Which Pop filter should i purchase?

P.LAB'97

New member
Hey, I'm not very familiar with this forum so if I posted this thread into the wrong section my apologies and please move it to the correct section.

Anyways I have 2 options of pop filters which on buying both created by the same brand Nady,

I'm having a difficult time choosing between the Nady mpf-6 which is made of nylon or however you would like to call it, and my second option is the Nady mpf-7 metal screen pop filter. Which one would you recommend?

I'm mainly aiming for a price not much above 30$ (Canadian)so if there's any other recommendations for me that'd be very useful, metal or nylon thanks.
 
Hey, I'm not very familiar with this forum so if I posted this thread into the wrong section my apologies and please move it to the correct section.

Anyways I have 2 options of pop filters which on buying both created by the same brand Nady,

I'm having a difficult time choosing between the Nady mpf-6 which is made of nylon or however you would like to call it, and my second option is the Nady mpf-7 metal screen pop filter. Which one would you recommend?

I'm mainly aiming for a price not much above 30$ (Canadian)so if there's any other recommendations for me that'd be very useful, metal or nylon thanks.

Neither - nylon ones can colour the sound and metal ones can have a resonance.

I use the foam pad ones - Sound On Sound review.
 
make your own from stockings and and old clothes hanger! seriously it works well.

Works like a charm, is free unless no woman wants anything to do with you, and is easy to make.

The only downside is that it doesn't look pro.

Oh, did I mention it works like a charm?
 
Yes but that's way out of my price range sadly lol

Fifty five pounds is $111 Canadian at today's exchange rate, way off the stated $30 budget. Note that John's company Sound Link Pro Audio (as noted in his sig) sells them so I'm not sure it's unbiased advice.

Yes, nylon pop screens can colour the sound slightly especially at higher frequencies but, if you look at photos from pro studios all over the world you see an awful lot in use. They can't be THAT bad!

...and, of the two on your short list, I recommend the nylon. It's rare but, as John says, the metal ones can exhibit a slight metallic resonance if you're really unlucky.
 
Certainly works well at stopping pops, but nylon pop filters do colour the sound at the higher end.

John - this is the first time I've ever heard anyone saying that - do they basically ROB the high end? Wondering if that's what's happening with my vocal tracks (I always end up adding some 'air' via EQ).
 
Try with and without your pop filter and see if there's a difference. My ears don't have much high end left at my age, so I don't notice a difference :) .

Make me do it myself??!! How dare you, Mark! :eek: Yeah, my ears aren't what they once were either, and almost constant tinitus these days. I can usually only judge the overall sound once I'm in the final mixdown stage. I know the pop filter DOES help with the plosives and keeps me from spitting on my LDC, too! :D
 
Anything in front of a microphone (or loudspeaker for that matter) can affect the sound slightly--but, unless you put a blanket or something in front the colourations are pretty subtle and not usually a problem. Your choice of mic and pre amp makes a much bigger difference--and since with a vocal mic you'll probably always use the pop screen anyway, any tiny colourations simply become part of your overall sound anyway.
 
Note that John's company Sound Link Pro Audio (as noted in his sig) sells them so I'm not sure it's unbiased advice.

It actually is unbiased but is unlikely to be seen as so - which is why I linked to an independent review, instead of spouting myself; and that review also praises the Rycote as well as the Håkan. And I'm open about what I do - it's all in my profile.


Yes, nylon pop screens can colour the sound slightly especially at higher frequencies but, if you look at photos from pro studios all over the world you see an awful lot in use. They can't be THAT bad!

They are effective at stopping pops - and preventing plosives was more important than the colouration - now people research it more, better alternatives have been found.


John - this is the first time I've ever heard anyone saying that - do they basically ROB the high end? Wondering if that's what's happening with my vocal tracks (I always end up adding some 'air' via EQ).

You can certainly hear the difference - though some are better than others - I have seen a nylon one that is excellent, but it's about x3 the price of the Håkan.
 
It actually is unbiased but is unlikely to be seen as so - which is why I linked to an independent review, instead of spouting myself; and that review also praises the Rycote as well as the Håkan. And I'm open about what I do - it's all in my profile.

I strongly believe that any member involved in selling goods or services should be completely up front in terms of disclosing their interest when recommending a product. I don't thing a link is enough...all it takes is "I sell a pop screen by Hakan that you can read about in this SOS review and...". Relying on a link in your sig is a bit disingenuous.

Indeed, another technical forum I'm involved in has exactly that as a formal rule--even if it's not a rule in here, I think it's only fair.

They are effective at stopping pops - and preventing plosives was more important than the colouration - now people research it more, better alternatives have been found.

Everything in the signal chain colours the signal somewhat. Indeed, people spend tons of cash on mics and pre amps for the specific purpose of introducing "desirable" colouration. The choice of microphone itself is hugely more important than any changes a pop screen can make.

Only the end user can decide if colouration from a pop screen is significant enough to spend extra on your Hakan. For anyone on a limited budget (i.e most of us), I wonder if your pop screen is the best use of resources. I'm pretty sure that, in the past, most of you have heard TV voice overs I've recorded using basic nylon pop screens--with a good mic in a professionally treated studio. The mic and the studio were more important.
 
$99 for a pop filter? Not in my budget. ANd when I see marketing terms like "hydrophobic" ... so most likely it's closed-cell foam, rather than open-cell.

Anyone seen a frequency chart for a nylon pop filter?
 
For a pop filter , spending a hundred bucks, it had better make me sound like Mick Jagger. Lol
 
Last edited:
I used to work in the rubber industry - "open cell" is still open cell until you seal it up. (Closed cell means there's a skin on it). If there are openings, it's not "hydrophobic" - there are places for the spit to settle and stay.
 
Last edited:
make your own from stockings and and old clothes hanger! seriously it works well.

Yup, this. Even if it attenuates the high end a little (which is very slight if it does), most Chinese mics can do with a little high end attenuation.

Have fun.
 
I used to work in the rubber industry - "open cell" is still open cell until you seal it up. (Closed cell means there's a skin on it). If there are openings, it's not "hydrophobic" - there are places for the spit to settle and stay.

"Hydrophobic" means that it rejects water - and there *are* open-cell foams that do this.

Spit is not water - but hydrophobic foam is easy to rinse out in warm water to clean out any spit deposits and it will dry very quickly (as it's hydrophobic).
 
Back
Top