SottoSotto
Back to blog
comparisonworkflowproductivitydictationtranscription

Real-Time Voice Typing vs Post-Recording Transcription: Which is Better?

Compare real-time dictation and post-recording transcription. Learn when each approach works best for different workflows and use cases.

K
November 27, 20256 min read

Voice input comes in two flavors: real-time dictation as you speak, or batch transcription of recordings. Each has its place in a productive workflow.

Real-Time Dictation

Text appears as you speak. You see results immediately and can make corrections on the fly. This is classic "voice typing."

Best For:

  • Writing emails and messages
  • Drafting documents at your desk
  • Any situation where you can review while speaking
  • Quick notes and reminders

Limitations:

  • Requires attention to the screen
  • Speed limited by processing latency
  • Can't do while walking, driving, etc.

Post-Recording Transcription

Record first, transcribe later. Capture audio whenever inspiration strikes, process it when convenient.

Best For:

  • Ideas captured while mobile
  • Meeting and interview recordings
  • Long-form content dictation
  • Batch processing multiple recordings

Limitations:

  • Delayed feedback on transcription
  • Extra step in the workflow
  • Recordings can pile up

Hybrid Approach

Most productive workflows use both. Real-time for desk work, recording for mobile capture. The key is having tools that handle both seamlessly.

Accuracy Comparison

Post-recording often achieves slightly higher accuracy because larger models can be used without real-time constraints. But for most purposes, both are excellent.

Both Workflows Covered

Sotto handles real-time dictation and audio file transcription. $29 one-time purchase.

Get Sotto
K

About Kitze

Creator of Sotto and indie developer building tools for productivity. Passionate about local AI and privacy-first software.

Follow on Twitter