In your post, you mentioned that the ACM's mic is better than the Z's mic but in your Amazon's review, you mentioned it's not worth US$50 for that. I just needed to know how much better is it relative to the Z's?
Is it better in terms of clarity, sound cancellation, sensitivity to pick up voice, or its ability to do its job of beamforming? Maybe some subjective percentages could help me understand how much better you felt it was over the Z? Also, if you have any experience with boom mics of headsets like the Sennheiser PC360 or something similar, could you comment whether the mic from the Z model is comparable in performance?
Reason why I ask is that over here is this part of the world, the difference between the Zx and Z is about US$30 and that I would like to buy the Q701 over the PC360 if I could use the Sound Blaster's mic. The omni-direction and lack of noise cancellation of the Zalman mic that you mentioned in your Amazon review is something I don't think I can live with. So would you reckon it's worth getting the Zx just for the better mic on the ACM over the Z if the difference is now US$30?
Thanks for your help.
I would not pay any money for the mic, at least not the mic alone. When I tested it, while using the ACM, the quality of the mic was bad enough that some of my friends noticed right away that I wasn't using my normal microphone, a Logitech desktop USB mic. As I was only using TeamSpeak at that day, the quality difference may have even been higher in other applications.
The mic is stereo, saves space on the desk and doesn't need an extra cable. That's as far as the advantages go as far as I'm concerned.