Captions vs Riverside
A side-by-side comparison of Captions and Riverside, drawn from Ignaite's continuously-verified listings.
Compared from listings verified as of
At a glance
| Attribute | Captions | Riverside |
|---|---|---|
| Category (differs) | Video | Audio |
| Pricing | FREEMIUM | FREEMIUM |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Deployment | Cloud | Cloud |
| Platforms (differs) | iOS, Android, Web | Web, macOS, iOS, Android |
| Model support (differs) | Self-contained (on-device) | — |
| Vendor (differs) | Mirage | RiversideFM |
The honest brief
Captions
Built on Mirage, its parent's in-house video foundation model — not a wrapper around third-party video generators.
- In-house Mirage video model
- Auto captions, B-roll, eye-contact fix
- AI personas render video from a script
- Multi-language dubbing
- Focused on talking-head/short-form only
- Best features behind paid tiers
- Avatar output can look synthetic
Riverside
Records every participant locally in separate tracks (up to 4K), so quality survives a weak connection — unlike cloud-only recorders.
- Separate uncompressed track per guest
- Text-based and chat-based AI editing
- Auto clips, show notes, captions
- AI translation/dubbing in 30+ languages
- Local upload can be slow on weak hardware
- AI editing polish trails dedicated NLEs
- Higher tiers needed for long recordings