ninbura

What you're really looking for is a mixer. But there's only one line of mixers that accepts USB microphones, that being the Rode Rodecaster line of mixers. They're very expensive, and only accept Rode USB microphones. If it were me, I'd switch to an XLR microphone and either purchase the Yamaha AG03MK2, or the Rodecaster Duo. With the AG03 you'd connect the main USB connection to your laptop dock and set the on-mixer switch to "dry 1/2". This will isolate the mic signal on the mixer and send it to your laptop over the USB connection. Note that with this mixer your Mic will only be sent to your laptop. You will also get system audio from the USB connection to the mixer. you'd need an HDMI audio extractor, as @thrasher_565 mentioned, to connect your video game consoles to the mixer. I'd also suggest running your two consoles through and HDMI switch to you can feed them both into the same extractor, and then into the mixer with a 3.5 to Dual 6.35mm cable. With the Rodecaster Duo, you'd connect USB 1 to your laptop dock, this would give you two inputs and outputs to your laptop (mic in, system & chat audio out). Then you could grab audio from your consoles via the USB 2 connection. I'd connect said USB connection to a USB switch for easily switching the connection between your PS5 & Nintendo Switch. The nice thing about this mixer vs the AG06 is that you can send your mic over the USB connection to your PS5 & Nintendo Switch. However, the mixer is significantly more expensive. Though, it's also of a much higher quality and significantly more feature-rich. Like giving you Mic FX (compressor, noise gate, eq, etc), Bluetooth connectivity, a separate fader for voice chat / game chat, and much more. If neither mixer is within your price range you could try to find something lower end, but I wouldn't recommend it.

You have a few things to consider Nvidia's consumer-grade GPUs have an artificial 5 encode session limit and your driver will need to be patched to bypass that if you're encoding more than 5 unique streams concurrently. The P5000 has dual encoders, you could run into encoder overload depending on your settings when running 8 concurrent 1080p streams on an Nvidia gpu that has a single encoder. Unless when you say "6-8 streams" you're referring to the sources in OBS, which renders encode session limits & encoder bandwidth irrelevant to the conversation. Use Nvidia's Video Encode and Decode GPU Support Matrix for reference as to which GPUs have dual encoders.That being said... the M2000 only has 1 encoder, so if you're currently pulling off 8 concurrent streams with that you should be good. Unless you want to increase quality via presets or need more headroom in the future. I'd consider using FFmpeg for your streams instead of OBS if you aren't compositing sources. FFmpeg is superior to OBS if you're directly streaming a source to a platform because it only hits the encoder on your GPU & not the 3D engine. YouTube supports AV1 ingest, so with a 40-Series card you could greatly reduce your data rate as AV1 is much more efficient. Also, the 4070 TI and everything above it in the 40-Series has dual encoders, which is relevant if #2 is actually a problem for you.

Worth noting that with some ingenuity you could probably get a 4K setup working, like by sharing the same encode session for streaming and recording. But if there's any reason you're encoding more than 2 streams of 4K60 I would recommenced getting one of the cards with dual encoders.

This also applies to the RTX 4070 desktop chip, which will be a tempting GPU for a streaming PC due to its price point. If your target stream resolution is 4K+, go with the 4070 TI.

Nvidia just announced their RTX 4070, and with it its specs on their official site. Most notably, for the first time since 10-Series; like-series GPUs don't always have the same number of encoders. The RTX 4070 and below (laptop chips) have a single 8th generation encoder, while the RTX 4070 TI and up have 2 8th generation encoders: For most people this shouldn't matter, but if you're trying to encode more than two 4K streams or more than one 8K stream in real-time the RTX 4070 and below won't be able to handle it. For example, if you're streaming 4K to YouTube, recording 4K locally, and stream 4k to Discord (AV1) simultaneously, you'll overload the encoder. This may also be relevant for Plex users who are streaming high resolution content to multiple clients. To be clear this doesn't affect the quality of your encodes, you simply have less encoding bandwidth to play with. They haven't updated it to show the RTX 4070 yet, but Nvidia's Video Encode and Decode GPU Support Matrix is useful when comparing GPUs encoding / decoding potential.

Yeah, despite the extra port it sounds like 40 series still only supports 4 heads, see answer.

That's what I'm currently doing per the original post.

Yeah AMD is better in that regard, I use all the Nvidia technologies though NVENC, RTX Voice, DLSS, etc.

This isn't true unfortunately, modern Quadros are also limited to 4 displays. I was looking into this earlier this year.

Hey there, if anyone out there has their hands on a Tuf / Strix 4090 I would much appreciate if all 5 display outputs were tested simultaneously I run dual GPUs in multiple computers to get a reliable 5th display, wondering if it's finally possible to do 5 displays with a modern Nvidia GPU. My guess is that you'll still be limited to 4 heads despite the extra HDMI port, but a man can dream.

RME's Babyface Pro is cheaper than their ADI-2 and has DSP with EQ. It's only a 3-band EQ per-channel, but with a loopback cable on the ADAT port you can apply an EQ to the input and output giving you 9 bands. Technically if you keep looping the signal back you can have up to 27 bands by the time it comes out of the phones output. The delay on physical loopback with RME interfaces is so low that it's imperceivable. The Babyface Pro is also more capable in terms of routing, IO, when comparted to the ADI-2. Of course the ADI-2 has the highest end phone output, but for OP's headphones of choice the output on the Babyface should be plenty. Almost all my audio gear is RME (MADI FX, UFX+, RayDAT, ADI-192 DD, ADI-648) and I highly recommend it. Didn't even think to suggest it as price for their cheapest interface with DSP is outrageously expensive for most people, but I guess that's what you're saying.

Yeah a lot of audio gear is built to be rack mounted, I'd throw something like this under the desk.

Hardware equalizers can be had, but even the lower end ones are fairly pricey: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004Q9DANA/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B004NDHZTY&linkCode=as2&tag=ledgernote-20&linkId=KUVUVIRKLQAGUWWC&th=1

This is actually a receiver; not a transmitter, it's a decent one though They do sell an "upgraded" transmitter, but as far as I can tell it's just that there's a small screen now, it's $20 more though. Haven't tested it myself but it feels like it's probably not worth unless you're really utilizing the dual headphone capability as it seems to give you better visibility and seemingly independent volume control.

I use one of these on the outset of my audio rack: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0838YPSZT/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o06_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 Bluetooth transmitters like these are sometimes misconstrued to have low quality, but that's because the analog to digital converter in them is usually gated and generally low quality. If you come in through the optical port signal integrity is perfectly maintained, the audio isn't converted from digital to analog until it hits the headphones. Most PCs have an optical output, super easy to setup with the included cables, should be able to power it off a USB port on the PC too. Supports all the best Bluetooth codecs and will have much better range than a tiny little dongle. It should be noted that this will not support two-way communication, so you can't use the mic on said Bluetooth device if it has one. But it should also be noted that quality is greatly degraded when using two-way communication on any Bluetooth headset. Both the input and the output are converted to mono signals with extremely low bit rates. If you're attempting to use a Bluetooth headset with Discord on PC or something I would highly recommend using an external mic separate from the headset. You could still use a wireless one if desired, like Rode's Wireless GO II system, or the Mod Mic Wireless.