Why Apple Shouldn’t Have Released the HomePod Without AirPlay 2

I was pretty ambivalent about the HomePod in my review. I found the sound to be mediocre for a lot of music, and it simply wasn’t worth the price. I don’t particularly care about using Siri with that device, and don’t consider that worth paying $350 for the speaker. I’m interested in its musicality.

Apple (finally) released AirPlay 2 this week, which notably offers the ability to create a stereo pair from two HomePods. I decided I’d try this out. I’m quite impressed by the sound.

For background, I have a fairly large bedroom, but the way it is set up means that I can’t put a dresser opposite the bed – or any kind of shelf – on which I’d put an AirPlay compatible amplifier and two bookshelf speakers. So the HomePod seemed like a good option; but a single HomePod not only didn’t sound good, but I couldn’t set it up in a good position for listening in bed.

So I bought a second HomePod when Apple released AirPlay 2, and put each HomePod on an Ikea bookcase on either side of the room, roughly centering the stereo sweet spot at the bed.

I wasn’t expecting this to sound great; given the sound of a single HomePod, I didn’t think the stereo would make much of a difference. But I was very surprised when I started listening to music. While the single HomePod is flat, and the frequency response is way too bassy, creating a stereo pair allows the electronic wizardry in the devices’ processors to create something that is frankly surprising. Music has a very good soundstage, with a much more balanced frequency response (though I still put the Bass Reducer EQ setting on my iPhone when streaming music to them).

Live music sounds vibrant, with the slight faux surround sound that the HomePod creates, and studio recordings sound precise and clean. I tried with a wide range of music, and, while there was the occasional track that didn’t sound great, most of the music I listened to sounded excellent.

But there was a problem: my Ikea bookcases were a bit too tall for me to get the right amount of treble from the tweeters. You need to have tweeters around ear level to get the right sound, because the waves are so small, and lying in bed I was too low and didn’t hear enough treble. It was fine when I was sitting up, but I often read lying down in bed, and wanted to be able to listen to music in this position at times.

IMG 7851So I thought it was worth trying to move the HomePod from the top of the bookcases to the top shelves. My first thought was that it would be boomy and bassy, but much to my surprise, the HomePod adapted to this location – which is certainly not the ideal place to put a speaker – with aplomb.

There was no boom, no notable difference in frequency response, other than the fact that I could hear the treble a lot better. And while I had to put books under the speakers when they were on the top shelf – this is one of those Ikea bookcases where the tops, bottoms, and sides aren’t solid – there was no need on the shelves.

Apple should never have released the HomePod without AirPlay 2, because reviewers heard the speaker in sub-optimal conditions. While you can use this as a standalone speaker, it’s really not good enough. However, it’s a bit expensive to buy two of them, and if I had more room, I certainly would not have bought a second one; I would have bought a small amplifier and bookshelf speakers. But with these two diminutive speakers in my bedroom, I now have full, rich audio, which is surprisingly good, taking up little space.

It’s worth noting that Apple may have tweaked the audio in the recent update to the HomePod software, which could also bring improvements. I’d still like a direct EQ setting for the HomePod, rather than have to set it when streaming from my iPhone. It means that if I want to stream from my iTunes library, I have to turn on the EQ on my Mac, and it’s not easy to do this remotely. I’d also like to see a balance setting for a stereo pair of HomePods. In my bedroom, the bed is equidistant from the right and left side walls, so it works out fine, but in other situations people may want to adjust this.

But kudos to Apple. Whatever they’ve done to make two HomePods work so well together is impressive.

Why Apple’s HomePod is Failing

In a Bloomberg article, Apple’s Stumbling HomePod Isn’t the Hot Seller It Wanted, Mark Gurman points out that Apple’s HomePod is more or less a failure. This device that was slated to be revolutionary – combining a smart speaker and “excellent” audio quality – is not flying of the shelves as Apple had hoped.

At first, it looked like the HomePod might be a hit. Pre-orders were strong, and in the last week of January the device grabbed about a third of the U.S. smart speaker market in unit sales, according to data provided to Bloomberg by Slice Intelligence. But by the time HomePods arrived in stores, sales were tanking, says Slice principal analyst Ken Cassar. “Even when people had the ability to hear these things,” he says, “it still didn’t give Apple another spike.”

The device was released later than Apple had announced, missing the important Christmas holiday season. It’s overpriced; at $349, it is much more expensive than other smart speakers, and more expensive than decent sounding standalone speakers. (Heck, you can buy a decent amplifier and bookshelf speakers for that price.) And the sound isn’t as great as Apple had advertised. The main problem is an excess of bass, and there are no equalization controls so listeners can tune the sound to their tastes, and not to Apple’s.

I immediately realized the device’s limitations, notably that the audio quality is good at times, but crappy at others. But,

I did find that, playing music from iTunes, with the Bass Reducer setting on the Equalizer, much of the music sounded better. There was less booming bass, and more subtle sounds. But no matter what, the midrange is weak on a speaker like this.

And the whole Siri thing? Trying to get Siri to recognize what music I want to hear? It certainly hears my voice, but any song, album, or artist names that are a bit obscure get converted to some weird sound-alikes, making it useless to control it by voice.

It does have some very good features, such as its variable loudness, that adjusts the bass and treble as you change the volume, and with the appropriate EQ, it sounds okay, but I’d get similar sound from a speaker at half the price. As is often the case, Apple uses a lot of buzz words to describe the technology in the device – and there is some cool technology – but these smarts don’t do much for the sound.

Apple may be hoping for a sales boost when they finally get around to releasing AirPlay 2, which is several months overdue, and which will enable the use of two HomePods as a stereo pair, but I can’t see a lot of people paying a total of $700 to have mediocre sound, without any EQ controls, and a flawed personal assistant.

Apple clearly doesn’t understand the market. They thought that they could convince people to spend more for a speaker that combines smarts and sound, but offered neither. Siri is limited and flawed, and the sound just isn’t good enough for a speaker at that price. I use mine in the bedroom, with Siri turned off, for occasional listening, and I don’t regret buying it, but I wouldn’t recommend the HomePod to anyone.

Smart Speakers and the Commoditization of Music

For several decades, there were only two ways to listen to recorded music. You could play music you owned, or you could turn on the radio. You may have had records or cassettes, or even reel-to-reel tapes or eight-track tapes, and you were able to play them if you were at home, or perhaps in the car. But for most people, unless they had substantial music collections, music listening meant tuning into their favorite radio station and listening to what other people thought they should be listening to.

Things have changed a lot since then: we now have endless options for listening to music at home, in the car, and pretty much anywhere we go using our smartphones. The latest addition to this arsenal of music players is the smart speaker: Apple’s HomePod, Amazon’s Echo, and others. These devices are changing the way many people listen to music by providing a frictionless experience. You ask the smart speaker to play some music, and the music plays.

But this approach is also changing the music people listen to. When listening to the radio, you generally hear a limited number of songs or pieces of music, because the radio station’s program directors have decided what the station will play. With a smart speaker and a streaming music subscription, you have a nearly unlimited range of choice: 30 or 40 million tracks covering the entire history of recorded music are available with simple voice commands.

The problem with this is that you can only play the music you remember; if you don’t know the name of an album, an artist, or song, it’s not easy to get a smart speaker to play what you want. You can also only get your smart speaker to play music whose name you can pronounce; it is particularly difficult to get specific works of classical music to play on a smart speaker because of this. Some people ask the smart speaker to play a certain type of playlist, music to match a mood, or an activity; some people simply ask it to play music. In the case of Apple’s HomePod, asking it to play music and nothing more will result in it playing your personal radio station, a selection of music that you have purchased from the iTunes Store, loved on Apple Music, or played recently. This is inoffensive music; music that doesn’t suck. You generally won’t be surprised by what you hear, and it fills a void: it is background music, wallpaper music.

In the past, people used the radio for wallpaper music; they would often hear the same songs over and over, in a gradually shifting playlist that would change from week to week, interspersed with advertisements and news. And they would become familiar with much of that music. Now, with a smart speaker and a music streaming service, there are no ads, no news, no repetition, just music. Music to fill the empty space; music to fill the void.

When people listen to music like this, they lose the emotional attachment they have to that music: they are simply turning on a spigot, and as long as music comes out, and silence is kept at bay, they are satisfied. They may not recognize all the music they hear, especially if they are listening to a playlist of new songs, and they may not know who is performing that music. They may not care; if they are simply using music to fill space, does it really matter what they listen to as long as it doesn’t suck?

We have shifted our music consumption from something very personal, where we knew what we were listening to, even if we didn’t always choose it when listening to the radio, to now something where, for many people, listening to music lacks that personal connection. As music becomes commodified, it loses its value. Individual artists are no longer appreciated for their music, since most people, when listening to music in this way, will rarely hear more than one or two tracks from an artist. They will hear a style, a mood, perhaps a certain level of energy, but, in that case, does it really matter what they listen to?

The Trouble With HomePod Reviews – Monday Note

Jean-Louis Gassée, former Apple executive and created of BeOS, doesn’t like the way HomePod reviews have been done.

With its HomePod speaker, Apple has once again reshuffled existing genres. As an almost singular representative of the new consumer computational audio devices, HomePod’s slippery algorithms defeat quick and easy reviews.

He criticizes most tests, as not being scientific, and highlights David Pogue’s “blind” test of four speakers with give people.

He discusses the “computational audio” used by the HomePod, and notes:

This is where we find a new type of difficulty when evaluating this new breed of smart speakers, and why we must be kind to the early HomePod reviewers: The technical complexity and environmental subjectivity leads to contradictory statements and inconsistent results.

I think he’s missing the point. When one reviews something subjectively, the goal is to find out how it sounds to each listener. You can double-blind all you want, but that’s not how people perceive music. There is certainly room for measurements – but not when they’re done wrong – but the true test of a device like this, especially one where the surroundings change the sound, is to have listeners judge it.

Yes, when you have four speakers, and their volume isn’t perfectly balanced, that is an issue, but the main takeaway in Pogue’s review was that a) no one liked the Amazon Echo, because it’s a cheap, tinny speaker, and b) the HomePod may not be the best. It is notably very bass heavy, which means that some music will sound good, and some won’t sound very good at all. Compared to the other speakers – which have a flatter sound signature – the HomePod makes the mistake of imposing a tone on all the music it plays, and not allowing for individual user adjustments. (I’m not sure if all the better speakers that David Pogue tested allow for EQ tweaking; the Amazon Echo probably doesn’t, because it’s not that much of a speaker; the Sonos One definitely does, via the Sonos app.)

Finally, I find it almost risible to see the graphic that Mr. Gassée has included in has article as proof that the test was rigged. He points out that a louder speaker generally sounds better – which is well known – so the people who preferred one speaker must have been closer to that speaker.


This is a clear example of bias. Persons one and five were certainly closer to the speakers on the end, but persons two, three, and four were closer to speakers B and C. But none of them like it. Mr Gassée’s lines are ludicrous; he’s talking about the distance, yet ignoring the fact that, for example, person three is notably further from speakers A and D, and much closer to speakers B and C.

This is a glaring error in logic, and it’s a shame to see it included in an article that gets so technical about computational audio, electro-acoustc music at IRCAM, and so one.

Apple HomePod Review: Superior Sound, but Limited by Siri

Apple’s HomePod has finally shipped, boasting a $350 price tag and marking the company’s foray into the “smart speaker” sector with a device that is more speaker than smart. This small, sleek device, clearly a product of Apple’s design team, is meant to offer high-quality sound and serve as a gateway to Siri, Apple’s personal assistant. In spite of the high price, it’s a very nice device, but it has a lot of weaknesses.

Should you buy a HomePod? Is it worth the price? Read on for our full review of Apple’s HomePod speaker to help you decide if it’s worth buying for your home.

Read the rest of the article on The Mac Security Blog

What to Do When Your HomePod Stops Responding

It had only been five days, but I already had a problem with the HomePod not responding. I wanted to listen to some music in the bedroom yesterday, while I was reading, and I started playing something on my iPhone, then went to stream it to the HomePod. It was playing, but no music was coming out of the device. I tried adjusting the volume by tapping the + on the top; no change.

The Home app, it showed that it was not responding.

Home app

After a bunch of attempts to fix it – restarting my iPhone, unplugging and replugging the HomePod – it still didn’t work. So I had to reset the device.

To do this, go to the Home app and find the tile for the HomePod. Press and hold its icon, then tap Details. You’ll see this:

Homepod settings1

Scroll down to the bottom and you’ll see Remove Accessory.

Homepod settings2

Tap Remove Accessory, and the HomePod’s settings will be deleted.

Unplug the HomePod, then plug it in again. Wait a minute for it to start up. Back on the main screen of the Home app, tap the + icon, and hold your iOS device near the HomePod to initiate the setup procedure again. After that, it should work (at least until the next time).


Apple does some dumb things at time, but this is probably the dumbest. Some of you may remember “antenna gate,” when the iPhone 4’s antenna was placed in a non-optimal location, and Steve Jobs famously told people “don’t hold it that way.” That was in incredibly arrogant way of refusing to accept responsibility for a design choice.

In the latest installment, the plastic on the bottom of the HomePod can leave white rings on some furniture. Apparently this occurs with wood that has been oiled or waxed, and is caused by chemical interactions with the wood.

It’s hard to understand how Apple, a company that touts its understanding of materials and design, could have release a product that, well, damages furniture. Presumably, if you only leave the HomePod on furniture for a few days, then notice it, it might be easy to repair, but you may need to do some heavy work if it’s any longer than that.

Apple’s Cleaning and taking care of HomePod support document now includes a “Where to place HomePod” section, which says:

It is not unusual for any speaker with a vibration-damping silicone base to leave mild marks when placed on some wooden surfaces. The marks can be caused by oils diffusing between the silicone base and the table surface, and will often go away after several days when the speaker is removed from the wooden surface. If not, wiping the surface gently with a soft damp or dry cloth may remove the marks. If marks persist, clean the surface with the furniture manufacturer’s recommended cleaning process. If you’re concerned about this, we recommend placing your HomePod on a different surface.

Not unusual? Seriously? It’s highly unusual for any product of this type, used as it is intended, to damage furniture.

This is much worse than the recent iPhone battery issue, and ranks up there with antenna gate as dumb Apple problems. There should be no limitation to where you can put the HomePod; I’ve never heard of any other device of this type where there are limitations as to what type of surface you can put it on. Why hasn’t Apple used a material that doesn’t mark wooden surfaces?

Audiophile HomePod Reviewer Turns Out to Not Know Much about Measuring Audio

The much touted review of the HomePod posted by an “audiophile” on Reddit last week – and gleefully tweeted by Apple’s Phil Schiller – turns out to be a long mess of uninformed and poorly made measurements.

This reply on Reddit highlights many of the problems, notably the fact that the HomePod wasn’t measured in an anechoic room, but mainly the fact that the “reviewer” fudged the display of his graphs, making them look better than they were.

Here’s one of the original graphs:


The experimenter seems obsessed with that graph which they claim shows a very flat frequency response. They even say, further down the review, that it’s an “almost perfectly flat speaker”. Mmm. I opened that same measurement in REW and here’s what I get (with the same 1/12 octave smoothing as the above image):


Doesn’t look as nice doesn’t it? That’s because of the scale, you see. It’s the ages-old trick of messing with the vertical scale to make things look flatter than they really are. In the screenshot that the experimenter posted, the interval between ticks is 10 dB. That’s enormous. Almost anything will look almost flat at that scale.

This is why it’s wrong to assume that some random guy who writes 5,000 words and includes a bunch of numbers and graphs knows what he’s doing. Another comment from the comment I linked to above:

I find it absolutely hilarious that the experimenter is specifying conditions like “Room temperature was 72ºF (22.2ºC) and the humidity outside was 97%. Air Pressure was 30.1 inHg (764.54 mmHg)”. It sounds like they’ve done very rigorous measurements in highly controlled conditions, but that’s rendered moot by the overwhelming influence of the specific room in which they made the measurements.


Conclusion: no, these measurements don’t show that “The HomePod is 100% an Audiophile grade Speaker”, far from it. Because the measurements were made in a reverberant room without windowing, the data is mostly meaningless. The linearity, SPL and distortion measurements are usable to some extent, but these are not the most important criteria when assessing the audio quality of a loudspeaker (unless loud bass is really important for you). Many parts of the “review” are misleading, at times egregiously so, leaving the impression that the experimenter is interpreting the data through Apple-colored glasses.

I wonder if Phil Schiller had anyone from Apple’s audio team look at the original “review” before tweeting it. My guess is no; they would have spotted the incorrect measurements, and warned him not to share it. It makes Apple look bad, because of Schiller’s sharing it, now that it has turned out to be quite wrong.

Computer Audiophile Reviews the HomePod

Chris Connaker, who runs the Computer Audiophile website, and who is a regular guest on The Next Track podcast, was initially not interested in the HomePod. It’s not the type of device he would use, he said, but given the amount of coverage it was getting, he decided to buy one and try it out. Here’s his review.

One could raise one’s eyebrows a bit when Chris mentions the reference system he uses to compare his music with the HomePod:

Speakers: TAD Compact reference One CR1 $45,000 (frequency response 40Hz–20kHz, ±3dB)
Amplifiers: Constellation Audio Inspiration Monoblocks $20,000 /pr
DAC: dCS Rossini $24,000
Cabling by Wire World and 512 Engineering ~$10,000

But he also uses:

Klipsch: The Three $499 (frequency response 45Hz–20kHz, ±3dB)

To be fair, you can’t compare the HomePod just to other, similar speakers. You need to compare it to the way music should sound. What you are trying to determine is how much is lost or gained by using that speaker when comparing it to a “real” stereo. In my testing and review, I compared it to my office sound system, which is a Yamaha receiver (£600) and Focal Chorus speakers (£200), with some cables (£6) and banana plugs (£8). So while my system was a bit less expensive than Chris’s, it’s still a pretty good system.

Here’s what he thought about the first piece of music he listened to:

The HomePod shouldn’t come close to my reference system, and it doesn’t. Let’s not kid ourselves. Apple has more money than some countries and has hired very smart engineers, but it can’t change the laws of physics. Starting with the impressive aspects of the HomePod playing Red or Dead, Randi’s vocal is crisp and clear, but has a very slight soft edge. The very fine details for which audiophiles frequently listen aren’t nearly as audible through the HomePod as they are through a true HiFi system. The HomePod has a very nice sound that will likely please most listeners without causing fatigue on tracks like Red or Dead. If I was unaware of the true sound of this track, I’d think the HomePod had done a pretty good job reproducing the vocal portion.

As he says, “If I was unaware of the true sound of this track…” That’s important; for many people, the HomePod may be the best speaker they’ve ever owned, because they simply never owned any good hi-fi equipment. They may find the sound attractive, or flattering, and, if so, that’s fine. But it’s important to put this into perspective: how it sounds compared to the music “the way the artist intended,” as audio buffs like to say.

Chris immediately highlights the main problem with the HomePod:

The HomePod is a bass monster, for better or worse. […] Thumps and booms are pretty much what the HomePod is all about and it’s very clear after a single listen to a track with very controlled bass.

Everyone who cares about how music sounds is saying this; it’s not just subjective. People who are used to the high bass of Beats headphones may think this is normal, but as I pointed out in my first impressions of the HomePod, some music sounds great, and some music sounds pretty bad, because of the excess bass.

For another song, he highlights one of the other issues I noticed:

the HomePod was nowhere near any of the HiFi system on which I’ve heard this song. Closed-in with a jumbled mess of sounds and a haze over the top is how I’d describe this track through the HomePod.

That “jumbled mess” is how a lot of more complex music sounds. Coldplay sounds great, but a string quartet I listened to sounded horrible. A jazz piano trio had no depth, no detail, and many tracks just sounded confused.

I love Metallica’s …And Justice for All album for both the music and the way it sounds. It’s not a favorite of many Metallica fans, but I just love the sounds of Lars’ Tama drum set. The track One features a nice soft-fish guitar intro. On the HomePod this guitar sounds really good and has good tone. I can see many music lovers really enjoying sounds like this. In fact, I wish the entire track sounded as good as this opening sounded through the Pod. I’m frustrated to say, the HomePod just falls apart at the 0:55 mark in the song. The drum sound that I love, that I’ve played for so many people on so many different systems including one a couple weeks ago in New York City, was totally wrong. It sounded like a huge band of upper bass frequencies was missing. I heard Lars’ kick drum, but not all of it. It’s as if there was a filter on the upper end of the drum set and an exaggeration on the very bottom end.

Exactly. A more restrained song I listened to, Brad Mehldau’s cover of the Radiohead song Exit Music (For a Film), showed how drums don’t do well on the HomePod:

“Moving to jazz, I tried out one of my standard test tracks, Brad Mehldau’s Exit Music (For a Film), a cover of the Radiohead song, on The Art of the Trio, Vol. 3: Songs. I love this track because of the subtle way it builds up, and because of the light touch of drummer Jorge Rossy, as he taps the cymbals, creating interesting polyrhythms with the piano. Unfortunately, the cymbals are too quiet, and the bass gets muddied with the piano, turning an intricate song into a flat-sounding piece for piano trio. This was also the case with other Brad Mehldau recordings.”

But, okay, that’s comparing the HomePod to Chris’s $100K system. How about his $500 Klipsch Three speaker?

It has a much more balanced sound than the HomePod. Eddie Vedder’s Society was very enjoyable through The Three as opposed to the HomePod. I A/B’d them for twenty minutes to make sure I heard what I thought I heard. I honestly expected the HomePod to put the Klipsch unit to shame, but that wasn’t the case.

Chris briefly mentions the Siri integration, but given that Siri is only half-baked on that device, even that isn’t a compelling reason to buy it.

His conclusion:

Perhaps some normalcy has now been added to the hysteria. I agree with Consumer Reports. I really wanted to like the HomePod and I wanted [it] to sound fantastic. The truth is, the HomePod is good and I’d recommend it to people who have to have Apple products. If people want a voice assistant, get a voice assistant. If people want a loudspeaker, get a loudspeaker. Splitting the duties provides much more flexibility to purchase the best of both worlds. Google and Amazon offer far better products for voice. With respect to sound quality, there are many other products I’d recommend over the HomePod, starting with The Three from Klipsch.

There are lots of great standalone speakers. The lack in functionality as “smart” devices, but it’s really not clear how many people want these devices. If you’re all in on the Apple ecosystem, it’s a good option, but if you really care about audio quality, it’s far from the best you can get for the money.

HomePod Audiophile Review: Sound Performance ‘Deserves a Standing Ovation’ – Mac Rumors

Update: The author of the review has now added an initial paragraph to his very long text, pointing out that, well, maybe, just perhaps, his measurements aren’t worth much.

EDIT: before you read any further, please read /u/edechamps excellent reply to this post and then read this excellent discussion between him and /u/Ilkless about measuring, conventions, some of the mistakes I’ve made, and how the data should be interpreted. His conclusion, if I’m reading it right, is that these measurements are largely inconclusive, since the measurements were not done in an anechoic chamber. Since I dont have one of those handy, these measurements should be taken with a brick of salt. I still hope that some of the information in here, the discussion, the guesses, and more are useful to everyone. This really is a new type of speaker (again see the discussion) and evaluating it accurately is bloody difficult.

He still doesn’t address the question of DSP affecting the sound differently when music is playing rather than a sine wave. But I think it’s clear that this whole thing is, well, a waste of time.

I wonder if Phil Schiller is going to tweet about this addendum…

HomePod reviews from the tech press came thick and fast last week, and while the smart speaker’s sound quality was consistently praised, most reviews were based on subjective assessments and didn’t take into account professional-grade output measurements. Early on Monday, however, Reddit user WinterCharm posted exhaustive audio performance testing results for HomePod to the Reddit audiophile community.

Using specialized equipment and a controlled testing environment, the review features in-depth analysis of the smart speaker’s output when compared to a pair of KEF X300A digital hi-fi monitors, representing a “meticulously set up audiophile grade speaker versus a tiny little HomePod that claims to do room correction on its own”.

I’ve been following this Reddit thread and its published results. It’s amazing that in a world of audiophiles who obsess over which USB cable makes their music sound better, that this person performed all of these measurements, and forgot to mention that the HomePod uses digital signal processing to alter all music that it plays. In other words, it is far from neutral, and audiophiles make a big deal about their equipment being neutral. The frequency response may be excellent, but the equalization alters the music from what it should sound like.

In fact, I think it’s highly possible that this reviewer has based the conclusions of his testing on false assumptions. The HomePod has dynamic digital signal processing; it alters the music based on the music. In other words, it’s not a fixed EQ setting, but one that changes as music is played (and according to the room where it’s played). As such, sending single frequency sine waves, or whatever he did, won’t show the results of the EQ.

You can easily hear this by playing some music you know well first on a stereo, then on the HomePod. For some music, the EQ is gentle; for other tracks, it’s aggressive, very bass-heavy. My speculation is that there’s some sort of algorithm that allows certain types of music – with, say, a close balance between bass and treble – to not have such a drastic effect on the bass, and others – more bass-heavy music to start with – to be more greatly affected.

In other words, this person measured the trees, but not the forests.

Source: HomePod Audiophile Review: Sound Performance ‘Deserves a Standing Ovation’ – Mac Rumors