Two ways of seeing a podcast

Riverside starts from video. The recording is excellent, video post-production is built in, and publishing to YouTube is their ground. Audio is handled properly — but it stays a by-product of a video edit.

Podkstr starts from sound. The episode lands in a multitrack editor where every voice has its own chain: filter, EQ, noise gate, compressor, de-esser, reverb, limiter. Ten effects, each with its own visual editor — you grab an EQ curve with the mouse, you do not fill in a form.

What changed, and we are not hiding it

Riverside now includes podcast hosting from its Pro plan. Our comparison pages said otherwise; that was true when they were written, and it no longer is. Hosting is not an argument between them and us any more.

What still is: what you can do with the sound once it is recorded.

A difference nobody advertises

Podkstr captures raw. The browser's automatic gain control and noise suppression are switched off on purpose: that processing is irreversible, and once baked into the file no edit removes it. You clean up afterwards, if you want to, with what you choose.

And the output level is measured, not estimated: LUFS normalisation to BS.1770-4, cross-checked against ffmpeg to within 0.08 LU, with a limiter holding the peak under the ceiling.

Who each is for

Riverside if video is your main channel, YouTube is the destination, and the video edit matters as much as the sound.

Podkstr if you publish audio, want to work the sound track by track rather than accept it, and seven interface languages mean something to you.

Try the editor →

Feature

Podkstr

Riverside

Remote recording

In-browser local capture

Raw capture, no forced processing

Multitrack editor

Per-track effects

Visual DSP controls

AI audio cleanup

Transcription

Measured LUFS mastering

Public live listening

RSS hosting

Multilingual interface

Two ways of seeing a podcast

What changed, and we are not hiding it

What still is: what you can do with the sound once it is recorded.

A difference nobody advertises

And the output level is measured, not estimated: LUFS normalisation to BS.1770-4, cross-checked against ffmpeg to within 0.08 LU, with a limiter holding the peak under the ceiling.

Who each is for

Riverside if video is your main channel, YouTube is the destination, and the video edit matters as much as the sound.

Podkstr if you publish audio, want to work the sound track by track rather than accept it, and seven interface languages mean something to you.

Try the editor →

Feature	Podkstr	Riverside
Remote recording	Included	Strength
In-browser local capture	Included	Strength
Raw capture, no forced processing	Strength	Not offered
Multitrack editor	Strength	Partial
Per-track effects	Strength	Not offered
Visual DSP controls	Strength	Not offered
AI audio cleanup	Included	Included
Transcription	Included	Included
Measured LUFS mastering	Strength	Partial
Public live listening	Included	Included
RSS hosting	Included	Included
Multilingual interface	Strength	Partial

Podkstr vs Riverside

Two ways of seeing a podcast

What changed, and we are not hiding it

A difference nobody advertises

Who each is for

Feature comparison

Plans, side by side

What Riverside does better

Two ways of seeing a podcast

What changed, and we are not hiding it

A difference nobody advertises

Who each is for