Apple announced the new iPod Hi-Fi at this morning's special event. While it's not
terrifically exciting, it's an alternative (albeit a pricey one at $349) to third party iPod speakers. The Hi-Fi
features a Universal Dock into which you can slide your iPod and another spot on the back for an iPod shuffle. (If
you've got an iPod model without a dock connector, you'll have to buy a separate audio cable to integrate your iPod
with the Hi-Fi.)The iPod nano and the iPod with video will display a new Speakers menu for the iPod Hi-Fi. The menu will let you control tone (with settings like normal, treble boost, and bass boost), display large album art on the iPod while the Hi-Fi is playing, and set the iPod backlight to remain on so you can see the album art. Sorry, but apparently there won't be a Speakers menu or tone control for older iPods.
Theoretically, the Hi-Fi is portable. It will run on six D-cell batteries "for several hours" according to Steve. However, the size and rectangular design of the Hi-Fi makes it look like it will be awkward to haul around. It's about as big as a breadbox: 17" x 6.6" x 6.9" with hand grips built into the plastic shell.
The Hi-Fi will charge your iPod while you're playing music. It includes an Apple Remote to control music playback from across the room. And it's got a combined analog and digital optical input jack, so you can connect it to your computer or to an Airport Express to use as a speaker system for those devices. However, the requisite audio cable is a separate purchase, which is too bad.
I'm no sound expert, but I can tell you that Steve was hyping the sound quality of the iPod Hi-Fi during the announcement, and the Apple site touts the Hi-Fi's sound quality across a range of frequencies. It's got two 80 mm speaker cones in dedicated chambers, and a 130 mm woofer for bass tones.
To be honest, I'm not likely to run out and buy this updated boombox. I'm happy with my Logitech mm50 portable iPod speaker for now. Have you got a big check left over from the holidays that you're just itching to spend? Will you spend it on this?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
2-28-2006 @ 2:59PM
LD said...
Perhaps the least Apple-like thing Apple has made since the Lisa.
Reply
2-28-2006 @ 3:00PM
umijin said...
This is thing is utterly bad.
Ugly, no wifi integration, can't see the screen across the room...
I mean, who the hell uses their iPod at home to play music through speakers anyway if they've got a computer already?
No radio?
No handle on top?
No way to keep iPod from falling when you are hefting by those wonderful handles?
NO WAY Steve!
Along with these overpriced leather monstrosities for iPod condoms - you have to be nuts if you think that you are offering something better than exising iPod vendors.
Get back to the drawing board and get us a truly small Mac laptop before your stock falls below 1996 levels. (>_
Reply
2-28-2006 @ 3:07PM
steve said...
probably the least desirable thing I've seen from Apple
Reply
2-28-2006 @ 3:09PM
RS said...
$349 for speakers?!?! Where's the value here? $100 leather ipod case with no controls window??!?!?!
Sorry, most of us don't have the same stock options deal like Mr. Jobs. Granted, Apple was never about rock bottom discounts - they are about innovation and customer experience. I guess I just don't see that in these product offerings
Reply
2-28-2006 @ 3:11PM
Steve said...
Actually, I the hell use my iPod for music everywhere. At parties, out on the deck or the yard, the beach, camping, cooking in the kitchen, you name it. I like the idea...
...but the execution is horrid! C'mon Apple! The remote and touted sound quality is great, but what about the iPod falling right out of it when moving it around? The thing ain't portable. And just so ugly. The SoundDock really puts this to shame, and it's cheaper too. What the hell???
Reply
2-28-2006 @ 3:13PM
Ryan said...
i agree with "umijin".... this doesnt look too good for apple stockholders (of which i am)....
also... is it just me or does this think look just plain ugly???
Reply
2-28-2006 @ 3:20PM
Jack Beckman said...
I was hoping for an iBoom done right (good quality sound, no..uh.."boom"). This is useless as a portable, for reasons mentioned. I guess I'll continue to play to my Sony portable via iTrip.
Reply
2-28-2006 @ 3:21PM
Entica said...
Hmm, no wifi, no tv out, no audio out, fugly design, expensive, etc. Doesn't meet my needs at all. For a bit more I could just buy a mac mini. Nice try Jobs.
E.
Reply
2-28-2006 @ 3:24PM
dcartguy said...
If you want to see some major hatin' on the Hi-Fi, head over to engadget.com.
I say don't knock it till you hear it. I probably won't buy one. I just think everyone is upset because they got so hyped up for this event and didn't get a true video ipod or a widescreen macbook.
Reply
2-28-2006 @ 3:27PM
Deedas said...
I pity the fool that buys this horribly overpriced, feature-lacking, boombox. I'm willing to go on record that this will be Apple's biggest blunder this decade.
Reply
2-28-2006 @ 3:27PM
Dom M said...
The current iPods do have a 'Small Speaker' setting already in the EQ menu under Settings which improves perfomance on some of the portable speakers
Reply
2-28-2006 @ 3:31PM
Hairatic said...
Might sound great... but it looks like crap!!!
Reply
2-28-2006 @ 3:34PM
USTommyMC said...
Yeah I don't know about this thing. I'm not an audiophile or anything but this thing better have super good sound if Apple expects me to spend over 300 bucks for it. Today's anouncements were stupid. A leather case? Are you kidding me? Sometimes I think Apples goes out of its way to make rumor sites look stupid.
Reply
2-28-2006 @ 3:38PM
Kirbdog said...
I don't think that is that bad. But, and its a big but is the price point. I could buy a lot of other things before this for $350. Thats just to much for a speaker set that does not have a great deal of features. The Apple remote is nice but $350 is beyond what this is worth. $200 would still be pushing it, maybe steve forgot he does not have 80% market share in iPod accessories.
Reply
2-28-2006 @ 3:55PM
Chris said...
"I'm willing to go on record that this will be Apple's biggest blunder this decade."
Dude, it's a set of stereo speakers. Let's not get all hysterical. Yes, it's very lame, and the whole event today was a sad joke, but it's not like Apple is betting the bank on the Hi-Fi. Nor could it have cost them much to develop the thing (plastic box + speakers + amp + dock = done). They'll sell enough of them to make it worth their while.
I just wish Apple would quit playing around and wow us with something new already. Your competitors aren't sitting still, Steve. Now's not the time for a leisurely stroll.
Reply
2-28-2006 @ 3:59PM
facio said...
While I agree with all the points above (ugly, expensive, not practical to move) the thing I hate the most is when a CEO try to sell something declaring faux statements: for that, Microsoft is the king but Apple got very close this time.
How can Steve jobs start talking to about high fidelity sound when this machine: A) doesn't even cover the audiable spectrum of human hears (Frequency response: 53Hz to 16kHz): we live in an era of high definiton music, audiophile have the option of DVD-audio, SACD, upcoming DVD-HD (with even higher frequencies) and Blue disks. All of these cover a spectrum of ~10 Hz to 100+ kHz! That's high fidelity. B) the power suppliy inside the box? HI-FI needs separated power supplied, every audiophile knows that. C) Amplifier inside the box?? That's even a bigger joke. D) the position of the drivers: impossible to replicate the sound stage (mentioned by Mr. Jobs) accurately.
Nothing wrong to sell a machine that very likely will sound better than than the competition, but this isn't an high-fidelity system.
Reply
2-28-2006 @ 4:08PM
Billy K said...
Dear Lord, what were they thinking? This is awful for a variety of reasons, but the first two that pop to mind are: it's trribly awkward having your iPod sticking out the top. Sorry, but the iBoom did a way better job at integration.
But most importantly, who cares if the sound is great? You can't get great sound out of an MP3 or AAC. This is just going to reveal the limitations of the iPod. Does this mean we'll be getting 192kbps AACs from the iTunes store?
Not a good day for Apple.
Reply
2-28-2006 @ 4:28PM
Halt said...
I guess I'm the only one who likes it. Sure it's too expensive, missing a radio perhaps, clumsy iPod dock. But the one thing this thing is different from most existing iPod speakers is the speakers. This thing looks like it will fill a room with quality sound and that is the main reason we have speakers.
The lack of features can also be called the Apple's minimalistic design we all love.
I think most people were expecting more exciting new stuff and now direct their frustration to the boombox.
Reply
2-28-2006 @ 4:30PM
Peter Garner said...
Is it just me, or does this thing look like a microwave oven? And I agree with facio. A frequency response of 53-16k. My 20-year-old B&Ws do better than that (70-20k), and I wonder if an iPod HiFi purchased today will still be working in 2026. This is progress? Ugh.
Reply
2-28-2006 @ 4:33PM
Matt Fitzsimmons said...
Most of you are looking at this all wrong. This isn't competition for the iBoom and such.
Rather, it's competition for the Bose Sound Dock. It quite possibly has better sound quality than the already phenomenal Sound Dock, it eliminates the main drawback of the Sound Dock (lack of portability), and it's cheaper.
I think there is a large market for this type of item.
For those complaining about how you can't use it with your computer, just plug it into your airport express. I think it gives the best of both worlds. There are often times when it's much simpler and more appropriate to hook your iPod into speakers than to use the computer, although I think Airport integration would have been a nice touch.
Reply