AirPlay 2 Brings HomePod Stereo Pairs and Multi-Room Audio To iOS 11.4 (betanews.com) 109
Today sees the release of iOS 11.4 and with it Apple is adding AirPlay 2. From a report: This brings some important changes to HomePod, including the stereo pairing option that was missing at launch. AirPlay 2 also adds multi-room audio to HomePod, bringing Apple's smartspeaker in line with Amazon Echo and Google Home. Other new features of iOS 11.4 include the ability to access iMessages via iCloud on any Apple device. The lack of stereo pairing and multi-room audio was seen by many as a failing of HomePod, but Apple has now addressed this. The company says that when two speakers are paired, they are capable of "delivering room-filling sound that is more spacious than a traditional stereo pair."
You're hearing it wrong (Score:4, Funny)
You gotta give it to Apple. Who you gonna believe, them or your own lying ears?
Re: (Score:2)
Getting two HomePod units
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing when you live in your parent's basement. Nothing if you think $350 is expensive for a speaker. Nothing if your main concern is not buying anything new.
Why should anyone care about your opinion in the slightest? If you can't see why someone would want multi-room audio then you haven't met the minimum requirements to participate in the discussion. Multi-room audio is what AirPlay2 is all about.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, take ot to the park or a lake and annoy all the other people there who come there for a bit of quietness and rest.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
If you are going the multi-room route, it is incredibly inefficient to put a separate pair of $700 speakers in every room. Yes, maybe those are decent for a primary space such as an entertainment room; but what if I want to set up a speaker in the bathroom so I can listen while I'm taking a shower? Or the garage for when I'm working on something? I'd prefer to just have reasonably decent but ultimately cheap speakers in those places. I have three stereo clock radios that sound pretty good and have aux inputs. I also have older devices I don't use any more. Again, this is part of a culture that throws out devices instead of reusing them.
So, for those places, get a cheapie set of AirPlay-compatible speakers. I wouldn't put a $700 set of HomePods in a bathroom or even likely a garage (unless I was rich).
And yes, I agree that they are pricey.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The way the summary reads, you have to have Homepod speakers for multi-room support.
I don't think so. I think the device only has to support AirPlay 2.
Re: (Score:2)
I have been enjoying multi-room sound with Airplay for many years now. Just hook up an amplifier and some speakers to some Aiport Expresses and go. Such a loss that Apple stopped makimg those.
Re: (Score:2)
I am close to the ocean in a naturally ventilated house, and we have a Play1 mounted about 7' above the floor (higher than door header). It is about the worst possible location for a unit, but it just has a little rust after four or five years.
Re: (Score:2)
You should look up "inefficient". It doesn't mean what you think it means.
Apple doesn't require HomePods to be used in pairs. You are free to use one if it's more suitable.
As easy as it is to criticize a HomePod, you've failed to do so.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, you are not. Again, you do not understand the term, much like you don't understand anything else.
Furthermore, you never spent $50 on speakers, not ones that "sound great" or anything else. It's quite clear in all of your posts. You don't know what great sound is nor do you have any idea what a HomePod sounds like nor do you know what AirPlay2 is for. You're an idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Efficacy vs efficiency. $/units of "great."
Re: (Score:2)
Compared to any of the 'place unit in room, play audio' options the 'homepod' arrangement is pricey and proprietary. Compared to the pricey and proprietary multi-room-with-synchronization-and-stuff options(Sonos being the big name); the cost starts to look more reasonable and they are at least proprietary offshoots of a large, (generally) competent vendor who will likely co
Re: (Score:2)
No. An array of speakers in one enclosure is not an improvement on true stereo when all music is now recorded in stereo.
Unless Apple now wants to argue that all music is being produced and mastered wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
No. An array of speakers in one enclosure is not an improvement on true stereo when all music is now recorded in stereo.
Unless Apple now wants to argue that all music is being produced and mastered wrong.
They are talking about a PAIR of HomePods being used to do a stereo field; not ONE HomePod.
Re: (Score:2)
From what I saw regarding the design of the speakers, it looks as though each pod has got an array of speakers that is putting sound out in every direction. You should expect that to be able to produce a better overall sound all else equal. If you're pitting it against some cheap speakers that came as part of a surround package, it's probably no contest. I suspect that if you've got a decent pair of quality speakers though that you can probably get better sound quality from them.
Getting two HomePod units is $700 though. You can get a great set of floor standing stereo speakers for that price though and even a pair of really good ones for the cost of just one HomePod. You're also going to get something that can fill a much larger space because each of your really good speakers is going to be able to handle far more power individual than a single HomePod so you'll be able to get loud without getting distorted.
And, keep in mind that every one of those speakers has a separate, computer-controlled, input; so there is MUCH more that something like a HomePod can do with its speakers than any conventional speaker system.
Re: (Score:3)
You gotta give it to Apple. Who you gonna believe, them or your own lying ears?
It's called "Acoustic Holography", and studios have been using it for years to use psychoacoustics to apparently place sound sources outside of the stereo field. I can't find any good cites at the moment; but I read about it several years ago.
Your brain is very easily deceived when it comes to sound-direction.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Something tells me you're not going to replace a decent setup with a subwoofer with many small speakers, no matter how hard you try.
I tend to agree: But pretty much everyone who hears the HomePod in real life is amazed with how good they sound; and the frequency response plots seem to bear that out.
I haven't heard one (let alone two) yet. Have you? (Serious question)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have not heard these, but I have heard many high end compact speakers. All of them sound like small speakers when it comes to low-end bass response. You're not going to be watching a movie with lots of explosions on these.
Oh, I am sure it won't have the low-end of an 18" sub with a dedicated 1200W Class D amp; but, OTOH, I don't think that Home Theatre was the target. More like secondary-location speakers (kitchen, bedroom, office, etc.). And for that, I think they will sound better than most.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
home theaters at those prices aren't worth talking about...or listening to.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't believe you since you demonstrate over and over that you don't know what a "high end" costs.
The fact is that the HomePod has surprisingly good bass for a speaker it's size. You wouldn't know that since you haven't heard one, but it doesn't stop you from posting repeatedly with derogatory comments toward the product. I'd suggest you take your own advice and "be free from your ego".
Re: (Score:2)
They sound better than a clock radio, but they don't sound $700 good.
Re: (Score:2)
They sound better than a clock radio, but they don't sound $700 good.
Do you speak from experience, or just guessing?
And I assume you haven't heard a stereo pair yet.
Re: (Score:2)
No, I have not heard a stereo pair of Homepods because they haven't been available until the iOS 11.4 update. Furrther, it was Apple that was the one saying that the Homepods were so advanced that they would sound better than a "traditional" stereo pair, whatever that is.
There have been speakers systems with arrays of drivers in a single enclosure forever. If a Homepod pair is going to sound better than a similarly priced system of "traditional" stereo pair
Re: (Score:2)
No, I have not heard a stereo pair of Homepods because they haven't been available until the iOS 11.4 update. Furrther, it was Apple that was the one saying that the Homepods were so advanced that they would sound better than a "traditional" stereo pair, whatever that is.
There have been speakers systems with arrays of drivers in a single enclosure forever. If a Homepod pair is going to sound better than a similarly priced system of "traditional" stereo pairs, they're going to have to demonstrate more than just their ability to spin a press release.
here have been speakers systems with arrays of drivers in a single enclosure forever
You're kidding, right?
The difference is that every one of the Drivers in a HomePod is under INDIVIDUAL Computer-Control. What the Driver sends to the speaker, and WHEN, are exactly determined by the A8 microcontroller, INDIVIDUALLY, for EACH DRIVER.
THAT my friend, has never been done before. And yes, it makes all the difference.
Re: (Score:2)
"THAT my friend, has never been done before. And yes, it makes all the difference."
How do you know, and why does that matter?
The HomePod is a speaker, it is judged by how it performs as a speaker, not how it achieves it.
Not sure what "all the difference" is in this context, but the HomePod doesn't sound especially good as a speaker, not even as a speaker of its size and price. It's main claim to fame is it's initial impression of bass performance and "individual control" over an array of tweeters doesn't d
Re: (Score:2)
Of course it's been done before. Do you really think Apple's going to do something innovative? That hasn't happened in well over a decade. Computer-controlled line arrays have been around for about that long.
https://loudaudio.com/martin-a. [loudaudio.com]
Re: You're hearing it wrong (Score:2)
Other than they all produce sound, those Line Arrays have very little in common with the HomePod.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course it's been done before. Do you really think Apple's going to do something innovative? That hasn't happened in well over a decade. Computer-controlled line arrays have been around for about that long.
https://loudaudio.com/martin-a... [loudaudio.com]
http://www.alconsaudio.com/lin... [alconsaudio.com]
So it has been done before - at several orders of magnitude the size and the price. Apple is such a lame company, and that certainly is not innovation.
Re: (Score:2)
You gotta give it to Apple. Who you gonna believe, them or your own lying ears?
I believe Apple. Simple reason: They are right. Note that they never said anything about the quality of the sound. Systems that sound "spacious" are also notorious for being utter garbage for anything other than filling a showroom with background sound, ala Bose.
I fully believe Apple's claim, and will not buy their product as a result.
Squeezebox (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Squeezebox (Score:4, Interesting)
Yaay, Apple caught up to squeezebox! Created by Slim Devices in 2000 and later purchased by Logitech. Of course, with squeezebox you can have squeeze player on Android/iOS/Windows/Linux/MacOS driving a $5000 amp and speaker or a $20 one. But.... enjoy your vendor lock-in Apple fans. I'm sure you will tell yourselves the sound is fabulous.
Squeezebox was a good idea, executed poorly, I had a Squeezebox radio and a Squeezebox Touch. The radio is one of the few items I've ever returned - even just a room away from the Wifi-router, it was unable to get a good enough signal to play music reliably. Having skimped on the wireless networking, it only had 802.11g. The Touch was a little better, but using it was a pain. All in all, Squeezebox was unable to succeed, and died many years before Homepods were even announced.
Apple seems to be competing mostly with Sonos [sonos.com], and a little bit with Google Home [wikipedia.org] and Amazon Echo [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I would have never bought the squeezebox devices. As with any of these solutions, the point is to not get locked into these devices which will be made crappy. The point is that a better solution is possible with an old netbook running linux and squeezeplayer.
Oh, that's ever so much more elegant than plopping a HomePod down on a shelf and applying power.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have friends and family that don't look down on me because I don't have the newest fancy-dancy. They care about hearing music, not looking at the device that makes the music. Be free from your ego.
Here is my stereo (Video-oriented stuff excluded) :
Arcam 80W x 5 Surround Receiver. Gift from a friend that worked in a repair-shop. Free. Only use it in stereo mode.
Oppo DV-981HD DVD Player I bought off eBay for $125. Bought it because it can play DVD-As and multichannel SACDs (as well as everything else). It has recently developed an issue with the front-panel microcontroller, so it has no display and the front-panel buttons don't work (thank Diety the IR Remote input works fine!)
Home-Built 3-way acoustic
Re: (Score:2)
And your you are here boring us with your lack of ego.
Speak English much, Coward?
Re: (Score:2)
But.... enjoy your vendor lock-in Apple fans. I'm sure you will tell yourselves the sound is fabulous.
Why are people so insecure about apple products? they knowingly don't try to appeal to everyone with their products, and clearly this product doesn't appeal to you. that's fine, don't buy it, but you don't have to try and make other people feel bad or stupid for thinking it's an interesting option. they have different priorities than you and that's fine, isn't it?
I'm fairly inside the apple ecosystem with a MacBook Pro, iPhone, iPad and appletv[1]. I don't own a HomePod and I'm probably not going to because
Re: (Score:2)
How does Apple take advantage? (Score:2)
Apple produces (generally) higher quality gear with better interconnection behavior than using other brands. Just how does that take advantage of anyone? It's not like buying Apple products you are scammed, you get what you are buying - Apple's attempt to make a product that works as well as possible for 99% of users.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"You're talking about a speaker that costs more than twice as much as most theatre systems, yet physically it can't have the same sound range."
You appear to know nothing about "most theatre systems", how much they cost, and what "sound range" is.
The criticism of the HomePod as expensive at it's price is one of the more absurd things anyone says about Apple. Anyone who thinks $350 for a speaker is a lot doesn't know anything about the category.
Re: (Score:2)
Facts please. How are these speakers better
Re: How does Apple take advantage? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
"Some people think $700 is worth it for a speaker that is simply 'prettier'"
HomePods are not $700 nor will anyone respect your opinion that they are "simply prettier" considering you've never heard one.
"I don't understand why this is offensive at all."
It's not as though you know anything about what you're talking about. You have utterly no experience with these products nor do you demonstrate any knowledge of their competition. It's not even clear you know what that competition is, considering you think i
Re: (Score:2)
That's cool but... (Score:2, Interesting)
Yeah, I'm sure the same people work on both. (Score:2)
Your iPhone 4S... (Score:2)
... Is it still using its original battery? Mine is. I don't use it much. I disabled most of its features like cellular data, locations, background, etc.
Seven twiddlers and a woofer... (Score:2)
Arrange your twiddlers around the periphery so that only one points forward. HomePod - bringing the Bose 901 "blur of audio-something generally over-in-that-direction" to the 21st century!
For those not aware, Bose calls their wideband midrange/tweeter transducer a twiddler.
Re: (Score:3)
Arrange your twiddlers around the periphery so that only one points forward. HomePod - bringing the Bose 901 "blur of audio-something generally over-in-that-direction" to the 21st century!
For those not aware, Bose calls their wideband midrange/tweeter transducer a twiddler.
Computer-controlled beamforming is a LOT different from Bose fakery.
If you'd get your head out of your ass, you'd see that there really is some pretty cool shit going on in the lowly HomePod.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Having listened and measured a HomePod, it's doing a bit more than the 901 - but not much, in terms of final results. Wave field synthesis is a pretty well-established field, and the biggest issue is always the tradeoff between image accuracy and image size. HomePod pushes way too far to the image size at great expense of image accuracy. A pair of them will most likely end up with a big image - and one that has no definition inside of it. Much like a modern 901.
Well, you won't get me to argue that a 901, even a 901a, is anything LIKE a high-fidelity speaker system.
But it will still be interesting to hear what a stereo pair of these things sound like. I'm pretty sure that no one else has created a system quite like this before. Yes, it is still limited by the size of its drivers and power amps; but I wouldn't be surprised to be quite surprised when I hear a stereo pair of HomePods.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you won't get me to argue that a 901, even a 901a, is anything LIKE a high-fidelity speaker system.
Likewise, you don't get to argue that the HomePod is anything LIKE a high-fidelity speaker system. Because it is most definitely not.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you won't get me to argue that a 901, even a 901a, is anything LIKE a high-fidelity speaker system.
Likewise, you don't get to argue that the HomePod is anything LIKE a high-fidelity speaker system. Because it is most definitely not.
Since the term "high fidelity" does not have a technical term, then it is impossible to say whether a particular system is "high fidelity" or not, isn't it?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Merriam Webster [merriam-webster.com] defines high fidelity, and Wikipedia does as well [wikipedia.org]. The HomePods are NOT high fidelity. Walk into any stereo shop and ask... But hey, this is the company that pushes their crappy "earpods" and owns Beats - what do we expect about audio quality?
Merriam-Webster's definition is kind of self-referential, and is quite subjective:
"the reproduction of an effect (such as sound or an image) that is very faithful to the original."
That's IT. You are KIDDING me, right?
The first paragraph of Wikipedia's definition sounds like some rando off the street wrote it.
"High fidelity (often shortened to hi-fi or hifi) is a term used by listeners, audiophiles and home audio enthusiasts to refer to high-quality reproduction of sound.[1] This is in contrast to the lower
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
OK, go ahead and claim the HomePod is high fidelity. That says a LOT about the standards you hold! HomePod is a gimmick, an also-ran, a distant 4th - behind Amazon, Google, and SONOS. Enjoy your 4th rate sound!
Nice deflection!
All I said is that I haven't seen a TECHNICAL (non-subjective) definition of High Fidelity.
You failed to provide one.
Then when challenged, you DEFLECT by again attacking the HomePod as not meeting a Standard you can't even provide an OBJECTIVE, REALISTIC Definition for!
I'm honestly not sure if I would characterize the HomePod as "High Fidelity" (according to my personal standards); but I haven't read even one review that places its Sound Quality "a distant 4th" BEHIND Sonos, Amazon or Google
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you can't read the Wiki link (high-fidelity equipment has inaudible noise and distortion, and a flat (neutral, uncolored) frequency response within the human hearing range) then there is no hope for you. But then, we know you're an Apple fanatic, so there was no hope to begin with, so... Perhaps you should check reviews [cnet.com] other than [businessinsider.com] Apple Fanboi [fortune.com] sites. Seriously, anyone who thinks a HomePod sounds better than a SONOS Play:1 is either deaf or a dyed-in-the-wool Apple Cultist.
I can read fine.
It's STILL SUBJECTIVE.
"Inaudible noise and distortion". Inaudible to WHO? And what KIND of Noise and Distortion, since IM distortion is MUCH more audible, depending on the frequencies involved, than THD is (haven't we had this discussion already?)
"Flat frequency response". Again, since NOTHING has a PERFECTLY-FLAT frequency response, that is an utterly impossible-to-achieve spec, sorry!
Oh, and do you really think that pitting ONE HomePod against TWO SonosOnes is a fair comparison?
In fact, th
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Go ahead, justify the fact it's a poor performer. We know you already live-and-breathe Apple. Go ahead, walk into a stereo shop and ask why their products don't sound as good as a HomePod. Go ahead and cheer-lead your locked in product [techhive.com] once again, and stay on that Apple reserve!
Man, I think the only subject we agree on is contained in your tagline.
Re: (Score:2)
SONOS One the winner [gizmodo.com]. Sorry!
And Gizmodo is some sort of Audio-centric site?
Sorry, no. In fact, that "comparison" article is quite laughable.
And the people who think that the HomePod has "no midrange" (which, BTW, is NOT reflected in the Freq. Resp. curves I've seen) are likely used to shitty computer-speakers, where the main drivers would be more properly placed in a full-range system as MIDRANGE drivers, and thus, those other systems have an OVERABUNDANCE of Midrange; so the HomePod sounds "deficient" by comparison.
Re: (Score:2)
Computer-controlled beamforming is a LOT different from Bose fakery.
Yes it is. Unfortunatley the only people who are capable of beam-forming in Apple are their marketing department which presumably had to come up with a name for the totally nothing at all like beam-forming thing that Apple engineers shat out and didn't realise the name was already taken.
Re: (Score:2)
Computer-controlled beamforming is a LOT different from Bose fakery.
Yes it is. Unfortunatley the only people who are capable of beam-forming in Apple are their marketing department which presumably had to come up with a name for the totally nothing at all like beam-forming thing that Apple engineers shat out and didn't realise the name was already taken.
Riiiiight. Of COURSE you know more than a group of engineers that have worked on a project for seven years.
Why don't you edutate us, then? Oh, and I'll take that copy of your Curriculum Vitae, too, while you're at it.
"Spacious"? How about realistic reproduction. (Score:1)
The point of stereo is better, more realistic sound reproduction. Of course, this always means there is a 'sweet spot' in the listening room, but that's sorta the point.
Re: (Score:2)
the "point" of stereo is not to create a "sweet spot" in the room, it's a necessary consequence of it. Eliminating that "sweet spot" would be a good thing.
Re: "Spacious"? How about realistic reproduction. (Score:1)
Eliminating the 'sweet spot' would be a good thing, but not at a compromise to the realism of the music reproduction. I am, of course, referring to recordings of musical performances that are naturally acoustic. Fabricated synthetic music, 'pop' or whatever other forms, don't really matter, because they are all fake from the start. Whatever squeaks and booms pleasantly then is all good. But high fidelity music reproduction, which is what stereo is for, is all about realism.
About time, I say.... but .... (Score:2)
It really is interesting how many "little things" with iOS are probably actually more important to get fixed than these updates Apple considers a "big deal".
I mean, the fact the HomePods didn't support stereo with a pair of them is, frankly, embarrassing - considering I've owned a couple different sets of bluetooth speakers that could do this years ago. So good for Apple it's finally been addressed. But I already skipped buying the HomePods. I own too many speaker and music solutions around here already.
One
Re: (Score:2)
Do you know how bluetooth stereo pairs work? I've been wondering. I'd think it's tricky to control the latency to a sub-millisecond level with a digital audio protocol.