Skip to content
Mic & Mix

The Best Pop Filters

A metal screen you can wash against a foam windshield that weighs 10 grams. Your boom arm's load rating decides more than you expect.

By Ryder M. · Published · How we score

Some links here are affiliate links: if you buy through one, we may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. It never changes the ranking — how this site is funded.

The Best Pop Filters: the picks compared on their decisive published specification, with our score for each.
#ProductKey specScorePrice
Top pick.1
Stedman Proscreen XLA pop filter you can wash instead of replace
Screen diameter6.125 in8.6
2
Rode WS2Plosive control without anything on your arm
Weight10 g8.6

Rows link to the full write-up below. Prices come from Amazon and change without notice, so we link rather than print them — how we score.

The Stedman Proscreen XL is the pick if you record daily: a patented metal screen that redirects plosive air downward rather than trapping it, a 6.125 inch screen that covers off-axis movement, and you rinse it clean instead of replacing it. The Rode WS2 weighs 10 g against the Stedman's 10 oz, which matters if your arm is near its limit.

A plosive is a burst of air, not a sound. A "p" or "b" fires a slug of moving air at the capsule, which produces a low-frequency thump that is largely unfixable afterwards because the capsule was physically displaced. A filter interrupts the air without meaningfully interrupting the sound.

Two approaches do that. A screen sits a few inches in front of the microphone and breaks up the airflow. A windshield is foam over the capsule itself, which disperses air in the same volume as the microphone. Both work; they fail differently and they weigh very differently.

Published specifications. The weight column is the one that interacts with your boom arm's load rating.
FilterTypeWeightScreen sizeCleanable
Stedman Proscreen XLMetal screen on a gooseneck10 oz6.125 in diameterYes, rinse
Rode WS2Foam windshield over the capsule10 gn/a (110 x 85 x 85 mm)Limited

Why a metal screen is different from a mesh one

A nylon mesh screen slows the air by making it pass through fabric, which also attenuates some high frequencies as a side effect. Stedman's patented approach uses a metal screen shaped to redirect the plosive downward and away rather than trapping it in the material, which is the reason they claim less high-frequency loss.

The practical difference most people notice is not tonal but maintenance: you rinse a metal screen and use it for years, where a nylon mesh filter accumulates whatever comes out of your mouth and becomes a consumable.

Both filters in detail

#1

Stedman Proscreen XL

Top pick

Stedman · A pop filter you can wash instead of replace

Worth it if you record daily and have replaced a fabric filter more than once. For occasional recording a nylon filter at a tenth of the price does the same acoustic job.

Why it is here

  • The patented metal screen redirects plosive air downward rather than trapping it in fabric
  • 6.125 inches of screen covers off-axis movement a small filter does not
  • Rinse it clean; a nylon mesh filter is a consumable

What it costs you

  • 10 oz on a 13-inch gooseneck is real leverage on a boom arm
  • Costs many times a nylon filter
  • 26.5 inches overall needs somewhere to live when you are not recording
Published specifications for the Stedman Proscreen XL, with the source for each figure.
SpecPublished valueSource
Screen diameter6.125 inspec
Overall length26.5 inspec
Gooseneck13 in flexiblespec
Clamp range0.39 to 0.925 inspec
Weight10 ozspec
#2

Rode WS2

Rode · Plosive control without anything on your arm

The right choice when your arm is already at its weight limit, or when the mic has to stay portable. A mesh or metal screen keeps the top end cleaner if you have the load capacity for one.

Why it is here

  • 10 g adds nothing to your arm's load, unlike a 10 oz metal filter
  • Sits on the mic, so the mic can move without re-aiming a separate screen
  • Cheapest effective plosive control there is

What it costs you

  • Foam over a capsule takes a little top end with it
  • Sized for specific Rode bodies — check the fit before ordering
  • Foam degrades over a few years
Published specifications for the Rode WS2, with the source for each figure.
SpecPublished valueSource
TypeHigh-density foam windshieldspec
FitsNT1-A, NT2-A, NT1000, NT2000, NTK, K2, Broadcasterspec
Dimensions110 x 85 x 85 mmspec
Weight10 gspec

What we did not pick, and why

  • Cheap nylon mesh filters on flexible goosenecks. They work acoustically and they are a genuinely reasonable purchase for occasional recording. They are not here because the gooseneck drifts under load and the mesh is a consumable — both fixable by spending once.
  • Double-layer mesh filters. More attenuation of the plosive and more attenuation of the top end. If you need two layers, you are too close.
  • Foam covers not sized for your microphone. A loose windshield rattles; a tight one compresses the grille. Check the fit list — the WS2 names the Rode bodies it fits.
  • Filters that clamp to the microphone body. Adding mass at the capsule is the worst place for it and it compromises whatever shockmount is inside.

What a pop filter does not do

  • Fix sibilance. A hard "s" is high-frequency sound, not moving air. That is a de-esser, or a different microphone, or turning slightly off-axis.
  • Reduce room noise. It is a windbreak, not an absorber.
  • Set your distance. It happens to enforce a minimum distance, which is a useful side effect rather than the purpose.
  • Replace technique. Speaking slightly across the capsule rather than straight into it removes most plosives for free.

Pair it with

  • An arm with headroom in its load rating. Best boom arms.
  • A microphone that does not already have one. The PodMic and RE20 both have internal filtering, so a screen is optional.
  • Something absorptive behind you, because the filter does nothing about the room. Best acoustic panels.

How to choose

  1. Check your arm's remaining load capacity. If it is tight, the decision is made: 10 g not 10 oz.
  2. How often do you record? Daily means buy the cleanable metal screen once.
  3. Does your microphone already filter internally? If so, a light foam windshield is plenty.
  4. Do you move while talking? A 6.125 inch screen covers more off-axis movement than a small one.
  5. Try technique first. Speaking slightly across the capsule is free and removes most of the problem.
A pop filter on a gooseneck mounted in front of a studio microphone
Illustrative photography of the category.

Questions people actually ask

Do I need a pop filter?
At close range, usually yes — unless your microphone has one built in, as the PodMic and RE20 do. The alternative is speaking slightly across the capsule instead of straight into it, which is free and removes most plosives.
Metal or foam pop filter?
Metal if you record daily and your arm has load capacity to spare — you rinse it rather than replacing it. Foam if your arm is near its limit, because 10 g against 10 oz is the difference between a stable mount and a drooping one.
Does a pop filter affect sound quality?
A mesh filter attenuates some high frequencies as a side effect of slowing the air. Stedman's metal design redirects the air rather than trapping it, which is the basis of their lower-loss claim. Foam over the capsule takes a little top end too.
Will a pop filter stop sibilance?
No. Sibilance is high-frequency sound, not moving air. Use a de-esser, move slightly off-axis, or consider whether your microphone's presence region is the real cause.
How far should the pop filter be from the microphone?
Far enough that the plosive has dispersed before it reaches the capsule — a couple of inches is typical. Touching the grille defeats the point and can transmit vibration.

Sources

Every specification on this page traces to a published source. We have not tested these products — the ranking is a reading of published figures against our scoring criteria.