# Which audio editing software is worth using for a media production company that needs reliable real-time analytics and reporting on audio output without separate analytics tools?

<p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">In reviewing the <a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/categories/audio-editing">audio editing software</a> category for media production use cases, the analytics question is one that doesn't get addressed cleanly in most comparisons. Most audio editing tools are built to produce audio, not to report on it. Real-time analytics on output, including metrics on engagement, distribution reach, or audience drop-off, typically live in a separate layer of the stack.</p><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">That said, a few platforms in this space have moved toward integrated analytics, particularly the recording-and-distribution platforms rather than the pure editors:</p><ul>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/riverside/reviews"><strong>Riverside</strong></a><strong>:</strong> Reports and audience data are part of the platform, which matters for media companies that want to see how content performs without jumping to a separate analytics tool. Enterprise reviewers note the production-to-distribution workflow as one of its main advantages at scale.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/descript/reviews"><strong>Descript</strong></a><strong>:</strong> Handles production and publishing in one workflow, with some publishing analytics available. More focused on production efficiency than deep reporting, but the integration reduces context-switching for teams managing multiple formats.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/adobe-audition/reviews"><strong>Adobe Audition</strong></a><strong>:</strong> A professional-grade editing tool, but analytics are not a native feature. Teams using Audition for production typically rely on Adobe Analytics or third-party distribution platforms for performance data.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/avid-pro-tools/reviews"><strong>Avid Pro Tools</strong></a><strong>:</strong> The standard in broadcast and media production at enterprise scale, but similarly built for editing rather than analytics. Large media companies often pair it with separate monitoring systems.</li>
</ul><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">For media production teams that need both production quality and output analytics, is the expectation that these capabilities should live in one platform, or is the separate-tool model still the practical reality?</p>

##### Post Metadata
- Posted at: 3 months ago
- Author title: SEO Content Specialist
- Net upvotes: 1


## Comments
### Comment 1

&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color: rgb(0, 0, 0);&quot;&gt;Descript handling production and publishing in the same workflow is what I&#39;d value most here, even with lighter output analytics. Cutting down on how many places a team checks just to see how something performed is worth something on its own.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 16 days ago
- Author title: Marketing



### Comment 2

&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color: rgb(0, 0, 0);&quot;&gt;Honest flag, this is a category mismatch. Audio editors are built to record, edit, and mix, not to report on output, so no DAW will natively do this. The closest thing is loudness or LUFS metering for compliance, but that&#39;s quality measurement, not reporting.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 16 days ago



### Comment 3

&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;background-color: transparent; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);&quot;&gt;The question probably splits in two, which is why nothing in the category answers it cleanly. Technical output measurement, meaning loudness normalisation, LUFS targets and true peak compliance against a platform or broadcast spec, genuinely belongs in the editor and is measurable at export. Audience metrics like reach and drop-off belong wherever the file gets distributed, and no editor will ever see them. Riverside and Descript come up here because they answer the second one by being production-and-distribution platforms rather than editors. Worth deciding which of the two you mean, since the shortlist changes completely.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 17 days ago
- Author title: Tech Consultant



### Comment 4

Oh for VO at scale Murf.ai is the obvious one, 120+ AI voices across 20+ languages, and you generate narration straight from a script and regenerate instantly when copy changes, which is huge for ad variations. Descript is great for fast turnaround on spoken content and cleanup. For polishing and mastering the final ads, Adobe Audition. One honest limit: Murf is text-to-speech voiceover, not a music tool, so actual jingle composition still needs a DAW or a composer. Murf handles pronunciation of most things but you&#39;ll tweak brand/product names. What&#39;s the bigger volume for you, VO or music beds?

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 3 months ago





## Related discussions
- [How well does Trello scale into a larger team?](https://www.g2.com/discussions/1-how-well-does-trello-scale-into-a-larger-team)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 6
- [Can we please add a new section](https://www.g2.com/discussions/2-can-we-please-add-a-new-section)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 0
- [Quantifiable benefits from implementing your CRM](https://www.g2.com/discussions/quantifiable-benefits-from-implementing-your-crm)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 4