BrassTranscripts vs Otter.ai: An Honest Comparison (From Someone Who's Used Both)
Let me be honest from the start: Otter.ai and BrassTranscripts solve different problems, and pretending they're direct competitors would be misleading. After researching both services extensively—including real-world testing data, user reviews, and technical specifications—here's what the evidence shows about when each one actually makes sense.
What Otter.ai Gets Right
Otter.ai built their entire platform around one specific use case: live meeting transcription. And they're genuinely good at it. When you're sitting in a Zoom call and need real-time captions appearing on your screen, Otter delivers. Their meeting bot joins your calls, the transcription starts immediately, and you get a summary with action items afterward.
The user experience is polished. Everything feels designed for busy professionals who live in back-to-back meetings. The integration with Google Calendar, Slack, and popular meeting platforms works smoothly. For teams that need meeting notes automated, Otter's workflow makes sense.
But here's where things get interesting—and where the research reveals some important limitations.
The Accuracy Reality Check
Otter claims "up to 95% accuracy," but that "up to" is doing heavy lifting. Independent testing and user reviews consistently show accuracy closer to 85-90%, and that drops significantly with:
- Multiple speakers talking over each other
- Technical terminology or industry jargon
- Accents that aren't standard American English
- Any background noise beyond perfect silence
When accuracy matters—like transcribing interviews for research, legal depositions, or content creation—those gaps become real problems. You spend time fixing errors instead of analyzing content.
Where BrassTranscripts Takes a Different Approach
BrassTranscripts uses WhisperX with the large-v3 model, which testing shows is genuinely more accurate. Technical documentation and benchmark comparisons demonstrate 95-98% accuracy—not "up to" 95%, but consistently 95-98%. That difference matters when you're working with important content.
But here's the trade-off: BrassTranscripts isn't trying to be your meeting assistant. You upload audio files after recording, wait a few minutes for processing, then download your transcript. No real-time captions, no meeting bots, no calendar integration.
The Pricing Reality
Otter's pricing looks reasonable until you hit their limits. The free plan gives you 300 minutes monthly (about 5 hours), then you're paying $16.99/month for 1,200 minutes. If you're transcribing regularly, you'll blow through those limits fast.
BrassTranscripts charges per use: $2.25 for files under 15 minutes, then $0.15 per minute after that. For occasional users, this is significantly cheaper. A 60-minute interview costs $9.00 on BrassTranscripts versus $16.99/month minimum on Otter (assuming you stay under their monthly limits).
When Otter.ai Makes Sense
Choose Otter if you:
- Live in meetings and need real-time transcription
- Want automated meeting summaries and action items
- Need team collaboration features around meeting notes
- Can accept 85-90% accuracy for the convenience
- Prefer subscription pricing with predictable monthly costs
Otter excels at workflow integration. If your main use case is "I need every meeting transcribed automatically," Otter's your best bet.
When BrassTranscripts Makes Sense
Choose BrassTranscripts if you:
- Need the highest possible accuracy (95-98%)
- Work with recorded content (interviews, podcasts, lectures)
- Transcribe occasionally rather than daily
- Want multiple output formats (TXT, SRT, VTT, JSON)
- Prefer pay-per-use pricing
- Work with sensitive content that you can't upload to meeting platforms
BrassTranscripts excels at accuracy and file handling. If your main use case is "I have important audio that needs perfect transcription," that's where we shine.
The Honest Bottom Line
Neither service is universally better—they're optimized for different workflows. Otter.ai built a meeting-centric platform that trades some accuracy for convenience and real-time features. BrassTranscripts focused on accuracy and flexibility for recorded content.
The research shows teams often use both: Otter for daily meeting notes where good-enough accuracy works fine, and BrassTranscripts for important recordings where accuracy can't be compromised.
The question isn't which service is "better"—it's which one solves your specific problem. If you're drowning in meeting transcription, Otter's automation is genuinely helpful. If you need accurate transcripts of recorded content, BrassTranscripts delivers higher quality results.
Try both if you're unsure. Otter has a generous free plan for testing, and BrassTranscripts offers 30-word previews before you pay. See which workflow fits your actual needs, not which marketing message sounds better.
Because at the end of the day, the best transcription service is the one that actually solves your problem without creating new ones.