
Sunday, December 11th, 2011 | by David Beneke
It was 2010. Blue released a new USB microphone that because of its ease of use, pattern versatility (3 mono patterns, plus stereo), price (I paid $99 for mine), and quality of sound, quickly became a bestseller. With its distinctive retro look, built-in zero-latency headphone amp, easy access, adjustable controls, and plug-and-play ability, the Blue Yeti was a mic that could live comfortably on your desk, like a friendly little R2D2 robot, at your service for a podcast or Skype call.
People that do voiceovers, like myself, found it easy to use the
Yeti in a pinch: plug it into a USB port, and get a decent quality recording at 16 bit, 48 kHz with no muss or fuss.
Earlier in 2011, Blue introduced an upgraded version of the microphone, the
Yeti Pro. The specs were identical to the Standard Yeti. I really wasn’t that intrigued by it, except the fact that that it had the ability to record sound at four times the rate of the Standard, and had an XLR (analog) output in addition to the USB output.
I searched for sound samples, but found none comparing the Standard Yeti to the Yeti Pro. So, I have made some for this review.
If you are a Standard Yeti user, be forewarned: there are things you have to do to get the Pro to work. Being mostly a PC user, with Windows 7, I just opened the Pro package and tried to do a simple plug and play, just like the Standard. It didn’t work. When all else fails, read the instructions! You have to download a driver for Windows users, from XP to 7. Mac users, you must have OS 10.6.4 or it will not work. The rest of the setup is a matter of software adjustment and the Yeti Pro manual does a great job of helping you set the mic up on both a Mac and PC.
From there, before making any judgments, get to know the Yeti Pro, because going from digital to analog will require a learning curve as well. More about that later.
Comparing the two mics shows the distinct differences between the two. The Pro has a pleasing, retro black studio finish, much like older 60’s tube type processing equipment, with a slight brassy patina.
The Standard is equally impressive looking, but the buttons and knobs on my standard seem to be of a lesser quality and even looser. The headphone volume control on the Pro is digital, spins infinitely and the OS remembers your last headphone level, a nice touch. Other than that the controls are identical. The Standard Yeti’s knob fonts are easier to read, a big difference when in a low light studio or if you are over 45 and need bi-focals to see which pattern you are in. The very handy and easy to see Mute button is the same on both microphones, staying solid red when recording, and blinking brightly when engaged (in USB only on the Pro).
How do the mics perform? When it comes to output gain, the Standard Yeti is the champ. To get the same recording level in USB mode, the gain on the Pro has to be turned up all the way, while the Standard gets the same output at less than half of full volume. Blue’s technical support staff confirmed my suspicion, that the Pro has lower output gain to enable the mic to perform better at high SPL.
What I would rather see is higher gain with a 20db pad switch. Reading other reviews, this seems to be the number one issue with the Pro. I hope Blue is listening.
[Ed. note -- we have been notified that Blue will be modifying the gain staging on the Yeti Pro for future production runs, to make its output level closer to the standard Yeti.]
The next difference is the quality of the headphone monitor circuits. Here, the Pro excels. The Standard Yeti has a tinny, breezy, noisy, low-gain headphone amp, requiring nearly maximum gain to get decent output levels. I was amping the Standard Yeti’s amp! In contrast, the Pro amp is dynamic, rich, and does not require full gain (unless you have substantial hearing loss and want feedback).
The published frequency-response graphs of these two microphones are identical. But the mics don’t sound the same. My first test had both mics side by side, capsules at the same height and position, both mounted on Blue Radius shock mounts, with digital (USB) output at 16 bit, 48 kHz, to two computers. I used calibration tones to ensure equal signal levels into Audacity. My first test was a non-scripted, let’s say fireside chat, testing both mics simultaneously.
[The two samples below are 16-bit, 320kbps MP3s created from 16-bit, 48kHz WAVs, recorded simultaneously. The Standard Yeti file is first, followed by the Pro.]
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
After the recording, I lined up the two recordings in Audacity for comparison. My initial impression was that the Yeti Pro has a much smoother, flatter response, whereas the standard Yeti had an audible mid high-end bump in Cardioid, picking up sibilant sounds more readily. Both mics at this bit rate and level seem to have the same self-noise level. My voice on both sounded similar, but the Pro was smoother.
In a test of the patterns, both mics performed equally as well in all patterns. On both mics, my least favorite pattern was the Figure 8. The rear lobe sounded hollow and not as dynamic as the front. I would not use this pattern for duets, as I felt the sound imbalance was too dramatic compared to the Omni and Stereo patterns. This did not change at higher bit rates.
Acoustic guitar tests were done at 16 bit, 48 kilohertz on the Standard Yeti, and on the Pro at 16/48, 24/96 and 24/192. The Standard sounded colored, with a high frequency bump that at times seemed harsh and unpleasant. The Pro sounded warmer, smoother and more like the guitar at all bit rates.
[The two samples below are 16-bit, 320kbps MP3s created from 16-bit, 48kHz WAVs, recorded simultaneously. The Standard Yeti file is first, followed by the Pro.]
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
[The two samples below are 16-bit, 320kbps MP3s created from 16-bit, 48kHz WAVs, recorded simultaneously. The Standard Yeti file is first, followed by the Pro.]
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
In this next test, I set the Yeti Pro to 24bit, 96-kHz rate. (The Standard Yeti remained at its highest-quality rate, 16/48.) Here is where the sonic differences became more pronounced. This is not surprising, because the Pro’s manual boasts the use of a higher-quality ADC, which “provides incredibly low distortion, high fidelity, and balanced frequency.” This statement is much truer than the provided frequency graphs. Even though the levels were carefully set, I noticed slight differences with each Yeti on the playback waveform. I attribute this to how each mic responds to different frequencies: the Standard Yeti attenuates the mid high-to-high frequencies, thus being louder here and offering more distortion and coloring.
Both mics have about the same amount of self-noise, which is very low. Voice tests with the Pro provided a richer, smoother sound in Cardioid, much like a larger-diaphragm condenser in my opinion. The Standard started to show its armor chinks here. The audible high frequency ring on the guitar test was still there, and individual plucks of the strings sounded colored and slightly distorted. The Pro sounded like the actual guitar, which has flaws, but it sounded real, exactly like the guitar with no coloring, especially at the highs.
[Download comparison WAV files: here.]
I noticed the most distinctive differences between the two mics on voice tests. The Standard was not as warm sounding; sibilance was much more pronounced. The Pro sounded warmer, more like a professional condenser microphone. I also noticed more self-noise with the Standard Yeti here.
The Yeti Pro’s ability to output both analog (via XLR) and digital (USB) makes it even more appealing. It sounds great, going through a console to an external ADC. The ability to record in stereo is an added plus. My voiceover and instrument tests proved to me that it is a worthy opponent to more-expensive large-diaphragm mics.
The mic’s noise level in analog is also very low, and the apparent gain of the mic goes up substantially. Whereas in USB, I was using maximum gain, the analog output requires only a moderate amount of preamp gain.
Another benefit of using the analog output is the ability to use the EQ, pads, and filters on your console or channel strip, as you would with any analog microphone.
The Pro’s Mute button and headphone amp do not work when using the analog output.
As with all condenser mics, the Pro requires Phantom power.
I prefer the Yeti Pro to the Yeti. In fact, I liked the mic so much, I decided to buy it.
There is really not much you can’t do with this microphone. I have nicknamed mine the “Proteus,” after the Greek god of the sea, who could change his appearance at will. That describes the Pro in a nutshell.
If you are doing podcasts, or any less-demanding recording, or you don’t have a console and don’t want to invest in one, stick with the Standard Yeti, as you are not going to benefit as much from the Pro. However, if you want to shell out an extra $100.00, you will be getting a much better mic all around.
Posted in Microphones, Reviews, Shootouts, voiceover | 9 Comments »
Brian Schwartz
December 12th, 2011 at 12:51 pm
I am buying a mic for an elementary school classroom, and we can afford just one mic. Prob don’t need the better recording capabilities of the PRO but if we need to put the mic on a boom stand, an XLR extension cable might be better than an USB extension cable.
Thanks for doing the review.
David
December 15th, 2011 at 8:22 am
Great stuff, David. Much appreciated. I recently bought myself a Pro, and am pretty pleased with it. A friend was asking me to help them pick one for a voice over project, and your comparative review was exactly what I needed. As this mike will be needed solely for voice over, and due to it’s simplicity of installation/use, I’m going to recommend that she go with the Blue.
Have a great end of the year,
D.
James
December 15th, 2011 at 8:49 am
Wait, what?! In addition to making trailer-park quality electronics, Behringer is now making wine?!? Wonder if Neumann will start making beer!
Just kidding; great review. I love, Luv, LUV this web page. SO many hours wasted doing “research.” (wink)
Ari
December 19th, 2011 at 11:37 am
I have a yeti pro and even with the gain on the mic fully open I am still getting really low levels of sound ( best I can pull is -12db) with regular speech.
I read on the forums that that is a default negative gain that youc an fix on the mac side by accessing the midi player, is tehre a similar solution for PC users?
Johnny Art
December 20th, 2011 at 11:49 am
Loved your review! Very much appreciated!!!!!
Guess i’ll be going with the Yeti Pro!
joseph
December 30th, 2011 at 8:24 am
thanks for samples, they are very usefull for chose the mic.
I bought the yeti pro.
see u
ingrid
January 16th, 2012 at 6:19 pm
Aweosome, you just answered all my questions .
I am also be using this for voice overs and would like to upgrade my old round Blue .I like your set up too.
Hope Blue peeps do something about the gain before I buy one …
Kate
January 27th, 2012 at 5:06 pm
Thank you so much for having the foresight to give us samples… why manufacturers don’t do this is beyond me.
I’m going with the Pro, you are correct even though I don’t have a console as yet, I’ll be yeti pro ready for it…
Love your work… thanks again!
The Best Voiceover Microphone … Ever? | recording hacks
February 1st, 2012 at 9:41 am
[...] a “Beringer Wine” voiceover script on my smartphone [Ed. note: David used this in his Yeti Pro review.] With the SM7b’s “presence” switch engaged, the mic had that meaty, mid [...]