So you need a high-quality USB microphone but can‘t decide between two popular options – the Elgato Wave:3 and HyperX QuadCast. Both have excellent sound quality and handy features, but which one is right for your needs?
I‘ll compare the audio performance, design, specs and ideal usage scenarios between the Wave:3 and QuadCast mics. My goal is to provide a detailed overview to help you determine the better choice based on whether you‘ll use it primarily for streaming, gaming, podcasts or recording vocals/music. Let‘s dive in!
At a Glance: How the Wave:3 and QuadCast Compare
Before getting into the details, here‘s a high-level view of how these two microphones stack up:
| Wave:3 | QuadCast | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $$ | $$$ |
| Audio Quality | Crystal clear, optimized for voice | Great quality, nice bass |
| Polar Patterns | One (cardioid) | Four (stereo, omni, bidirectional) |
| Key Features | Clipguard technology, great software | Built-in pop filter and shock mount |
| Ideal For | Streaming, podcasts, vocals | Gaming, versatility |
The Wave:3 has pristine audio perfect for content creation at a lower cost, while the QuadCast offers more versatility with its 4 polar patterns and included pop filter/mount. Keep reading for more details!
Sound Quality and Performance
Arguably the most important criteria – how good is the audio? Both microphones sound fantastic, but they excel in different ways.
The Wave:3 features a 24-bit rate at 96 kHz, exceeding CD-quality audio with crisper treble and clear vocals. It also utilizes a proprietary Clipguard technology that results in very low distortion. According to Elgato, its "superior components and circuitry" deliver broadcast-grade waveforms optimized for speech.
In testing across multiple independent reviewers, the Wave:3 produces rich, natural sound for podcasts, game streaming and YouTube videos. While bass is good for a condenser mic, the high-end clarity and vocal reproduction is where it really shines.
"Fantastically well rounded USB mic…crystal clear audio recording with very impressive results across the frequency range." – Gear4Geeks review
The QuadCast utilizes a 16-bit rate at 48kHz, slightly below the Wave:3 but still excellent quality. Its mid-range reproduction results in clear vocals with a warmer, more robust bass presence. This gives a nice fullness that many reviewers preferred for a wider variety of audio sources.
With a wider 20Hz-20kHz frequency response compared to the Wave:3‘s 70Hz-20kHz range, the QuadCast can capture deeper lows without distortion. Gamers appreciated the punchy sound profile when livestreaming or chatting with teammates. The built-in pop filter also helps reduce plosives on louder audio sources.
"The HyperX Quadcast has been a seriously impressive bit of kit…amazing sound quality for any type of content creation." – Pro Streamer review
Verdict: The Wave:3 provides pristine vocals and speech optimized for content creation, while the QuadCast adds nice bass with great clarity across instruments and game audio.
Usage Scenarios: Ideal Applications
With their distinct audio profiles, what are each microphone‘s strengths for practical use?
The Wave:3 truly shines for content creation like podcasts, voiceovers and YouTube videos. Reviewers praise its "crisp, broadcast quality sound" perfect for speech across various sources:
"Elgato Wave:3 is a fantastic microphone for streamers or content creators…crystal-clear 24-bit/96kHz audio optimized for livestreaming and content creation workflows." – Tom‘s Guide review
Many testers preferred the Wave:3‘s vocal performance for Twitch or Discord streaming as well. Adjustable settings in the Wave Link software allow you to tweak capture vs system audio levels on the fly.
Alternatively, the QuadCast‘s four polar patterns and richer low-end gave it an edge for gaming and versatile audio sources:
"The HyperX QuadCast S’ four polar pattern settings make it incredibly versatile and an absolute game changer when it comes to recording or streaming all sorts of content." – Digital Trends review
Beyond its clearer cardioid capture, switching to stereo mode widened the soundstage for instruments and game sound FX. The omni-directional pattern enabled multi-user chat and bidirectional mode reduced ambient noise for interviews or 2-person streams.
Verdict: The Wave:3 excels at vocal clarity ideal for streaming and content creation, while the QuadCast‘s audio profile suits gaming and production use with more audio sources.
Microphone Features and Specs Compared
| Specs | Wave:3 | QuadCast |
|---|---|---|
| Bit Depth | 24-bit | 16-bit |
| Sample Rate | 96 kHz | 48 kHz |
| Frequency Response | 70hz – 20khz | 20hz – 20khz |
| Polar Patterns | One (cardioid) | Four (stereo/omni/bidirectional/cardioid) |
| Dimensions | 65 x 100 x 103mm | 170 x 100 x 130mm |
| Weight | 280g | 254g |
| Port | USB-C | Mini-USB |
| Headphone Jack | ✅ | ✅ |
| Pop Filter | ❌ | ✅ (built-in) |
| Shock Mount | ❌ | ✅ (built-in) |
Beyond their core audio capabilities, what other functionality and specs should factor into your decision?
A key differentiator is polar patterns. The fixed cardioid option on the Wave:3 optimizes voice capture from one direction with great background noise cancellation.
Meanwhile, the QuadCast provides four patterns – stereo, omnidirectional, bidirectional and cardioid modes. This added versatility suits a wider variety of audio sources, especially when recording instruments or multiple speakers.
In terms of built-in features, the QuadCast also includes an integrated pop filter and shock mount. This helps reduce unwanted plosives and dampens vibrations from motion or keystrokes. The Wave:3 lacks these capabilities out of the box, though aftermarket options are available.
For connectivity and controls, both utilize handy touch buttons on top to instantly mute audio. Volume dials also provide physical adjustment capability right on each unit. In terms of cabling, the Wave:3 uses a modern USB-C connection, while the QuadCast employs a mini-USB port.
Lastly, the Wave Link software bundled with Elgato’s mic provides valuable control over mic gain, EQ and mixer levels. This makes it easy to balance your vocals against game audio and system sounds when broadcasting.
Overall when looking at their specs and tools, the QuadCast likely offers more flexibility thanks to its multi-pattern support and built-in filters. But the Wave:3 delivers premium components and audio-tuning software to help personalize your recording and streaming experience.
Design and Aesthetics
Beyond performance metrics, physical design often plays a role in microphone buying decisions as well. How do these options compare aesthetically?
The Wave:3 utilizes an all-black aluminum build with a mesh grill protecting the front condenser. A smooth frame matches well with professional streaming gear though fingerprints can accumulate quickly on the exterior housing.
A volume dial and mute button adorn the front side for easy access, with indicator lights adding a pop of white when adjusting levels. The sturdy base helps avoid tipping though overall weight stays light at just 280 grams.
Meanwhile the QuadCast utilizes sturdy metal components paired with rugged plastic molding. This results in a slightly "chunkier" look according to reviews but likely improves overall device protection compared to the Wave:3.
The signature QuadCast aesthetic features a red emitting base that pulses or glows depending on power and mute status. The QuadCast S model allows users to control lighting color and effects for added personalization. The built-in pop filter uses an open circular mesh grille compared to the Wave:3‘s barred appearance.
Verdict: The Wave:3 looks more polished and discreet but shows smudges on its housing while the QuadCast has brighter gamer-centric styling with added protection.
Connectivity and Compatibility
In terms of hooking up your new microphone, both work seamlessly with Windows 10 PCs or Macs via USB plug-and-play connectivity. Simply insert the attached cable into an open USB port then select the Wave:3 or QuadCast as the active input device in your operating system preferences pane and recording/streaming software.
Unfortunately neither microphone will function directly with the Xbox console or other gaming systems like the PS5. Since these platforms lack required USB data capability, an intermediary device like the Elgato HD60 or HyperX QuadCast S would be necessary for capturing console party chat or game audio.
For mobile devices, USB connectivity allows easy use with laptops and tablets equipped with full-size USB ports. Recording directly into your phone is not supported though as mobile devices generally only provide power, not sufficient data transport for external mics.
In terms of future-proofing, the QuadCast still uses a Mini-USB connector vs the more modern USB-C standard found on the Wave:3. So the Elgato option offers better upgradability on computers shifting to the newer USB spec.
Verdict: Both work seamlessly on PCs/Macs but can‘t directly capture Xbox party chat unlike their siblings (Wave:1/QuadCast S). The Wave:3 employs future-proof USB-C connectivity.
Key Differences Summary
Here‘s a quick recap of some of the notable ways these premium USB microphones differ:
- Audio: Wave:3 optimized for crisp speech, QuadCast offers nice bass
- Usage: Wave:3 ideal for streaming/podcasts, QuadCast great for gaming/production
- Patterns: Wave:3 single cardioid, QuadCast has stereo, omni, bidirectional
- Features: QuadCast has integrated pop filter and shock mount
- Design: Wave:3 more elegant, QuadCast durable "gamer" aesthetic
- Connectivity: Wave:3 utilizes more future-proof USB-C
- Price: Wave:3 around $120, QuadCast approximately $140
So which one edges out the other?
Final Verdict: Wave:3 or QuadCast?
Overall both these microphones deliver excellent quality and helpful tools, coming down to your intended needs and preferences.
The Elgato Wave:3 shines thanks to its pristine 24-bit/96kHz audio perfectly optimized for content creators. From livestreams to podcasts to voiceovers, it consistently provides rich, professional sound focused on vocal clarity.
Meanwhile the HyperX QuadCast rates well as a more versatile option thanks to its assortment of polar patterns and built-in pop filter/mount. This allows adaptability across games, music and broadcast scenarios where audio sources may vary. Its styling also appeals to the recreational gamer demographic.
Considering their strong reputations and performance, either model stands as a great choice depending on your workflow:
- For streaming, podcasting and pure vocal reproduction, I suggest going with the Wave:3
- If you need added flexibility across games, music and group recordings, choose the QuadCast
Hopefully this overview gives you a better feel for each microphone‘s capabilities in order to determine the best match! Let me know if you have any other questions.
