HyperX QuadCast vs HyperX SoloCast
Amazon links in this article are affiliate links. As an Amazon associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Similarities
Differences
Performance
Verdict
Similarities
The HyperX QuadCast and HyperX SoloCast are both plug and play USB condenser microphones.
Both devices have plastic bodies.
They have adjustable desk stands and a capacitive mute button at the top.
Each mic has both 3/8th and 5/8th inch threading to allow them to be attached to a boom arm without the need of an adapter.
SoloCast on a boom arm.
QuadCast on a boom arm.
Differences
The SoloCast can be rotated on its desk stand, unlike the QuadCast.
The QuadCast has 4 polar pattern options and a headphone jack.
Most of the differences between the HyperX QuadCast and SoloCast come down to build quality and extra physical features. I bought my QuadCast for $130 and my SoloCast for $60 (Amazon). Here’s the list of differences:
The QuadCast records in 4 polar patterns (omnidirectional, bidirectional, stereo, cardioid). It has 3 capsules inside to allow it to do so. The SoloCast only has 1 capsule and records in exclusively cardioid.
The QuadCast has a shock mount built onto the device.
The QuadCast has a built in pop filter under the grille.
The QuadCast has a headphone jack to allow you to monitor your audio in real time.
The QuadCast has a gain knob on the bottom.
The SoloCast can be tilted back and forth and rotated 90 degrees on its desk stand. The QuadCast only tilts back and forth.
The SoloCast is just under 7 inches tall with its included stand. The QuadCast gets up to 10 inches tall with the stand.
The Solocast’s USB cable is 81.5 inches long while the QuadCast’s is 117 inches long, braided and has a ferrite core.
QuadCast (left) and SoloCast.
Pretty much every difference is in favor of the QuadCast, but when it comes to performance, the devices are very similar when used on a boom arm. The two arms I used for this review were from Luling Arts (Amazon) and the boom arm that came with the Fifine T669 bundle.
Performance
Here are several audio clips of the HyperX QuadCast and SoloCast. The samples include spoken word, plosive testing, a keyboard typing test, and a brief piano keyboard test just to demonstrate performance on certain notes.
QuadCast on a boom arm with a pop filter.
SoloCast on a boom arm with a pop filter.
Both the SoloCast and QuadCast benefit greatly from a pop filter to prevent distortion.
Here’s a summary of the SoloCast and QuadCast’s audio performance compared to each other.
Overall, both mics sound similar in tone and have minimal background noise rejection. The QuadCast is slightly clearer with certain high frequencies, has better plosive rejection (usually), and it has much better resistance against shocks from keyboard typing due to its shock mount.
If you’ve ever heard the Blue Yeti (my comparison), these mics sound similar to that but they sound less distant.
Verdict
Of these two microphones, I recommend the HyperX SoloCast. I was able to get the SoloCast with a third party boom arm and a pop filter for far cheaper than the QuadCast, but the sound is very close to the QuadCast. The 3 extra polar patterns beyond cardioid just aren’t necessary for most users.
If you’re leaning towards the QuadCast for aesthetic purposes, you might also be interested in the QuadCast S. It has customizable RGB lighting.
Other options…
If you’re not already set on getting a HyperX microphone, I suggest looking into the Samson Q2U (my article). Unlike the QuadCast and SoloCast, it is a dynamic microphone and it has both USB and XLR cables. I recommend it often because it has good background noise rejection which is useful for home use.
Amazon Listings
HyperX Quadcast: https://amzn.to/3sKxLY9
HyperX Quadcast S: https://amzn.to/2PlA45S
HyperX SoloCast: https://amzn.to/3zcNTFt
