Stedman Pop Filter? Yay or Nay.....

[Clit Torres]

Just wanted to hear some experiences from people who use both the fabric type and metal mesh screen type pop filters. I've got a couple of nylon ones and was considering picking up a Stedman, but at the price they go for I need a little justification for this purchase, it seems a little crazy to me that anyone can charge so much for a circular metal mesh .

I went through the same thing before I picked myself up a pair of Auralex Mopads, but the pads IMO where well worth it.

[noisedude]

Studio Projects do a triangular metal one now for quite a bit less than a Stedman. Never used a Stedman but the SP one is much more effective than the nylon ones I've used in the past.

[tkingen]

IMHO the Stedman is more transparent than the nylon ones. We bought one from a store that allowed returns. We tested recording without a pop filter, with the Stedman, and then with a nylon filter. The Stedman sounded the same as recording without a filter, except for the absence of the plosives. The nylon filter attenuated high frequencies. Just a little - but it was noticeable.

[tkingen]

Originally Posted by noisedude

Studio Projects do a triangular metal one now for quite a bit less than a Stedman. Never used a Stedman but the SP one is much more effective than the nylon ones I've used in the past.

If Alan is making one for a more affordable price that would be the one to get.

[kidvybes]

...I've used the original Stedman...much better than fabric-style pop screens...more "transparent" sounding and easily washable...now I use one that Peluso (famous for their tube mics) has come out with at half the price of Stedman's...works excellent!...here's the link:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...sPageName=WDVW

...and "No, I don't work for Peluso"...this is not spam, just a link to a good product I purchased and believe in...

[noisedude]

Of cours you don't work for Peluso! Can't anyone make a recommendation around here without getting accused of spam?

Incidentally, SP don't claim the pop filter to be totally transparent, but in my using of it the only side effect is a slight reduction of low frequencies, in essence a very mild rumble filter. It certainly has less effect that the nylon ones.

I think they've made it cheaper by using a triangular shape which I imagine tesselates better so less metal is wasted.

[Richard Monroe]

Actually, the ones I really like (I got both of them for free and no, I wouldn't pay the ridiculous price) are the fine mesh ones from B.L.U.E. They're not even there, but they work. I also use the Stedmans. This is my take on it. The steel ones are more durable, and yes, they are overpriced. The Stedmans are very convenient to use, because the gooseneck is well made. It's not just the steel. They are good pop filters, with good hardware.
It can be an ambience thing, too. Yeah, you can rig up cheap ones that work OK, but I find that a studio that looks a little like a studio brings out the studio "game" in the talent. A garage brings out garage "game". In the greater scheme of things, it is just nice to put a good pop filter in front of a good mic. I'm glad some other people are competing with Stedman. It'll bring prices down. Steel is better than nylon for a variety of reasons.-Richie

[kidvybes]

Originally Posted by noisedude

Of cours you don't work for Peluso! Can't anyone make a recommendation around here without getting accused of spam?

...I added that because someone (a coward who wouldn't put his name with his comment) slammed me with a negative "rep" for offering a link to this same product on another thread dealing with the need for a pop filter...

[ozraves]

The Stedman is the genuine article that anyone should be able to afford.

[scrubs]

I'll agree that the Stedman is well built and has a more transparent sound than the nylon screens. However, I notice that when I make a "B" sound (other plosives are less noticeable), the mic actually picks up the sound of the air rushing through the wire mesh. This has ruined a couple of takes for me and requires very careful placement to minimize. I've never had this problem with nylon screens and was very disappointed at this from the Stedman. I say the jury is still out.

[Clit Torres]

Originally Posted by noisedude

Incidentally, SP don't claim the pop filter to be totally transparent, but in my using of it the only side effect is a slight reduction of low frequencies, in essence a very mild rumble filter.

I was thinking about picking up the SP pop filter and decided not to because of this very reason. If I remember correctly, I think Alan also mentioned that there is more of a mid focus if used from the backside.

I've also checked out that Peluso one, and after shipping, exchange, taxes, and the ever so delightful waiting period, I'm opting to get something locally.

It's looking like I'm just going to go for the Stedman, if I'm going to pay way too much for a metal mesh, I suppose I may as well go with the "genuine article" as Ozraves puts it.

[Clit Torres]

Originally Posted by kidvybes

...I added that because someone (a coward who wouldn't put his name with his comment) slammed me with a negative "rep" for offering a link to this same product on another thread dealing with the need for a pop filter...

I guess you never know what's gonna cheese someone off around here, some cowardly fool actually zinged me just for saying that I sold my AT4050.

[noisedude]

Originally Posted by Clit Torres

It's looking like I'm just going to go for the Stedman, if I'm going to pay way too much for a metal mesh, I suppose I may as well go with the "genuine article" as Ozraves puts it.

I think that's fair enough. Price-wise the Stedman is not a realistic option for me in the forseeable future, but I've reached a point of being very happy with what I havefor minimal outlay. Let us know how you find the Stedman, though ...

Nik

[paddyponchero]

I have the peluso ones, they are very cheaply manufactured but do the job ok

[gemsbok]

there was a guy on ebay selling knock offs. he bought the material from the same factory as stedman i was told.i got mine a year ago. i compared mine with the one in guitar center and it looked identical. i think it was 20$. the verdict is still out for me. i guess its time to break out the measuring tools and the chamber.

[mindwave_21]

Are they that expensive? I've got the PS-101 from Guitar center and remember paying about $19.99 for it. Maybe it was on sale or something. Anyways, it's the only pop filter I've ever used and I like the fact that it won't tear or stretch out.

[Clit Torres]

Around these parts the ps101 goes for about $80, which is roughly $65 US.

[Alexbt]

I picked up a GrooveTubes pop at Guitar Center for $50 today with my new mic purchases. I put it in front of a dynamic, and it does reduce plosives pretty well, and it is the metal type. It also provides no high end loss (was what I was told, and for the price, it better not). I didn't hear any difference with or without.

Having yet to use my new condensers, I would assume it's ok and I won't get any damage caused to them. (First time condenser buyer/user.)

[qbert1]

Originally Posted by scrubs

However, I notice that when I make a "B" sound (other plosives are less noticeable), the mic actually picks up the sound of the air rushing through the wire mesh. This has ruined a couple of takes for me and requires very careful placement to minimize. I've never had this problem with nylon screens and was very disappointed at this from the Stedman. I say the jury is still out.

I agree, the air noise can be an issue and should not be overlooked by someone in the market. If you have anyone whistling or even "ooooo"ing it can be an issue as well. I'd have another nylon one handy just in case.