Lance Ulanoff:
If it were only a question of quality, Apple’s HomePod, which, after a months-long delay finally ships on February 9, should be an unqualified success. Its audio quality is excellent, especially considering its size.
Seven months ago, I sat is a small room and heard Apple’s 7-inch smart speaker play music for the first time. It sounded good, but the demonstration was short and lacking a key component of the smart speaker’s feature set: Siri integration.Recently, though, I heard Apple’s HomePod again in a variety of scenarios and spaces. It sounded even better, especially when compared to larger Google Home Max and the aurally excellent Sonos One, the HomePod’s separation of sounds and fidelity to original instrumentation is astonishing.
This listening experience also added the smarts, or utility, that was missing back in June. Apple’s HomePod is, finally, a functioning Siri smart speaker.
You had me at astonishing.
I’m very curious about the sound quality, and how HomePod achieves such high fidelity, given the amount of compression in most music. Everything I’ve heard so far matches Lance’s description of his experience.
“given the amount of compression in most music”
If Apple was trying to demo the audio reproduction capabilities, they probably used Apple Lossless.
schizophrenic review. he applauds the sound and says it’s better than than the Google Home Max, which is $400, then calls the HP “expensive” in his headline despite it being 50 bucks cheaper than google. and in the closing suggests the $50 Echo Dot sounds decent and this is almost four times more, but they aren’t remotely comparable. the HP is a high quality shelf speaker while the echo is a cheap assistant speaker. nobody looking for a good shelf speaker would even consider the Echo.
Don’t be confused by the hype. The home pod is to good audio as MP3 is to sound quality.
and
I take it you’ve heard a HomePod for yourself?
The sound quality in Canada: the treble is distant and the bass is missing.
“given the amount of compression in most music”
Typical delusional audiophile statement. No, “most music” today is encoded at very high bitrates and despite your “golden” ears, no, you cannot tell the difference from a CD. I know you think you can, but no, you can’t. My Apple Music downloads are 256kbps AAC. That was a great bitrate even for MP3, and AAC is even better.
I’d be happy to admit I’m wrong — do a double blind test (no cheating!), record for YouTube, and post it.
Aaaaand the “audiophiles” have arrived. Nothing but the finest, imported speakers, tube amps, etc. for your golden ears! No files but lossless! And better bring in the nitrogen-infused, gold-plated Monster Cables too for good measure!
nope just hater nonsense from this troll. itunes and AM don’t use mp3 by default anyway
Typical ignorant comment. The compression in music isn’t only in encoding, but a lot of it is in the studio. It’s there even in lossless formats and CDs. Most studio music is highly processed and so it’s almost impossible to tell what accurate reproduction sounds like.
But hey, continue believing your crap receiver from the bargain shelf of Best Buy is just as good as my Naim setup. I don’t care.
You’re wrong, but not for obvious reasons. Compression here refers to dynamic range compression, which is a different thing than codec compression. Most music is compressed (in the DRC sense) past the point of reason. Codec compression isn’t too bad, as you note.
Maybe. 256 Mbps AAC is very good. And if the HomePod has a good DAC, which it undoubtedly does, most people would not be able to tell the difference, except for maybe the most demanding recordings.
Agreed. DRC compression is somewhat irrelevant in this discussion. Codec compression can rear its head in classical recordings, or others where there is a lot of layered natural (e.g. non-synthesized) instruments and voices. Most Apple Music streaming and purchased songs sound excellent, but there have been a few times I’ve heard the limitations of the codec compression.
Either way, if the reported sound quality is anywhere near what we’re reading, the HomePod will be a bargain, and I look forward to purchasing one.
I tend to agree with you. The review attempts to address a scattered, unsettled, and over-hyped category.
While the competition appear to be taking a shotgun approach, Apple’s entry is laser-focused backed by an incremental roadmap…not at all surprising.
I don’t think DRC is irrelevant. It’s the only one that matters to the HomePod, unless you can tell 256 bit AAC from lossless. I’m sure some can, but the overall muddiness of modern music is more of a concern to me. It makes buying something expensive to listen to it pretty pointless.