Blue Yeti vs HyperX QuadCast
Amazon links in this article are affiliate links. As an Amazon associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Overview
Build Quality
Performance
Verdict
Overview
Blue Yeti (left) and HyperX Quadcast.
The Blue Yeti and HyperX QuadCast are condenser USB microphones. They're plug and play. No additional software is required to get them working. They are both side-address microphones, meaning you speak into the side of them rather than the top.
Blue Yeti
Capsule: Condenser (3 capsules inside)
Connection: USB-A 2.0
Polar Patterns: Cardioid, bidirectional, omnidirectional, stereo.
Frequency Response: 20 Hz - 20 kHz
I bought my Blue Yeti for $130. Here is an Amazon link for current pricing.
HyperX QuadCast
Capsule: Condenser (3 capsules inside)
Connection: USB-A 2.0
Polar Patterns: Cardioid, bidirectional, omnidirectional, stereo.
Frequency Response: 20 Hz - 20 kHz
I bought my HyperX QuadCast for $130. Here is an Amazon link for current pricing.
HyperX also sells a variant of this mic, the QuadCast S, that has RGB lighting rather than just red.
Just by looking at the specs sheet, these seem like very similar microphones. However, they do have key differences which are mostly qualitative, such as the design and of course audio performance. So let's get into the build quality.
Build Quality
Features
Both the HyperX QuadCast and Blue Yeti feature a:
gain knob
polar pattern knob
headphone jack for monitoring audio
mute button
Only the Blue Yeti has a headphone volume gain knob, but the HyperX can have its headphone monitoring volume adjusted in your computer’s sound settings.
The HyperX QuadCast also has a shock mount built onto it to (attempt to) silence mild bumps which I'll demonstrate.
Body and wire
HyperX QuadCast
The QuadCast is 8 inches tall without the included stand and 10 inches with it. It weighs 1.6 pounds total. It has a plastic body with a striking red color inside the black grille. When active, the red glows to indicate it's on. Inside the grille is a built-in pop filter, but as I'll demonstrate, it's not very effective.
The capacitive mute button on top of the mic also turns the light off and on. The shock mount is also plastic, but the stand it comes with is metal.
The included USB cable is 117 inches long, braided, and has a ferrite core to reduce electronic interference. Whether that helps or not, it ultimately has a quieter noise floor than the Blue Yeti, which I'll get to shortly. The QuadCast’s headphone jack and wire opening on the back are not optimally placed, as it’s a very tight fit when using the mount adapter.
Red light indicates mic is active.
Blue Yeti
The Blue Yeti is 7.5 inches tall without the included stand and reaches 11.75 inches with the stand. The body is made of metal, and the Blue Yeti weighs 3.51 pounds total.
The mute button flashes red when the mic is muted, and the light stays red when it is active. This is a bit counter-intuitive, so it's easy to forget if your mic is or is not muted. In contrast, you cannot miss the QuadCast's entire body glowing red.
The included USB cable is 81 inches long.
Stand and mounting options
Both mics can (and should) be angled upwards when used on a desk.
3/8th inch and 5/8th inch threading on the QuadCast mount adapter.
There are knobs on the sides of the stands included with the Blue Yeti and HyperX QuadCast that allow for angle adjustment of the mics. They can be completely loosened to remove the body from the stand entirely. Soft padding is found on the bottom of both stands.
Both the QuadCast and Yeti have 5/8th inch threading to attach them to boom arms and microphone stands. The QuadCast also has 3/8th inch threading deeper inside the mount adapter. The QuadCast's shock mount stays attached even when removed from the stand.
Be aware, the Blue Yeti is too thick to fit in most of the smaller shock mounts that come with cheaper mic stands.
Build Quality Summary
Each mic has a very thoughtful build, and the differences are mostly aesthetic. I give a point to the QuadCast for its lighter plastic build that doesn’t have easily chippable paint like the Blue Yeti. But I have to then take a point away from the QuadCast for its terrible positioning of the USB port and headphone jack that potentially puts pressure on wires.
Performance
Here I've included lots of sample audio, and I'll be covering several aspects of the sound such as
Tone
Proximity effect and distance testing
Plosive rejection
Background noise rejection and noise floor
Shock/bump test
Music
My Settings
For these examples, my volume in Windows settings is the default value for each device: 82% for the QuadCast and 90% for the Blue Yeti.
The Blue Yeti is set to around 20% gain on the device, but dropped to its lowest value for the plosive rejection test. The QuadCast is set to about 60% gain on the device.
Both devices are in the cardioid polar pattern for these tests. These tests were done in a home office environment, not a sound-proof studio booth.
Tone
Both the Blue Yeti and HyperX QuadCast have similar, natural sounding tones. No frequency is greatly emphasized or suppressed, so vocals sound very accurate.
Proximity Effect and Distance Testing
The Blue Yeti has a much tighter range of where it can be positioned to capture optimal sound when speaking into it. It's best about 3-6 inches from your mouth. When used closer than that, sibilance (high frequency from s and soft c sounds) becomes very harsh. That limits how much of the proximity effect (bass boost at close range) you can utilize.
When used farther than about 6 inches, the Blue Yeti will pick up reverberation - your voice echoing from the walls of the room. In a soundproof booth, that's fine, but for most scenarios it's not ideal.
Using the Blue Yeti with a boom arm and pop filter.
The HyperX QuadCast can be used even just an inch away without becoming overly sibilant. In addition, the proximity effect on this mic is slightly stronger than on the Yeti. From about a foot away, the QuadCast loses fullness like any microphone does, but less ambient sounds and reverb can be heard when used from a distance.
Plosive Rejection
Unfortunately, the QuadCast does begin to distort from plosives up close without an external pop filter. The one built into the mic just doesn’t do the job by itself. The Blue Yeti has very good plosive rejection even without a pop filter despite how sensitive the mic is. Blue did a great job here.
Background Noise rejection and noise floor
The Blue Yeti will pick up every noise in your room, even sounds coming from outside of it!
The Blue Yeti is very sensitive to ambient noises such as computer fans and wind blowing outside. In contrast, most of these sounds are inaudible on the QuadCast even at a high gain. Loud sounds such as keyboards aren’t blocked out at all by either device. For that, you’ll need a dynamic microphone rather than a condenser.
The noise floor of a microphone is the electronic hiss generated by the components of the device itself. The Blue Yeti’s is a bit louder than the QuadCast’s. The louder noise floor coupled with how much sound the Blue Yeti takes in from inside (and outside) a room, makes the Blue Yeti less effective in a home or office space.
There are some effective noise reduction filters in OBS or audio editing programs that can mitigate this, however.
Shock/Bump Test
Neither of these mics do well with bumps to a desk or the device itself. I even gave both devices the benefit of putting them on a boom arm to make it easy for them.
The main difference is you can hear other objects rattling in the background on the Yeti, while the QuadCast turns everything into a deep thump. If you’re listening without headphones, you might not hear the thumps on the QuadCast, so that’s kind of a plus, but you’ll definitely hear them with them on.
Music
Recording music on the HyperX QuadCast.
Recording music on the Blue Yeti.
Song recorded: Boy Color - (Now That We're) Strangers.
Settings:
Blue Yeti: gain at minimum. Computer input volume: 50%.
HyperX QuadCast: Gain at maximum. Computer input volume: 25%.
Music is where the Blue Yeti makes its real distinction from the HyperX QuadCast.
In the above samples, when the singer sings the word “strangers” while adding several notes to the “a” vowel, you can really hear the separation of each note in the Blue Yeti. Also when a single note is held, you can hear every detail of the singer’s voice like it’s vibrating the space next to you. In the midrange, the vocals had a strong presence independant of the ukulele in the Blue Yeti, but they blended a bit on the QuadCast.
When it comes to instruments, it’s a similar situation. The sound caused by strumming the ukulele (the actual sound of the strings, not just the notes) comes through super clear in the Blue Yeti, but not as much on the QuadCast.
Overall sound summary
The HyperX QuadCast is better for general use in spaces that are not sound treated.
The Blue Yeti and HyperX QuadCast are both very natural sounding microphones. In a sound-treated studio environment, the Blue Yeti can excel because it picks up more nuances in a recording. This also make the Blue Yeti the better choice for music.
For streamers or anyone doing home office work, the HyperX QuadCast's less sensitive capsule is more suitable.
Verdict
I recommend the HyperX QuadCast over the Blue Yeti for home and office use such as streaming and video conferencing. It picks up less background noise and reverberation resulting in great sound even if you're not positioned perfectly in relation to the mic.
For those in a studio setting and musicians who want the finest details of their voice or instruments picked up, the Blue Yeti is a better choice.
If background noise is a serious factor for your recording space, consider a dynamic microphone as those both reject off-axis noise very well. The Samson Q2U (my comparison) can usually be found cheaper than both the QuadCast and Blue Yeti and it has a similar tone to both.
Amazon Listings
Blue Yeti https://amzn.to/33gwcpD
HyperX QuadCast: https://amzn.to/3sKxLY9
