Google Debuts Its $400 Google Home Max Speaker To Rival Apple's HomePod (techcrunch.com)

In addition to the Pixel 2 and Pixel 2 XL, Google debuted a $400 speaker, called Home Max, that looks to compete directly with Apple's recently announced HomePod. The Home Max is a larger Google Home that features stereo speakers and more premium looks and materials. It's expected to go on sale in December in the U.S. TechCrunch reports: It can tune its audio to its own space, analyzing the sound coming from the speaker using its built in microphones to determine the best equalizer settings. This is called Smart Sound, and it evolves over time and based on where you move the speaker, using built-in machine learning. It has Cast functionality, as well as input via stereo 3.5 mm jack. Home Max can output sound that's up to 20 times more powerful than the standard version of Home, Google says, and it has two 4.5 inch woofers on board with two 0.7 inch custom-built tuners. It can sit in either vertical or horizontal orientation, and it comes in both 'chalk' and 'charcoal.' Of course, this bigger speaker also includes a noise isolating array that makes it work even in open rooms with background noise, and it's Assistant-enabled, so you can use it to control your music playback via voice, or manage your smart home devices, set yourself reminders, alarms, and timers and much more. Google also launched a budget-friendly Google Home Mini that features the Google Assistant but in a smaller form factor. 9to5Google reports: Google touts the Home Mini as having a powerful speaker with "crisp" 360 degree sound. The Mini can also be connected to any Chromecast wireless speaker, but there is no 3.5mm jack like Amazon's Echo Dot. In the center, there are four white lights that note when the Home Mini is listening or responding. Besides saying the "Ok, Google" hotword, users can tap on the Home Mini to issue a command. Google also retained the Home's original button for disabling the microphone with a toggle next to the charging port. The Google Home Mini will be go on sale later this month for $49, with pre-orders starting today.

Comments

Connect

[Anonymous Coward]

So, i just plug it in Pixel 2 via 3.5mm audio jack?

Re:Connect

[megamind]

Except the jack is going away. Just what the world needs is more specialized speakers. Why isn't there an app for this? Why do I need a whole new device?

$400 for a smart speaker??

[Anonymous Coward]

Interesting at $250 or less. $400, not so much.

Re:$400 for a smart speaker??

[Anonymous Coward]

What kind of idiot buys a device which sole purpose is to spy and collect data to monetize? Of course _Google_ should pay a sum per month to a person who lets his house to be spied. A some kind of revenue sharing model would be fair compensation for lost privacy.

3.5

[markdavis]

>"It has Cast functionality, as well as input via stereo 3.5 mm jack"

Oh really... a 3.5mm jack. Hmm...

Re: 3.5

[Anonymous Coward]

How courageous of them.

Not quite as advanced though

[SuperKendall]

It looks nice but if you find other images of people holding it, very large. That is probably good for sounds quality, but it also makes it hard to fit in.

The Apple HomePod is a bit nicer in a number of ways - it is more multi-directional in figuring out sound abalone (though the Max does that to some unknown degree, how well it does this will be defined by where you aim it). Again related to aiming, the HomePod can target people in the room in a way the Max does not seem too...

The largest advantage the HomePod has though is that they can work in pairs to deliver real stereo, something I've seen no mention of in the Max. Yes it means you need to buy two HomePod units.

The Max in theory supports more services, although you could always just AirPlay things like Spotify to the HomePod...

To me the Google offerings seem more aimed at trying to overcome Amazon in the home assistant space, which seems sort of hopeless.

Re:Not quite as advanced though

[LynnwoodRooster]

Yes, a bigger speaker is usually better for acoustics, no omnidirectional (like HomePod) is not good for audio quality in a room, and yes you can run a pair of Max in a stereo pair. This is more a shot across the bow of SONOS and the new SONOS Home just announced, rather than HomePod. Even the pricing and shape and functionality are reminiscent of the SONOS Play:5. HomePod will probably end up like all previous Apple audio products - forgotten in two years, never to be discussed again.

Re:Not quite as advanced though

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem with the HomePod is Siri, its limited functionality makes it great as a box for streaming music from Apple Music but pretty crappy for everything else. I use Siri a bit on my phone but I'm frustrated by its limitations, so much of the time I just end up with "here's what I found on the web for <insert question here>" my Google Home is a far more capable assistant. It's annoying that I can't switch out Siri for Google Assistant app on my phone.

Re:Not quite as advanced though

[Anonymous Coward]

Google says the Home Max is stereo... but with front-facing speakers only 1" apart what kind of stereo effect can you actually hope to achieve?

Re:Not quite as advanced though

[Fly Swatter]

The tweeters are, relatively, much further apart. The tweeters also do most of the heavy lifting when it comes to stereo projection.

The funny part is they say it can be placed both horizontal and vertical as if that is a selling point. Seems to me, vertical position would ruin the stereo effect for most practical purposes.

Does it have a radio ?

[Fly Swatter]

it has two 4.5 inch woofers on board with two 0.7 inch custom-built tuners

So I can hear two radio stations at a time, or maybe these are tweeters? When it comes to specifications, double checking your facts for typos are important.

Self calibrating room acoustics is nothing new, most modern receivers have had this for years. Although with something that will probably get kicked around the house and constantly move location it might be more useful in this case. Oh and the 'Smart Sound' moniker was taken by (I think) Magnavox years, or maybe now its decades, ago.

Re:Does it have a radio ?

[HornWumpus]

On what planet is a 4.5 speaker a woofer? What's the max throw on that? $400? They're on crack. For that kind of money I expect a rapper's brand on the junk electronics.

Re:Does it have a radio ?

[50000BTU_barbecue]

On the planet were progress has made the Creative T20s give perceptible bass out of a 2 inch cone.

Re:Does it have a radio ?

[LynnwoodRooster]

You'd be surprised... I've done lots of real sub-5" woofers, with real stroke. Like 10+mm one way on a Klippel. Even smaller can rock. For example, I designed the transducers in the SONOS Play:1 and that 3.5" woofer has an 8.6mm one way excursion (per Klippel measurements). It'll throw down with most 5.25" woofers, and even embarrass quite a few 6.5" units. SPL is about displacement, and that is bore times stroke, and you can do REALLY big stroke if you know what you're doing...

Re:Does it have a radio ?

[HornWumpus]

Bose 901s have 9 drivers about that size. Starting in about 1970. New ones have added tweets.

Not really new, but also not really a woofer. No highs, no lows etc.

Re:Does it have a radio ?

[LordKronos]

On what planet is a 4.5 speaker a woofer? What's the max throw on that? $400? They're on crack

On planet earth. The term "woofer" is about frequency range, not volume. But even so, plenty of those compact home theater systems use 4.5" subwoofers and actually do a not-half bad job at it. They make special long throw/high excursion drivers to help deal with the size issue.

Back in the early 90s, I was really into the car audio scene and attended several of those max-spl competitions. As I recall, there was one guy who filled a mini van with probably a few hundred 4.5" or 5" subs, and it was actually pretty damn impressive.

Re:Does it have a radio ?

[LynnwoodRooster]

Bore times stroke. Diameter times motion. The 9 drivers in the 901 had about 1mm of linear excursion; the one in the Play:1 will out-displace all 9 of those ful range drivers in the 901. SPL is a function of displacement, and that means the motion in and out is as critical as the diameter. A small bore/large stroke can generate as much SPL as a large bore/small stroke woofer. Take a listen to a Play:1 sometime - it'll surprise you.

Re:Does it have a radio ?

[HornWumpus]

Which generation of 901s? You realize they're still made?

In any case, calling them 'woofers' is just bullshit, 'full range' with decent bass and weak tweet, maybe. Where are the crossovers? Is that a woofer crossover frequency?

Re:Does it have a radio ?

[rtb61]

When it comes to the most profoundly invasive spy ware imaginable, microphone sensitivity is more important as well as how large and visible the off switch is. It seems the are going for the invisible look, just what you would use on gullible people, make it disappear in their environment so they forget it is there and say things they shouldn't say to be used against them latter. I think they are heading in the wrong direction, a kawaii https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... desk top robot with it's rechargeable docking station, which use motion to attract you attention and as a bonus it has a camera to spy on users and photograph the desktop.

A lot of this stuff is cool but it is clear corporations can not be trusted with this invasion of privacy and all the data and processing power needs to be localised.

Re:Does it have a radio ?

[KozmoStevnNaut]

Xmax is 11mm +/-, that's some pretty serious distance. Given the amount of DSP built into it, of course they're actively controlling the drivers to minimize distortion.

In a well-tuned cabinet, with high-quality drivers and DSP, I bet they can hit 50Hz flat, no problem at all, and probably as low as 40Hz at a decent SPL. Odds are they're boosting the hell out of the low bass at lower volumes and gradually rolling it off as you increase the volume, keeping the low frequencies always right up there close to the limits of what the amps and drivers can do. Bose does the same thing on their portable speakers, and it is rather convincing, though the sound does become somewhat leaner at high volume levels. It's simply a modern version of the loudness button on old-school amps, but more advanced.

I bet they're also using clever DSP tricks, including missing fundamentals, to increase the perceived amount of bass. The Boomcloud Boomstick (love that name) is an inexpensive device that does some of these things. It's fake as hell, but it really does give the illusion of deep bass on tiny earbuds and portable speakers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

I've researched this a little bit, since I'm building a DIY bluetooth speaker, and I'm interested in making it not sound tinny and lacking in bass (especially outside), despite using a small cabinet and relative small drivers. The next best thing to actual deep bass is a convincing illusion of deep bass. I see absolutely no reason why Google wouldn't be using similar tricks.

That's a really impressive microphone and speaker.

[Shemmie]

$400 eh?

Why?

[Orgasmatron]

Why do people keep calling these things "speakers"? It presumably has a speaker in it, but I don't call my car "engine" or "mirror". And, closer to home for most of us, I don't call my computer "CPU" or "hard drive".

I completely understand why Google, Amazon and Apple all want to misdirect as much attention as possible away from their motivation, but why do we go along with it? Why does a news site that claims to be "for nerds" go along with it?

And seriously, does no one remember Mister House?

Re:Why?

[Presence Eternal]

I can't speak for everyone, but given I already have a far more useful device in my pocket I think "speaker" accurately describes their sole value.

Re:Why?

[JohnFen]

Why do people keep calling these things "speakers"?

Because calling it a "spy portal" didn't score very well in focus groups.

Re:Why?

[LynnwoodRooster]

Probably because it will be used for music reproduction the vast majority of the time. If the primary use of the product is as a speaker, then calling it a speaker seems to make sense.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

apple is doing it because siri is semi-retarded. They dont want to play up the AI part.

Re:Why?

[blindseer]

And, closer to home for most of us, I don't call my computer "CPU" or "hard drive".

Apparently you've never done computer support work. I have people calling their computer a "hard drive" all the time. Why this is baffles me a bit but I'd rather just get the person's issues resolved than debate the distinction between the computer as a whole and the hard drive as a part of that whole.

I don't call my car "engine" or "mirror".

I'll hear people refer to their car as "wheels", and I've done the same. Language is a complex thing.

Re:Why?

[Darinbob]

I still don't know what it is, or what the Apple competitor is. I don't think I want to find out, I'm afraid it will remove the rest of my hope for humanity.

Re:Why?

[Darinbob]

But almost no one buys a speaker for $400 unless they're either giving a public concert or they're one of those crazy audiophiles, neither of which would be satisfied with a Google speaker.

Re:Why?

[Orgasmatron]

Apparently you've never done computer support work.

I've actually done a lot of support work, as I expect most of us have, which is why I said it was closer to home for us. We are all painfully aware that other people are ignorant about computers and technology and like to show it, but we don't usually join them.

Re:Why?

[LynnwoodRooster]

SONOS sells about 1 million (yes, 1,000,000) wireless speakers a month, and they are around $300-$500 each. That is the number one home audio speaker brand in the world - by number of units AND revenue. Seems a lot of the public buys speakers at that price point...

No speaker jack? Ok!

[JohnFen]

I'm good with this not having a speaker jack, as there's no way one of these devices will ever be in my home anyway.

So to sum up

[Anonymous Coward]

Overpriced speaker, overpriced wireless headphones, overpriced phone with no headphone jack.

Thanks Google! Keep being like your big brother Apple.

Re:So to sum up

[Glarimore]

Yeah, it's hard to believe the same company was selling the Nexus 5 (that was a ton of phone!) in 2013 for only $350.

Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't figure out the obsession with infotainment type stuff. It seems to be 99% of the new products being engineered for consumers. Is it really the case that everyone wants to listen to music or TV in their house?

I personally can't stand music (or TV) and wouldn't want it in my house or car. It seems like people are only concerned with this.

Mini comes free with my Pixel 2XL

[yorgasor]

I preordered a Pixel 2 XL today via googlefi. They're sending me a coupon for a free Mini when they become available, but I can't imagine what the heck I'd do with it. I'm not at all keen on having devices in my home that listen all the time, and even if I can turn that off I don't know what I'd do with the stupid thing. Maybe the kids can just ask it for the weather instead of bothering me all the time.

Re:Mini comes free with my Pixel 2XL

[viperidaenz]

Eric Cartman had quite a lot of fun with Amazon Alexa.

Re:Mini comes free with my Pixel 2XL

[naughtynaughty]

You could put it outside and have it tell the neighbor kids to get off your lawn

Re:Mini comes free with my Pixel 2XL

[Anonymous Coward]

Return them the coupon or the "Mini"?
It's a funny situation, they want to send you shit you don't want.
If the speaker is decent, you might dismantle it. Use it as a passive speaker, or use your own electronics - put an amplifier in there with a jack input!

Likely they want you to own shit that only work with "Google Cast" so that you buy or use shit that works with Google Cast (i.e. Android or non free version of Chrome). As if you bought a speaker than only worked with Internet Explorer 6 + ActiveX or Windows CE.

for $400

[Anonymous Coward]

For the same $400 I can get a much higher quality pair of studio monitors (speakers) AND without spy features.

What a novelty!

Re:for $400

[avandesande]

I doubt they are better than my 60$ craigslist klipschs

$750 too much

[Anonymous Coward]

That's right. Google should pay us to deploy these spyware devices.

20 Times More Powerful?

[Anonymous Coward]

Home Max can output sound that's up to 20 times more powerful than the standard version of Home, Google says, and it has two 4.5 inch woofers on board with two 0.7 inch custom-built tuners.

Google is very good at *not* publishing the speaker output power of their Google Home devices. The Google Home comes with a 16.5V 2A power adapter (i.e.: max power would be 33W RMS assuming no power allocated to the compute functions) so if the Google Home Max comes with anything less than a 660W power adapter then I call bullshit.

Re:20 Times More Powerful?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's possible the speakers are more sensitive; a 5db more sensitive driver would cut that power deficit a lot.

Re:20 Times More Powerful?

[PPH]

Ours go to eleven.

Re:20 Times More Powerful?

[HornWumpus]

You called out your own bad assumptions. Not all power on the Home goes to audio. I'd just assume 4W and run with that. Bet it's closer than 33W.

Bet the Home Max doesn't run 80-100W either.

Re:20 Times More Powerful?

[Anonymous Coward]

I read that as going +13dB higher. If anything they control the sound volume exactly i.e. if the volume goes from 0 to 32 on their current speaker (or whatever it is) it's firmware and the physics that have a say on how loud it is at "32".
Try a standalone class D amplifier if you can, e.g. 2x12W for less than 20 USD, needs a decent 12V power supply (like a 3 amp one ; at the least 2 amps). With ordinary bookshelf passive speakers. It's loud. It's also very good at bass, treble, everything in between, and precision.
It won't be loud only if the input source is very weak (not a problem usually)

Re:20 Times More Powerful?

[KozmoStevnNaut]

It's really quite interesting how much output you can get from very little power, if you choose your speaker drivers and cabinet design carefully. Even a basic bass-reflex design can get to 105+dB with the right drivers and a tiny 10W amp.

For transmission line type designs, folded horns and so on, you can hit 110+dB with just a single watt, however those cabinets tend to take up a lot of space.

I'm working on a DIY bluetooth speaker, which will probably use either the brilliant little Dayton RS100 4" full range driver, or some inexpensive car speakers of some kind. I'm debating whether to use a 2x15W amp, or two 25W mono amps. The ones I'm looking at are available on Ebay for around $2.50, which is just completely ridiculously cheap.

Not omnidirectional in terms of effect though

[SuperKendall]

no omnidirectional (like HomePod) is not good for audio quality in a room

It is when it is specifically focusing sound in different directions. It's just omnidirectional in terms of where it can aim the sound field, not in terms of what actually comes out. It automatically balances effects from walls and other objects around it to account for sound that is meant to travel in a specific direction.

yes you can run a pair of Max in a stereo pair

Aha, I have found where it says you can do that on the specs page. But it will be $100 more than a pair of HomePods to do so...

This is more a shot across the bow of SONOS and the new SONOS Home just announced

I agree that is one of the targets but I think usurping Alexa is the primary goal still.

Even the pricing and shape and functionality are reminiscent of the SONOS Play:5.

Someone else pointed that out, it does seem like a great point...

HomePod will probably end up like all previous Apple audio products - forgotten in two years

*cough*iPad*cough* Really? Example?

Apple audio products have mostly been pretty successful it seems like. The only one that is not really around anymore is the Airport Express, but it was not primarily and audio product...

Do you really think AirPods will be gone in two years? I think not, they are wildly popular. I actually think the HomePod will be around and pushed for quite some time...

Re:Not omnidirectional in terms of effect though

[LynnwoodRooster]

It is when it is specifically focusing sound in different directions. It's just omnidirectional in terms of where it can aim the sound field, not in terms of what actually comes out. It automatically balances effects from walls and other objects around it to account for sound that is meant to travel in a specific direction.

That directionality cannot be accomplished over a usable bandwidth. HomePod is simply too small, and has too few elements, to provide beamforming capabilities much below 1 kHz. Meaning you might hear cymbals from the right location, but the rest of the band is "somewhere over in that half of the room". Physics - can't break those laws!

Apple audio products have mostly been pretty successful it seems like. The only one that is not really around anymore is the Airport Express, but it was not primarily and audio product...

Apple Hi Fi. And I know of at least TWO attempts at making a home audio speaker that were aborted by Apple (back when Jobs was still there) because they couldn't figure it out. Apple has yet to make a successful speaker product. Flat out. And with Google Buds offering real time translation, I think you'll see AirPods relegated to the 10% or so who have an iPhone - meaning, people buy them because they are "in the ecosystem", not converted to it.

Re:Not omnidirectional in terms of effect though

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple Hi Fi. And I know of at least TWO attempts at making a home audio speaker that were aborted by Apple (back when Jobwas still there) because they couldn't figure it out. Apple has yet to make a successful speaker product. Flat out. And with Google Buds offering real time translation, I think you'll see AirPods relegated to the 10% or so who have an iPhone - meaning, people buy them because they are "in the ecosystem", not converted to it.

It was called the iPod Hi-Fi.

"Apple has yet to make a successful speaker product" is not the same as "HomePod will probably end up like all previous Apple audio products - forgotten in two years".

Re:Not omnidirectional in terms of effect though

[SuperKendall]

That directionality cannot be accomplished over a usable bandwidth. HomePod is simply too small, and has too few elements, to provide beamforming capabilities much below 1 kHz. Meaning you might hear cymbals from the right location, but the rest of the band is "somewhere over in that half of the room"

Not if you have two working in unison. I think you are not understanding how the HomePod is constructed.

Physics - can't break those laws!

Don't need to, not quite sure what you are talking about here. It's a simple matter to say less output goes against the wall than forward for example... again I am thinking you have not really looked into how a HomePod is built.

Apple Hi Fi.

Just because they do not make it any more does not mean it was not successful, just boutique. It gets excellent ratings on Amazon... thanks for showing us all that Apple can make good speaker products.

And I know of at least TWO attempts at making a home audio speaker that were aborted by Apple (back when Jobs was still there) because they couldn't figure it out.

Maybe the fact they are releasing something is a big giant clue stick descending upon your head.

But like I said, thanks to your product mention we already know Apple can do a good job making speakers. From a review: "The sound is much better than any portable device I've seen, period."

Sound like the HomePod, with years of refinement, should be pretty great.

Re:Not omnidirectional in terms of effect though

[Anonymous Coward]

"It wasn't a failure, it was boutique." To be that much of an apologist does take courage.

Mmmm

[nospam007]

OK, now there's 3 of them.
Which one is VHS, which one the BetaMax and the Video2000?

The product description sounds interesting

[kammermusik]

Yet, I'll see how the actual sound they deliver compares to my Bowers & Wilkins MM-1 computer speakers. I know it's kind of crazy paying ~$500 for computer speakers but the sound is worth it, IMO.

Re:That's a really impressive microphone and speak

[AndySchlenker]

$400 eh?

$400 is too much Andy http://punta-cana.us/