsung already announced that they are working on a smart speaker product, which will be delayed because of "Bixby", so yeah, they are already in the market.
"As first reported by the Wall Street Journal, Samsung will release a “premium” Bixby smart speaker in the second half of 2018. Koh’s announcement contradicted an earlier report from Bloomberg that it would sell the speaker early in the year".
So Samsung is building a "premium" smart speaker that looks to be, at best, a direct competitor to Apple's "HomePod" premium smart speaker.
I'm extremely impressed with sound quality of mine. Especially compared to the Echo. Can't wait for the additional capabilities in Airplay2.
Think of the AppleTV 4K, 4K Apple created content, HomePod speakers, iTunes 4K, Apple Music with the content and speakers able to distribute sound in multi "channels". You get the best picture quality, the best content and the best sound, all on Apple devices.
To me this is the purpose of the HomePod and SIRI controlled devices: bring a galaxy of Apple branded devices, incredibly well integrated with each other, to create the ultimate "home theater".
Apple isn't attacking the living room with one product, Apple is attacking the living room with a host of incredibly well integrated products that act as one.
I got my HomePod on day one and can't wait for "stereo" networking. At that time i'll get a second HomePod.
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,
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?
Actually, since I haven't listened to the HomePod, I don't personally know, but I would note that those audiophile speakers are only as good as the placement, the room's acoustics, and an individuals equalization adjustment, and since the HomePod excels at setting itself up, I would argue that you will almost certainly get peak results with a HomePod over a poor installed two way bookshelf speaker pair. What is left to find out, is how much benefit a second HomePod offers, Daniel noted having listened to this setup, and that awaits a software release sometime in the future.
In the meantime, I'm not convinced that those side by side tests are all that reliable, so I will withhold judgement, something that you obviously aren't inclined to do.
I haven't tried the HomePod yet, but I had listen to very expensive speakers, and are miles ahead of the Sonos Play:5 and Home Max, which at the most is what the HomePod will do, based in the AppleInsider review, among others. Yes, you can make audiophile speakers sound as good (or bad) as the HomePod, but you cannot make the HomePod sound as good as audiophile speakers installed properly.
Why do you think side-by-side tests are unreliable? All the "sophisticated" was design to make HomePod sound good on any place. The HomePod was suppose to beat other speakers in all environments, but instead comparisons showed that it sounds similar to the competition. BTW, I'm not saying that the HomePod is a bad speaker, but it looks like it isn't better than the competition, even with all the technology detailed in the article.
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.
Yes and perhaps we will one day build a space elevator. Who cares what’s possible? Let’s talk about the real products here in real life, please.
I'm extremely impressed with sound quality of mine. Especially compared to the Echo. Can't wait for the additional capabilities in Airplay2.
I see the attraction of multi room audio but for me it is non event. I actually like having a single source - bee that mono or stereo - source for my music. I like walking in and out of the sound scape. The idea of a house wide blanket of sound reminds me of hotels and restaurants - the experiences of which I am no fan. I will likely get a HomePod at some point but I predict I will get so pissed off with Siri I'll end up controlling it with my iPhone. Or maybe I'll set up an old iPad as a controller. There is something to be said for browsing through AppleMusic and finding the perfect track.
Yeah, while using voice control is the new sexy (and all of a sudden mandatory despite having been on iOS siri with little excitement lol), I don’t imagine I’ll stop wanting to browse my music as usual. Apps and screen are a-OK for me.
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.
Which is why the studio should be using pop filters on their end.
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.
Comments
That's there's right funny!
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.
HomePod's response is -12 db at 40 Hz, 4 db at 70 hz, so it isn't infrasound that you are concerned with.
What you want is an equalizer app to reduce low frequency volume, which would have to effect of reducing speaker excursion. Better would be a filter that would filter out the specific frequencies of wind noise of that particular stream.
Even better would be source material that removed or mitigated that noise in the first place.
In essence, you won't want to buy the HomePod until it has an equalizer app, though you can do that via AirPlay.
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?
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.
In the meantime, I'm not convinced that those side by side tests are all that reliable, so I will withhold judgement, something that you obviously aren't inclined to do.
Once again a person that hasn't heard or seen a Homepod making sweeping remarks about it's quality..hahahaha Please get over yourself.
https://www.techradar.com/news/samsungs-bixby-smart-speaker-to-take-on-apple-homepod-in-second-half-of-2018
"As first reported by the Wall Street Journal, Samsung will release a “premium” Bixby smart speaker in the second half of 2018. Koh’s announcement contradicted an earlier report from Bloomberg that it would sell the speaker early in the year".
So Samsung is building a "premium" smart speaker that looks to be, at best, a direct competitor to Apple's "HomePod" premium smart speaker.
To me this is the purpose of the HomePod and SIRI controlled devices: bring a galaxy of Apple branded devices, incredibly well integrated with each other, to create the ultimate "home theater".
Apple isn't attacking the living room with one product, Apple is attacking the living room with a host of incredibly well integrated products that act as one.
I got my HomePod on day one and can't wait for "stereo" networking. At that time i'll get a second HomePod.
Why do you think side-by-side tests are unreliable? All the "sophisticated" was design to make HomePod sound good on any place. The HomePod was suppose to beat other speakers in all environments, but instead comparisons showed that it sounds similar to the competition. BTW, I'm not saying that the HomePod is a bad speaker, but it looks like it isn't better than the competition, even with all the technology detailed in the article.
Yeah, while using voice control is the new sexy (and all of a sudden mandatory despite having been on iOS siri with little excitement lol), I don’t imagine I’ll stop wanting to browse my music as usual. Apps and screen are a-OK for me.
Which is why the studio should be using pop filters on their end.
Every review I’ve read said it sounds notably better than the other speakers, including more expensive products like the Max.