Both the Blue Yeti vs HyperX Quadcast are USB condenser microphones, and they are ready to use as soon as you plug them into the USB port of a compatible device.
This means you will not have to download any extra software to make them work properly, making them more convenient than other microphones.
Their other similarities include being side-address style microphones. This means that to get the best audio quality, you will want to speak or play music on the side of your microphone instead of the top.
The many similarities between these two microphones lead many to wonder which will be the better investment.
They are both from reputable manufacturers and, perhaps most importantly, are in a similar price range; this means that they get compared quite frequently, so we aim to answer this question!
If you want a dynamic microphone in the price range of the Blue Yeti and the HyperX Quadcast but you are unsure which will be better and suit your needs better, this guide is for you.
We will compare each of these microphones’ overall categories that need to be covered, so make sure to read carefully before deciding which you think will be better for you!
Key Takeaways
| |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blue Yeti | HyperX Quadcast | ||||||||||
| Metal body | Plastic body with red lighting | ||||||||||
| Volume gain knob for headphones | Tap-to-mute sensitivity control, built-in shock mount | ||||||||||
| 81-inch USB cable | 117-inch braided USB cable with ferrite core | ||||||||||
| Standard 5/8th inch threading | 5/8th inch plus additional 3/8th inch threading | ||||||||||
| More effective built-in pop filter | Requires external pop filter for better plosive rejection | ||||||||||
| Higher sensitivity to ambient noise | Better at reducing background noise | ||||||||||
| Classic design suits various setups | Distinctive red lighting appeals to gamers/streamers | ||||||||||
| Around $130, varying by version and retailer | Around $130, subject to change with time | ||||||||||
Blue Yeti Overview
- The Blue Yeti is a capsule condenser and has 3 capsules inside it
- It has a USB connection type A 2.0
- Its polar patterns include Cardioid, omnidirectional, bidirectional, and stereo pickup pattern
- The frequency response for this USB mic is between 20 Hz and 20kHz
- The Blue Yeti tends to cost around $130, but this price will change as the microphone ages and new versions come out
🎤 Blue Yeti Microphone Review: Expert Insights and Analysis
HyperX Quadcast Overview
- Similarly to the Blue Yeti, the HyperX Quadcast is a capsule-type condenser also featuring 3 capsule
- It also uses the USB Type A 2.0 connection
- As well as this, it also has the same polar patterns being Cardioid, omnidirectional, bidirectional, and stereo.
- HyperX Quadcast X has a zero-latency headphone output and a tap-to-mute sensitivity control.
- Topping off the similarities, this microphone also has the same frequency response, being between 20 Hz and 20kHz
- The price is also around $130, and like the Blue Yeti, this is likely to fluctuate.
- There is a very similar version of this mic called the Quadcast S with the main difference being that it features RGB lighting instead of the simple red lighting provided by the HyperX Quadcast
Microphone Build Quality
With the main overview out of the way, we can see that these are 2 very similar microphones, so we will need to go more in-depth to see how they stand apart.
Features Included
Both of these microphones include a gain knob, a mute button, a headphone jack used to monitor the audio captured, and a polar pattern knob as well.
Despite these similarities, only the Blue Yeti features a volume gain knob for headphones, and for the HyperX Quadcast, you will have to adjust this in the sound settings on your device.
There is also a shock mount that is built into the HyperX Quadcast, which, as you can imagine, aims to silence bumps, but we will get to this in the performance section.
Body And Wire
HyperX Quadcast Body And Wire
The HyperX Quadcast offers a visually appealing design with functional features, while the Blue Yeti provides durable build quality and straightforward functionality, each with its own set of minor drawbacks.
The HyperX Quadcast put together is 8 inches high, but the stand is 10 inches and weighs 1.6 pounds together.
The plastic body has a red color covered by a black grille, and it will glow red when it is turned on. Unfortunately, the grill has a built-in pop filter, which is not the most effective.
The mute button is on top of the mic and will also turn the mic’s light on and off. The shock mount is also made from plastic.
🎙️ Best Condenser Microphone for Podcast
The USB cable is 117 inches and is braided with a ferrite core made to stop interference, which contributes to a slightly lower noise floor.
The main issue with the body is the headphone jack is in an awkward position and is tight with the mount adapter as well.
Blue Yeti Body And Wire
Without the stand, the Blue Yeti is 7 and a half inches tall, but with the stand, it is 11 and 3 quarters. The mic’s body is all metal, making the weight heavier at 3.51 pounds.
The mute button for the mic will flash red when the mic has been muted and will stay red when active instead.
This is a little awkward and will take some time to pick up. The USB cable is also significantly shorter, 81 inches.
Mounting And Stand Options
Both mics offer adjustable stands with padding for desk use and compatibility with boom arms.
The mic stands for both devices, making it possible to angle them up, which is perfect when using a desk. Both have knobs on the side which allow them to be adjusted. Both of the stands also feature soft padding.
They both have a 5/8th inch of threading to attach them onto boom arms and mic stands, but the HyperX Quadcast also has a 3/8th inch threading inside for a deeper mount adapter, which is a useful feature.
🎙️🔊 How to Make Your Mic Sound Better
Build Quality Overview
Both of these microphones have been built well and are aesthetically pleasing, with the Blue Yeti having a design that will fit more setups.
Still, the HyperX Quadcast has a few more quality-of-life inclusions that may make the sacrifice in aesthetics worth it unless you are a fan of red.
The main issue with the HyperX Quadcast is the bad positioning of the USB port and headphone jack, which leads to uncomfortable pressure on the wires. However, the longer cable is a bonus.
Microphone Performance Review
Both of these mics have an astoundingly natural sound when recording audio. The Blue Yeti is better for working in a sound-controlled area due to its sensitivity, but if you can not control external noise as much, the HyperX Quadcast will be better at blocking this more.
Note On Settings
The testing for this section was done with the default values for each of these microphones.
They were also done on the cardioid polar pattern as it is one of the best for testing audio recording, and were done in a home office, not in a studio booth, so keep this in mind when reading our thoughts.
Tone Review
The tone of both the Blue Yeti and the HyperX Quadcast is pleasant and natural; neither has any particularly suppressed or emphasized frequencies, which gives vocals an accurate feel.
Distance And Proximity Effect Test
When compared, the Blue Yeti has a more tight range, repositioning it to get the best sound relatively simple, between 3 and 6 inches from the audio source.
If closer, the sibilance becomes too harsh, which limits the use of the proximity effects like bass boost you can take advantage of.
If you go further than 6 inches, the audio will start to pick up more on reverberation with an echoed voice. You can get a lot closer with the HyperX Quadcast without facing sound quality issues and it also has a much more effective proximity effect.
You will experience fewer ambient noises when recording from over a foot away than you would with the Yeti.
Plosive Rejection Test
The plosive rejection of the Blue Yeti is quite good with or without a pop filter due to the sensitivity of the mic, while the HyperX Quadcast suffers more in this category, needing an external pop filter with the one that is built-in not being effective enough at its job.
Background Noise Rejection Test
As previously alluded to, the Yeti is incredibly sensitive and will pick up on a lot of ambient noise as well as noises from outside, while these will be much less noticeable and often silent on the HyperX Quadcast even when it is at a higher gain.
The Yeti also has a higher noise floor with more electronic noise.
🎤🔇 How to Reduce Background Noise on Mic
Shock And Bump Test
When it comes to shocks and bumps, neither mic performs amazingly.
With the Yeti, you will be able to hear objects rattling in the background, while the HyperX Quadcast will make the sounds as a deeper thud, which you may not hear with headphones but will usually be audible otherwise.
Music Recording Test
The Blue Yeti is far better at recording music than the HyperX Quadcast, with notes not becoming blended and the mic picking up on all the details, while the HyperX Quadcast cannot achieve this level of detail.
Microphone Performance Overview
| Feature | Blue Yeti 🎙️ | HyperX Quadcast 🎤 |
|---|---|---|
| Tone | Pleasant and natural, with a balanced tone for vocals 🎵 | Pleasant and natural, offering slightly warmer vocal tones 🔥 |
| Distance & Proximity Effect | Best between 3-6 inches; sibilance issues when closer; echoes beyond 6 inches 📏 | More forgiving with closer distances; effective proximity effect; less ambient noise beyond a foot 🚶 |
| Plosive Rejection | Good, even without an external pop filter 💨 | Requires an external pop filter for effective plosive rejection 🎤 |
| Background Noise Rejection | Highly sensitive, picks up ambient and external noises; higher noise floor 🔊 | Less sensitive to ambient noises; quieter background at higher gains 🔇 |
| Shock and Bump Test | Picks up rattling noises as background sounds 🚚 | Produces deeper thud sounds, less noticeable with headphones 🎧 |
Personal Insights
Testing my home office’s Blue Yeti and HyperX Quadcast revealed distinct qualities. The Blue Yeti’s balanced tone and robust build made it a reliable choice for varied recording needs, though its sensitivity to ambient noise required a controlled environment.
|
|
|
Primary Rating:
4.2
|
Primary Rating:
4.3
|
|
$99.99
|
$99.00
|
The HyperX Quadcast, with its warmer sound profile and forgiving distance range, offered flexibility and ease of use, particularly beneficial for dynamic recording sessions.
Each microphone presented its own set of strengths and challenges, guiding my preference based on the specific demands of each recording scenario.
Pros and Cons
Blue Yeti
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| 🛠️ Durable metal body | 🔊 More sensitive to ambient noise |
| 🎚️ Volume gain knob for direct headphone monitoring | 🌬️ May require an external pop filter for optimal performance |
| 🎨 Classic design fits various settings | |
| 🎤 Versatile pickup patterns for different scenarios | |
| 🔌 Comes with an 81-inch USB cable |
HyperX QuadCast
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| 💡 Distinctive red lighting suitable for gaming/streaming | 🎙️ Built-in pop filter less effective |
| 🤫 Tap-to-mute feature and built-in shock mount | 🔌 Awkward positioning of USB port and headphone jack |
| 🔌 Includes a 117-inch braided USB cable with ferrite core | |
| 🎤 Offers the same versatile pickup patterns as Blue Yeti | |
| 🔄 Additional 3/8th inch threading for more mounting options |
Tips and Tricks: How to Choose the Right One
- Prioritize tone warmth for vocals with the HyperX Quadcast; opt for the Blue Yeti for balanced instrumental recordings.
- Consider the HyperX Quadcast for more forgiving proximity and less ambient noise capture; choose the Blue Yeti for tighter sound control.
- Select the Blue Yeti for its robust metal build if durability is key; lean towards the HyperX Quadcast for its aesthetic and lighter build.
- If versatility in mounting options matters, the HyperX Quadcast’s additional threading offers more flexibility.
- Factor in the recording environment: the Blue Yeti for quieter spaces due to its sensitivity, and the HyperX Quadcast for more varied settings.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I use the Blue Yeti and HyperX Quadcast for professional podcasting?
Yes, the Blue Yeti and HyperX Quadcast are suitable for professional podcasting, offering high-quality sound that can meet the demands of most podcasters. The choice between them depends on your specific needs, such as tone preference and recording environment.
Do I need an external pop filter for these microphones?
The Blue Yeti performs well without an external pop filter, but using one can further enhance plosive rejection. The HyperX Quadcast, however, benefits significantly from an external pop filter due to its built-in filter’s limited effectiveness.
Are these microphones compatible with boom arms?
Yes, both microphones are compatible with standard boom arms, featuring a 5/8th-inch threading. The HyperX Quadcast also includes a 3/8th inch threading for additional mounting options.
How do these microphones handle background noise?
The HyperX Quadcast handles background noise better than the Blue Yeti, with less pickup of ambient sounds at higher gains. The Blue Yeti’s higher sensitivity makes it more prone to capturing ambient noises, requiring a quieter recording environment.
Which microphone is better for recording instruments?
Both microphones can effectively record instruments, but the Blue Yeti’s balanced tone and multiple polar patterns provide more versatility for different recording setups. The HyperX Quadcast’s warmer tone might be preferred for certain instruments, making it a matter of personal preference based on the desired sound.
Summary – Which Should You Buy? HyperX Quadcast vs Blue Yeti
Based on our description of these microphones, hopefully, you have surmised which will suit your use better.
If you have less control over the noise in your space, choose the HyperX Quadcast, but if you want more detail and do not worry about other noises, then the Blue Yeti will be better.
