ChatGPT answers, unedited

For up to six callers, use a remote podcast recorder that captures each person locally into separate tracks rather than Zoom-style call recording. Good options:

• Riverside.fm — Best all-around for interview podcasts: isolated audio/video tracks, local recording, browser guests, and recovery from unstable connections. Riverside
• Zencastr — Strong audio-first choice with separate tracks and simple guest links. Airtape Studio
• Descript (including its recording workflow) — Good if you want recording, transcription, and editing in one place. Descript
• Adobe Podcast — Supports multitrack recording with local capture and progressive uploads designed to protect recordings during connection issues. Adobe Podcast

For a six-person interview show, I’d prioritize:

1. Local recording on every participant’s device.
2. Separate WAV tracks per caller.
3. Progressive upload/recovery if someone drops.
4. Browser-based guest access (no installs).
5. A host test session before live episodes.

Avoid relying on Zoom alone; it is optimized for meetings, not production-quality isolated tracks. Riverside For your use case, I’d shortlist Riverside (video + polished workflow) or Zencastr (audio-first simplicity).

For a podcast with up to six callers, I’d shortlist Riverside and Zencastr. Both use local recording, which is the key feature you want: each participant’s audio is captured on their own device rather than relying on the live internet stream for the master recording.

My pick: Riverside

riverside.fm is a particularly good fit if this is a recurring interview show.

• Separate tracks: Each participant gets an individual high-quality audio/video track. Riverside supports up to 10 recorded participants. Riverside Riverside Help Center
• Connection drops: The recording happens locally, while tracks are uploaded continuously in the background. Riverside says this protects the recording from internet lag/drops and even browser crashes. Riverside Riverside
• Graceful recovery: There are also cloud recordings available as a lower-quality fallback if a participant's high-quality track is incomplete. Riverside Help Center
• Podcast workflow: It includes editing, transcription, clips, and podcast publishing, if you want to keep more of the workflow in one place. Riverside

Strong alternative: Zencastr

zencastr.com is especially compelling if you want something straightforward and your ceiling really is six people.

• It records separate tracks for up to six participants, including on its free offering. Zencastr
• Audio/video is recorded locally, so a bad internet connection affects the conversation but doesn't inherently degrade the locally recorded master. Zencastr Help Center
• Recordings begin uploading as you record, and Zencastr maintains local backups, helping protect against disconnections or a computer problem. Zencastr Zencastr Help Center
• Guests can join through a link without creating an account on a computer. Zencastr

Quick comparison

Riverside's current free plan provides 2 hours of multi-track recording, while Zencastr currently advertises unlimited recording on its free plan with up to six participants. Riverside Zencastr

Bottom line: For a professional interview podcast where a dropped connection must not ruin the recording, I'd use Riverside. If keeping costs down and having exactly six participants is the priority, Zencastr is worth serious consideration.

One important operational tip: regardless of platform, have every guest use headphones, a wired/USB microphone when possible, and Chrome/Edge on a computer, and do a 2-minute test recording before the actual interview.

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d choose Riverside as the safest overall option.

• Riverside — best overall. It records each participant locally, so a caller’s shaky internet connection doesn’t degrade the actual recording. It continuously uploads those local recordings in the background, and it supports up to 10 participants with separate audio/video tracks. It also has browser-based joining, so guests don’t need to install anything. Riverside Riverside
• Zencastr — excellent alternative, especially if you’re audio-first. Its free plan supports up to six participants, with separate tracks and local recording. It starts uploading as soon as recording begins and maintains local/server copies, which is particularly attractive for handling crashes or connection problems. Zencastr Zencastr Help Center
• Zoom/Meet — I wouldn't use them as the primary recorder for a serious podcast. They're convenient, but the recording is more dependent on the live connection and generally gives you less pristine source material. Riverside

My pick

Riverside if you want the most robust, production-friendly workflow.
Zencastr if six-person capacity and cost are the bigger priorities.

For your specific requirement—individual tracks + graceful recovery from connection drops—the key feature to insist on is local recording with progressive/background upload, rather than simply recording the video call in the cloud. Riverside explicitly supports that architecture, including backup cloud recordings if a high-quality track doesn't finish uploading. Riverside Riverside Help Center

riverside.com and zencastr.com are the two I'd shortlist.

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d use zencastr.com.

Why Zencastr is the best fit

• Separate tracks: Each participant gets their own audio track, which makes editing individual voices, removing interruptions, and fixing levels much easier. Zencastr Help Center Zencastr
• Up to six people: Zencastr currently supports 6 participants total, including the host, even on its free offering. Zencastr Zencastr
• Connection-drop resilience: Audio is recorded locally on each participant's device, rather than relying on the internet stream for the master recording. If someone's connection drops, the audio already captured locally isn't ruined. Zencastr Help Center Zencastr
• Progressive uploading: Tracks upload to the cloud in chunks while you record, so you're not waiting until the end to discover that a long recording failed to upload. Zencastr Help Center
• Crash/disconnection protection: Zencastr maintains local copies and cloud uploads, although participants should keep the recording page open until their upload confirmation appears after the session. Zencastr Help Center Zencastr Help Center
• Easy for guests: Guests can join via a link without creating an account or installing software when using a computer. Zencastr

Runner-up: SquadCast

squadcast.fm is also very strong. Its progressive-upload system and local isolated tracks are specifically designed to protect recordings from dropped connections, and it can even let participants rejoin the same session after an interruption. SquadCast SquadCast

I'd choose Zencastr for a six-person interview, though, because the current six-participant support and straightforward browser-based guest experience line up particularly well with your use case.

One important operational rule: have everyone use headphones and a laptop/desktop with a reasonably stable connection, and tell guests not to close their recording tab immediately when the interview ends. Zencastr recommends at least 5 Mbps, preferably 10+ Mbps, and keeping the page open until uploads are confirmed. Zencastr Help Center

If you tell me whether you're recording audio-only or audio + video, I can also compare Zencastr vs SquadCast vs Riverside specifically for a six-person production workflow.

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d choose riverside.fm.

• Separate tracks: Each participant gets their own high-quality audio track, rather than everyone being baked into one recording. Riverside supports up to 10 recorded participants, so six is comfortably within its capacity. Riverside Riverside Help Center
• Connection-drop resilience: It records locally on each participant's device, so a guest's flaky internet doesn't degrade the actual recording. The files upload progressively to the cloud during the session. Riverside Riverside
• Graceful recovery: Riverside maintains cloud recordings as a backup, and its local recordings can survive browser crashes or connection problems. Riverside Riverside Help Center
• Good podcast workflow: You can download individual WAV tracks for editing in tools like Pro Tools, Logic, Audition, or Reaper. Riverside Help Center

Runner-up: Zencastr

zencastr.com is particularly attractive if you're doing audio-first interviews. It also records locally, preserves recordings through internet disconnections, and gives every participant a separate track. Its current free offering supports up to six participants. Zencastr Help Center Zencastr

My pick: Riverside if you want the most robust all-around setup (especially audio + video); Zencastr if the show is primarily audio and you want a simpler podcast-focused workflow.

If six means six guests plus you (7 total), I'd lean Riverside, since Zencastr's stated free-session limit is six participants. Zencastr

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d prioritize a platform that does local recording + separate tracks + recovery from network problems. Avoid relying on ordinary meeting software as your master recording source; the key is that each participant’s microphone is captured on their own device, then uploaded/synced. Descript Violet Recording

My shortlist:

My recommendation for six-person interviews

1. Choose Riverside if:

• you publish video clips as well as audio,
• guests are often non-technical,
• you want the most “studio replacement” experience. Riverside
• Choose Descript/SquadCast if:

• your editing team spends a lot of time cleaning interviews,
• transcripts and quick edits matter as much as recording reliability. Descript
• Choose Zencastr if:

• the show is primarily audio,
• you want a simpler recording-focused tool. Podcast Pontifications

For a six-caller format, I’d also run a backup recording:

• Host records the session locally in the platform.
• Each caller uses headphones and a decent mic.
• Keep a simple fallback such as a local voice recorder/DAW for the host if the platform has an outage.

I would not use Zoom as the primary master recording for a serious podcast. It is convenient, but dedicated podcast platforms are built around isolated tracks and local capture rather than call-quality audio. Iris

If you tell me whether this is audio-only or video podcast, and whether callers are regular co-hosts or one-off guests, I can narrow it to one choice.

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d use descript.com as the default choice.

Why Descript Rooms fits your use case

• Separate tracks: Each participant is recorded locally, giving you independent audio/video tracks rather than one compressed call recording. Descript Descript
• Connection-drop resilience: The recording continues locally even if someone's internet connection glitches. Descript progressively uploads the files, and if an upload stalls or the connection is lost, participants can rejoin or use a recovery link to resume uploading. Descript Descript Help Center
• Six callers is comfortably within its capacity: Rooms supports the host plus up to 10 guests. Descript
• Good post-production workflow: The separate tracks drop directly into Descript's editor, so transcription, editing, cleanup, and multicam work can happen in the same environment. Descript

My shortlist

1. Descript Rooms — best overall for your requirements. Especially compelling if you'll edit the podcast in Descript.
2. Riverside — best alternative if video presentation is a major priority. It's also built around local recording and separate tracks, with a polished remote-guest experience. Riverside
3. Zencastr — good audio-first alternative. Worth considering if you don't need as much integrated video/editing.
4. SquadCast — worth considering if your production workflow already revolves around Descript. It's now part of the Descript ecosystem. Podstack

I would not use Zoom as the primary recorder for a podcast where losing a guest's track would be costly. The key architectural feature you want is local recording on every participant's device + independent uploads, rather than recording the internet call itself. Descript

If you tell me whether this is audio-only or video + audio, and roughly how often you record, I can narrow it down to the best plan/software and estimate the cost for six callers.

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d choose riverside.fm as the safest overall option.

My ranking

1. Riverside — best overall

• Records each participant locally, rather than making the final recording dependent on the live internet connection.
• Produces separate high-quality audio/video tracks for each participant.
• Uploads recordings continuously in the background, so connection problems or even a browser crash are much less likely to ruin what has already been recorded. Riverside Riverside
• Supports more than six participants, so your six-person ceiling isn't a problem. Riverside
• Particularly good if you want video as well as audio.
• Zencastr — excellent alternative, especially for audio

• Also records each participant locally and gives you separate tracks.
• Its local backups are specifically designed to protect recordings when someone loses their connection. Zencastr Help Center
• Up to six people total can join on its free plan, which happens to match your requirement exactly. Zencastr
• Good choice if you want a relatively simple podcast-focused setup.

What I'd pick

Riverside if this is a serious/regular interview show. The combination of local recording + continuous uploading + individual tracks gives you the best protection against a caller's Wi-Fi dropping mid-interview. Riverside

Zencastr if keeping costs down is important and six total participants is a hard maximum. Its local recording architecture is very solid too. Zencastr

I would not use Zoom/Teams/Meet as the primary recording system if individual studio-quality tracks and graceful handling of connection failures are priorities. Their normal call recording isn't designed around the same local multitrack workflow.

If you tell me whether you need audio only or audio + video, and whether the six callers means 6 total or host + 6 guests, I can narrow it down to the best specific plan.

For a remote interview podcast with up to six callers, I would choose a purpose-built remote podcast recorder, not Zoom/Teams. The key features you need are:

• Local recording per participant (so a bad internet connection does not ruin the audio)
• Separate tracks for every caller (so you can edit each voice independently)
• Progressive upload / recovery (so a dropped connection or browser issue does not lose the take)
• Simple guest joining (ideally a browser link, no account or install) Pod Green Room Airtape Studio

My shortlist:

My recommendation for your specific case

For six callers, I would use:

1. Riverside if the podcast has video, YouTube clips, or you want the easiest “professional studio” workflow. Podcast Pontifications
2. Descript + SquadCast if your editor wants fast transcript-based editing. Descript
3. Adobe Podcast or Zencastr if it is primarily audio and you want fewer production steps. Adobe Podcast Airtape Studio

A few operational tips for six-person recordings:

• Have every caller wear headphones (prevents echo and bleed).
• Do a 2-minute mic check before starting.
• Record a local backup on the host machine if the episode is important.
• Avoid platforms that only save the mixed call audio; fixing one bad speaker level afterward becomes much harder. Pod Green Room

For a recurring show with six guests, I would probably start with Riverside or Descript/SquadCast and run two or three test episodes before committing.

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d use riverside.fm.

Why it fits your requirements particularly well:

• Separate tracks: Riverside records each participant locally, giving you an individual audio/video track for every caller rather than one mixed recording. Riverside Riverside Help Center
• Connection-drop resilience: the recording happens on each participant's device, while files progressively upload to the cloud. A weak or temporarily lost internet connection therefore shouldn't ruin the local recording. Riverside Riverside
• Six callers is comfortably within its capacity: Riverside currently supports up to 10 participants on separate tracks, so a host plus six callers leaves plenty of headroom. Riverside
• Guests don't need to install software or create an account—they can join from your link. Riverside
• Good podcast-quality audio: it can produce uncompressed 48 kHz WAV tracks, which is what I'd want for serious post-production. Riverside

My recommendation

Riverside > SquadCast/Zencastr > Zoom for this particular use case.

The key feature I'd prioritize isn't the video quality—it's local recording + progressive upload. That's what protects you when someone's Wi-Fi suddenly dies. A conventional cloud-recorded call can lose quality or recording continuity when the connection deteriorates; Riverside's architecture is specifically designed to avoid that. Riverside Help Center Riverside Help Center

One caveat: connection resilience doesn't mean you should ignore backups. For an important interview, I'd have the host run a local backup recording as well, and have each caller use headphones and a decent microphone.

If you tell me whether this is audio-only or video + audio, and roughly how much you're willing to spend per month, I can narrow it down to the best 2–3 options and compare their current pricing/features.

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d use a remote recording platform that captures each person locally on their own device, rather than a normal video-call app. That way, a guest’s unstable internet affects the live conversation, but not the high-quality recording file. THAT Toronto Podcast Studio Podcast Pontifications

My shortlist:

My recommendation for your use case

Pick Riverside if:

• You record video podcasts or want YouTube/social clips.
• You regularly have 3–6 guests.
• You want guests to click a link and join with minimal setup.
• You want the safest “professional podcast studio” experience. Riverside

Pick SquadCast + Descript if:

• The show is primarily audio.
• Editing speed matters (removing filler words, making transcripts, producing clips).
• You care more about a stable production workflow than flashy video features. Riverside

Avoid using only Zoom/Meet for the master recording

They are convenient, but they prioritize real-time communication over pristine isolated tracks. A dedicated podcast platform is designed to preserve each participant’s recording locally and recover from connection issues more gracefully. THAT Toronto Podcast Studio Podcast Pontifications

Production setup I’d use

• Recording: Riverside (or SquadCast)
• Backup: host records a local track in Audacity or a DAW
• Mics: USB/XLR microphone per caller
• Headphones required for every participant
• Producer monitors connection status and verifies every track before ending the session

For six callers, I would not optimize for the cheapest option—the cost of losing a rare guest interview is usually much higher than the subscription difference.

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d use Riverside as the default choice.

Why Riverside

• Separate local tracks: Each participant’s audio/video is recorded locally on their own device, so a weak internet connection doesn’t degrade the master recording. You can download each person’s track separately, including WAV audio. Riverside Help Center Riverside Help Center
• Good resilience to connection drops: Riverside uploads recordings in the background while the session is happening. Even if a browser crashes or the connection drops, the locally recorded files are designed to remain safe. Riverside
• Six callers is comfortably within its capacity: Riverside supports up to 10 recorded participants (host + 9 guests). Riverside
• Cloud backup: Riverside also creates cloud recordings, which can serve as a fallback if a participant's high-quality local track is incomplete. Riverside Help Center
• Easy for guests: Guests can join through a link without creating an account or installing software. Riverside

The main alternative: SquadCast

squadcast.fm is probably the strongest alternative. Its Progressive Uploads feature is particularly attractive if connection reliability is your biggest concern: it continuously saves/uploads recordings and can preserve the recording up to a disconnection. It also supports separate local tracks and up to 10 people total. SquadCast SquadCast

My pick: Riverside, especially if you're doing video interviews as well as audio. If your absolute top priority is “never lose the recording even when someone's connection/device goes sideways,” I'd seriously consider SquadCast because of its Progressive Uploads architecture. SquadCast

One important operational rule regardless of platform: have every caller use headphones + a decent USB/XLR microphone, and tell guests not to close their browser/app until their recording has finished uploading.

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d shortlist Riverside and Zencastr, with Riverside as my default choice.

My pick: Riverside

The key feature you want is local recording: each caller's microphone is recorded on their own device rather than relying on the quality of the internet stream. Riverside then uploads those recordings in the background. So if someone's Wi-Fi briefly drops, the live conversation may glitch, but the underlying recording can remain high quality. Riverside also says recordings survive browser crashes and provides separate participant tracks. Riverside Riverside

For six callers, that's particularly valuable because you don't want one person's bad connection to ruin the master recording.

Zencastr is an excellent alternative

Zencastr uses essentially the same important architecture: each participant gets a separate locally recorded track, with progressive uploads to the cloud. It specifically keeps a local browser copy so that a temporary disconnection doesn't destroy what has already been recorded. Zencastr Help Center

There's also a compelling practical advantage: Zencastr currently advertises up to six participants on its free plan, with separate tracks and 48 kHz WAV recording. Zencastr Zencastr

What I'd use

If this is a serious podcast and reliability is the priority → Riverside.

If you're trying to keep costs at zero and six people is your hard maximum → Zencastr.

One important caveat: neither platform can make a caller's live connection immune to dropping. What they do is decouple the final recording quality from that connection by recording locally. That's the architecture I'd insist on for a six-person remote interview.

For especially important episodes, I'd also have the host and key guest run a local backup recording (e.g. a DAW or QuickTime/OBS) as insurance. support.riverside.fm

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d choose riverside.fm as the default.

• Separate tracks: Each participant gets an individual high-quality audio/video track, which makes editing crosstalk, mistakes, and levels much easier. Riverside Riverside
• Connection-drop resilience: Riverside records locally on each participant’s device and progressively uploads the recording. A temporary internet drop can affect the live conversation, but shouldn't ruin the high-quality recording. Riverside Riverside
• Six callers is comfortably within its capacity: Riverside supports up to 10 participants in its FAQ, though its podcast-specific page currently describes up to 8 guests. Riverside Riverside
• Guests don't need accounts or software installation on a computer; they can join via your invitation link. Riverside

A strong alternative: Zencastr

zencastr.com is particularly attractive if six total participants is your hard ceiling. It records each speaker locally, maintains local backups, and uploads while you record, so connection problems don't directly degrade the final tracks. Zencastr Help Center Zencastr

My pick: Riverside for a professional recurring podcast; Zencastr if you want a simpler/possibly more economical six-person setup.

One important operational rule for either: have everyone use headphones and a wired/quality microphone where possible, and do a 2-minute recording test before the actual interview.

For a remote interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d shortlist Riverside, Zencastr, and SquadCast. All three use local recording and separate participant tracks, which is exactly what you want when internet quality varies.

My pick: riverside.fm

Riverside is probably the best overall choice if your priority is professional-quality interviews with minimal technical babysitting.

• Separate tracks: each participant gets an individual high-quality audio/video track. Riverside Help Center Riverside
• Local recording: the guest's audio/video is captured on their own device, so a bad connection doesn't degrade the final recording. Riverside Help Center
• Progressive uploading: recordings upload to the cloud while the interview is happening, providing protection against connection problems and crashes. Riverside Riverside
• Capacity: Riverside supports more than your six-person requirement, so you have headroom. Riverside
• Guests can join through a browser link, which keeps the onboarding relatively simple. Riverside

Best alternative: zencastr.com

Zencastr is particularly attractive if six people is your hard maximum and you want a straightforward podcast-oriented setup.

• It records separate tracks for every participant. Zencastr Help Center
• It records locally, so internet dropouts don't contaminate the recorded audio/video. Zencastr Help Center
• It maintains local backups in the participant's browser storage. Zencastr Help Center
• Its current free offering supports up to six participants. Zencastr
• Guests don't need an account or software download when joining from a computer. Zencastr

Also worth considering: squadcast.fm

SquadCast has a particularly strong answer to your "connection drops gracefully" requirement. Its Progressive Uploads continuously save recordings to the cloud while maintaining locally recorded tracks. SquadCast SquadCast

It also explicitly supports rejoining the same session after a disconnection, and its cloud recording provides an additional recovery layer. SquadCast

What I'd choose

For a recurring interview podcast, I'd go with Riverside. If keeping costs down is especially important, I'd test Zencastr first. If your biggest fear is a guest's computer/network failing halfway through a critical interview, SquadCast's progressive-upload/rejoin approach is especially compelling.

One important operational point: don't use Zoom/Meet as your master recording if individual, edit-ready tracks matter. The dedicated platforms record each participant locally rather than merely recording the network call. Riverside Help Center Riverside

If you tell me whether this is audio-only or video + audio, and whether the six callers are all on simultaneously, I can recommend the best specific plan/setup and a backup workflow.

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d use a remote podcast recording platform that does local recording with isolated tracks rather than Zoom/Teams. The key features you want are:

• One separate audio track per participant (host + each caller)
• Local recording (“double-ended” capture) so a caller’s bad internet does not ruin their audio
• Progressive upload / recovery so brief disconnects don’t lose the session
• Browser-based guest access so callers do not need complicated installs
• Exportable WAV files for editing Pod Green Room Violet Recording

My shortlist:

My recommendation for your setup

For a host interviewing up to six remote callers, I would choose:

1. Riverside if this is a serious show with video, sponsors, or polished production.
2. Zencastr if it is audio-only and you want a simpler workflow.
3. Descript if the editing team wants to turn transcripts directly into cuts.

I would avoid relying on ordinary video-call recording as the primary capture method. Tools like Zoom are convenient, but they are built around live communication rather than preserving studio-quality isolated recordings when connections fluctuate. Iris Home Hustle Hub

A robust workflow would be:

• Host + six callers join a Riverside/Zencastr session
• Everyone uses headphones and a decent USB mic if possible
• Record isolated tracks
• Keep a local backup recorder on the host side (for example, a DAW recording your own mic)
• Edit in a DAW or Descript afterward

For six callers, also check the platform’s current participant limits on your plan before committing, since multi-guest capacity can vary by subscription tier. The Podcast Setup Lab

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d prioritize software that does three things:

1. Records each person locally (not the compressed call audio)
2. Creates isolated tracks for every guest/host
3. Keeps recording if someone’s internet drops and syncs/uploads afterward

The best fits are:

My recommendation

• If this is a serious interview show with video clips, YouTube, or social content: use Riverside. It is the most polished option for a host managing several remote guests. Riverside
• If it is audio-only and you want simplicity: use Zencastr. It is purpose-built for podcast recording and gives you clean individual tracks. Zencastr Help Center
• If your editing team already uses Descript: use SquadCast + Descript. Podcast Pontifications

Setup I’d use for six callers

• Host: Riverside or SquadCast account
• Guests: browser join link (no software install)
• Everyone: headphones + USB microphone if possible
• Record: - Individual WAV tracks
• Backup local recordings enabled
• Separate video tracks only if you need video
• Have a producer/technical person monitor the session if six guests are frequent

I would not use Zoom as the primary recorder for a polished podcast. It is excellent for meetings, but dedicated podcast platforms are designed around isolated tracks and local recording rather than a single compressed conversation feed. podcastsetuplab.com

For a six-caller interview format, my shortlist would be:

1. Riverside (best overall)
2. Zencastr (best audio-only value)
3. SquadCast/Descript (best editing workflow)

For a podcast with up to six callers, I’d choose Zencastr as the default, with Riverside as the alternative if video is a major part of the show.

My recommendation: Zencastr

zencastr.com is particularly well matched to your requirements:

• Up to 6 participants can be recorded on separate tracks. Zencastr
• It uses local recording, so each participant's microphone is captured on their own device rather than relying on the quality of the live internet connection. Zencastr Help Center
• If someone temporarily loses their connection, their recording is preserved locally and can continue/upload once connectivity returns. Zencastr Help Center
• You get individual audio files per participant, which makes editing a six-person conversation dramatically easier. Zencastr
• Guests can join through a link without needing complicated software installation or registration. Zencastr

That combination is exactly what I'd prioritize for a caller-heavy interview format.

The alternatives

Riverside is my second choice if you're producing a video podcast. It offers separate participant tracks and local recording, while giving you a more video-centric studio experience. Riverside

SquadCast is also very strong technically: its progressive-upload system continuously saves locally recorded, isolated tracks to the cloud, specifically addressing dropped connections. SquadCast

One important architectural point

For six callers, I would not make the live call recording itself your master recording. Use the call purely for communication; the recording system should independently capture each person's microphone locally.

So the ideal workflow is:

Caller 1 → local track
Caller 2 → local track
…
Caller 6 → local track
↓
Cloud backup/upload
↓
DAW/editor → final mix

That way, a caller dropping off the internet doesn't destroy the audio they've already recorded.

Bottom line: I'd start with Zencastr for your use case. If the show is equally video-focused, I'd lean Riverside instead.

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d choose riverside.fm.

Why Riverside is the best fit

• Separate tracks: Each participant gets their own high-quality audio track, rather than everyone being baked into one recording. Riverside supports well beyond six participants. Riverside Riverside Help Center
• Connection drops are much less dangerous: Riverside records each person locally on their device and progressively uploads the recording to the cloud. So a guest's internet can drop without ruining the audio already captured. Riverside Riverside
• Graceful recovery: Riverside also maintains cloud recordings as a backup/reference, and you can monitor each participant's upload status during and after the interview. Riverside Help Center Riverside Help Center
• Easy for callers: Guests can join through a link without creating an account or installing software. Riverside
• Podcast-quality audio: It supports uncompressed 48 kHz WAV tracks, giving your editor clean individual sources. Riverside

A strong alternative: Zencastr

zencastr.com is particularly interesting if six people total is a hard ceiling. Its current offering explicitly supports up to six participants, separate tracks, local recording, and uploading while recording. It also keeps a local copy plus a server backup if a computer crashes. Zencastr

Another option: SquadCast

squadcast.fm has essentially the same core architecture: local recording, separate tracks, progressive uploads, and automatic backups. It supports up to 10 people total. SquadCast

My ranking for your use case:

1. Riverside — best overall, especially if you want video, editing, and room to grow beyond six.
2. Zencastr — excellent if six participants is your maximum and you want a straightforward podcast recorder.
3. SquadCast — very solid recording/redundancy architecture, particularly appealing if recording reliability is the priority.

The key feature I'd insist on is local recording + progressive upload, rather than ordinary Zoom/Meet-style cloud recording. That architecture means a caller's flaky Wi-Fi can affect the conversation you hear live, but doesn't necessarily destroy the high-quality track being recorded locally. Zencastr SquadCast

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d use SquadCast if your top priorities are separate local tracks + resilience to connection drops.

My pick: SquadCast

• Individual tracks: Each participant is recorded locally on their own device, producing separate audio tracks rather than a single compressed call recording. SquadCast SquadCast
• Connection-drop protection: Its Progressive Uploads send recorded chunks to the cloud while the conversation is happening. If someone loses connectivity, the recording captured up to that point is already backed up, and participants can rejoin the same session. SquadCast SquadCast
• Six people is comfortably within its capacity: SquadCast currently supports 1 host + up to 9 guests, so a six-caller show isn't pushing its limits. SquadCast
• No guest downloads: Guests can join through a browser without installing software or creating an account, which is useful when interviewing people who aren't technically savvy. SquadCast
• Good production workflow: You can download the individual WAV tracks afterward, and it integrates with Descript for editing. SquadCast Riverside

Strong alternative: Riverside

Riverside would be my choice if the podcast is video-first. It's particularly polished for video interviews and also records separate local tracks, with current plans supporting multi-participant recording. Riverside Riverside

What I'd avoid

I wouldn't use Zoom/Teams/Google Meet as the primary recorder if you're aiming for a professional podcast. They're optimized for real-time communication rather than independent, high-quality source recording; a bad connection can affect the actual recording rather than merely affecting what participants hear. SquadCast

Bottom line:
Audio-first / reliability → SquadCast.
Video podcast / polished all-in-one workflow → Riverside.

For your specific requirement of six callers and graceful recovery from dropped connections, SquadCast is the safer fit. SquadCast

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d use Riverside as the default choice.

Why Riverside fits your requirements

• Individual tracks: Each participant gets their own separate, synchronized audio track (and video track if you're recording video), rather than a single mixed recording. It supports uncompressed 48 kHz WAV audio. Riverside Riverside
• Connection drops are much less scary: Riverside records locally on each participant's device and progressively uploads the recording. So a temporary internet problem doesn't degrade the master recording. Riverside Riverside
• The call can continue if someone disconnects: Other participants aren't kicked out, and the disconnected person can rejoin. Even if the host drops, the recording continues until the host returns or participants leave. Riverside Help Center
• Six callers is comfortably within its capacity: Riverside currently supports up to 10 participants in a session, so six callers plus a host is within the stated limit. Riverside
• Guests don't need accounts: They can join from your invitation link, which makes it considerably easier to get nontechnical interviewees onto the show. Riverside

The closest alternative

SquadCast is also a very good fit. It likewise records participants locally in separate tracks and uses progressive uploads/automatic backups specifically to protect against connection problems. It supports up to 10 people total. SquadCast

I'd choose:

My pick: Riverside, particularly if you're doing video as well as audio. If you're primarily audio-only and your production workflow already revolves around Descript, I'd seriously consider SquadCast.

One important operational detail: regardless of platform, have every caller use headphones and a dedicated microphone, and have everyone join 10–15 minutes early for a short test recording. Local recording protects you from network failures; it doesn't protect against a bad mic, muted input, or someone closing their browser before the local file finishes uploading. Riverside Help Center

riverside.fm
squadcast.fm

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d use Riverside as the default choice, with SquadCast as the strongest alternative.

My recommendation

1. Riverside — best overall

• Records each participant locally, so you get an individual high-quality track rather than a compressed call recording.
• Separate audio/video tracks make editing each caller independently straightforward.
• Local recording plus progressive uploading protects the recording when someone's internet connection temporarily drops. Riverside Riverside
• Supports considerably more than six participants, so your six-caller ceiling isn't a problem.
• Particularly good if you'll also produce video clips or a video podcast.

riverside.fm

2. SquadCast — best if reliability is the priority

This is arguably the most compelling choice given your specific requirement. SquadCast explicitly records participants locally on separate tracks and progressively uploads those recordings to the cloud. Its documentation says recordings continue to be protected even with spotty connections, and participants can rejoin a session after a disconnection. SquadCast SquadCast

It supports up to 10 people total (one host + nine guests), so six callers is comfortably within its capacity. Guests can join through a browser without installing software or creating an account. SquadCast

squadcast.fm

3. Zencastr — good audio-first alternative

Zencastr also provides local multitrack recording, meaning each participant gets an independent track despite internet-quality problems. It supports up to 11 remote guests according to a recent comparison. Riverside

zencastr.com

What I'd choose for your show

If this is primarily an audio interview podcast: I'd lean SquadCast because your two most important requirements—individual local tracks and graceful recovery from connection problems—are core features of its recording architecture. SquadCast SquadCast

If you're doing video too: I'd pick Riverside.

I would not use Zoom as the primary recorder for this. A conventional video call prioritizes real-time communication rather than giving you the robust, local, per-person recordings you want for post-production. Riverside

One important operational detail: regardless of platform, have every caller wear headphones and use a dedicated microphone, and ask everyone to keep the recording tab open until the upload has completed. That gives you much more protection than relying on the call connection itself.

For a podcast with up to six callers, I’d use Riverside.

Why Riverside is the best fit

• Individual tracks: Each participant gets a separate, synchronized audio track (and video track if you're recording video), which is ideal for editing interviews and panels. Riverside Riverside Help Center
• Connection-drop resilience: Riverside records locally on each person's device rather than relying on the internet connection for the master recording. If someone's connection drops, their local recording continues; once they reconnect, uploading resumes. Riverside Riverside Help Center
• Six people is comfortably within its capacity: Riverside currently supports up to 10 recorded participants (host + 9 guests). Riverside
• Guests don't need an account or software installation: They can join through a link, which is valuable if your callers are nontechnical. Riverside
• Progressive upload: Recordings are uploaded while the conversation is happening, providing an additional layer of protection rather than waiting until the end. Riverside

One strong alternative

SquadCast is worth considering if you're already using Descript. It also records each participant locally and progressively uploads files, with explicit support for recovering from connection problems. SquadCast SquadCast

Bottom line: For a six-person interview/panel where losing someone's clean audio because their Wi-Fi hiccupped would be a disaster, Riverside is the safest straightforward choice. The key feature you're looking for is local multitrack recording + progressive cloud upload, rather than ordinary Zoom-style cloud recording.

riverside.com

If this is audio-only, I can also compare Riverside vs. SquadCast vs. Zencastr specifically on price, maximum callers, WAV quality, and failure recovery.

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d shortlist Riverside and Zencastr. Both are designed around the exact failure mode you’re concerned about: each participant is recorded locally, rather than relying on the live internet stream for the master recording.

My pick: Riverside

Riverside is probably the best fit if connection resilience and production workflow are the priorities.

• Individual tracks: Each participant gets a separate high-quality audio/video track. Riverside supports up to 10 participants, so six callers is comfortably within its capacity. riverside.fmriverside.fm
• Connection drops: The recording happens locally on each participant's device, while files are progressively uploaded to the cloud. A temporary internet drop therefore shouldn't ruin the locally captured audio. riverside.fmriverside.fm
• Browser crash protection: Riverside says recordings remain safe if a browser crashes, thanks to the local recording/upload architecture. riverside.fm
• Guest experience: Guests can join via a link without creating an account or installing software. riverside.fm
• Quality: Up to 48 kHz uncompressed WAV audio and 4K video, depending on the setup. riverside.fmriverside.fm

Strong alternative: Zencastr

Zencastr is especially attractive if you're doing audio-first interviews and want a straightforward podcasting workflow.

It records each participant locally and progressively uploads their files, so connection problems don't degrade the actual recording. It also provides a separate track for every participant. support.zencastr.com

Zencastr specifically has troubleshooting documentation for guests getting disconnected, which is reassuring for a show with lots of callers. support.zencastr.com

Riverside vs. Zencastr

Bottom line: I'd choose Riverside for a professional interview show, particularly if callers may have unreliable connections. Its local recording + progressive upload architecture is exactly what you want. If the show is primarily audio and you want something simpler, Zencastr is an excellent alternative.

One important caveat: connection resilience doesn't mean the conversation itself won't be interrupted. If a caller's internet drops, they may temporarily disappear from the live conversation; the key advantage is that the audio they had already recorded remains intact. Riverside also has a Low Data Mode intended to keep the live conversation usable when someone's connection is poor. support.riverside.fm

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d use Zencastr or Riverside rather than Zoom/Teams.

My pick: Zencastr

zencastr.com is particularly well matched to your requirements:

• Separate tracks: each participant gets their own audio/video file, which makes editing and fixing individual voices much easier. Zencastr Help Center Zencastr
• Up to six participants: Zencastr explicitly supports recording separate tracks for six participants, and paid plans support even more. Zencastr
• Connection drops don't ruin the recording: it records locally on each participant's device and progressively uploads the files. A temporary internet problem therefore shouldn't introduce the usual compressed/glitched audio into the recording. Zencastr Help Center Zencastr
• Good recovery behavior: if someone disconnects and rejoins, current Zencastr recordings maintain a single participant track and insert silence/black frames for the period they were offline, making synchronization much easier. Zencastr Help Center
• Guests don't need accounts: they can join through a recording link. Zencastr

One important operational rule: don't let people close the recording page immediately after the interview. Zencastr needs to finish uploading their locally recorded files; leaving before that can cause an unfinalized track. Zencastr Help Center Zencastr Help Center

Riverside is the other strong choice

riverside.fm is probably the better choice if you're doing video-first interviews and want a more polished all-in-one recording/editing workflow. Current comparisons put Riverside and Zencastr among the strongest options for remote recording. Riverside ThePod

What I'd choose

For your specific requirement, I'd start with Zencastr. The combination of local recording, individual tracks, six-person support, and graceful handling of participants dropping offline is exactly what you want.

If you tell me whether this is audio-only or video + audio, and whether the six callers are all remote, I can narrow it down further—including which plan you actually need.

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d use riverside.fm.

Why it fits your requirements:

• Individual tracks: Riverside records each participant locally and gives you separate audio/video tracks, rather than relying on the quality of the live call. Riverside Help Center Riverside Help Center
• Connection drops are much less damaging: Each person’s recording is captured on their own device and progressively uploaded. A flaky connection can disrupt the conversation, but it shouldn't ruin the underlying recording. Riverside also retains cloud recordings as a fallback. Riverside Riverside Help Center
• Six callers is comfortably within its capacity: Riverside currently supports up to eight guests in a studio. Riverside
• Good podcast-quality audio: It supports up to 48 kHz audio and separate WAV tracks. Riverside
• Easy for guests: They can join through a browser link without installing a traditional conferencing app. Riverside

Runner-up: SquadCast

squadcast.fm is also a strong choice. It records participants locally into separate tracks and automatically uploads them to the cloud; it supports up to 10 people total (host + 9 guests). SquadCast

I'd choose Riverside if you want the simplest overall experience, especially if you're recording video as well. I'd consider SquadCast/Descript if your editing workflow is already centered around Descript.

Bottom line: For six-person remote interviews where separate tracks + resilience to connection problems are the priorities, Riverside is my first choice.

For a remote interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d use zencastr.com.

Why Zencastr fits your requirements

• Individual tracks: Each participant gets their own audio track, rather than everyone being baked into one mixed recording. Paid plans can provide 16-bit/48 kHz WAV files. Zencastr Help Center Zencastr Help Center
• Handles connection drops well: The audio is recorded locally on each participant's computer, rather than recording the internet call itself. Zencastr progressively uploads those recordings in the background, so a temporary connection problem doesn't ruin the local recording. Zencastr Help Center
• Graceful reconnection: Since September 2024, Zencastr creates a single track per participant even when they're temporarily offline, inserting silence during the outage. That makes post-production synchronization substantially cleaner. Zencastr Help Center
• Six people is comfortably within its capacity: Zencastr currently supports up to 12 total participants, and its editing system can process six participants at a time. Zencastr Zencastr Help Center
• Low guest friction: Guests can join from a browser using a link and don't need a Zencastr account. Zencastr

My recommended setup

For a six-person interview, I'd configure it as:

Zencastr → Record Audio (and Video if needed) → separate WAV tracks → edit in your DAW/NLE.

Have everyone join before hitting record, and after stopping, make every participant keep the recording page open until Zencastr confirms their files have finished uploading. That's important because the local recordings still need to upload after the session. Zencastr Help Center

If you're choosing between Zencastr, Riverside, SquadCast, etc., I'd put Zencastr at the top specifically because your two priorities are separate tracks + resilience to connection drops. If you tell me whether you need audio only or video too, I can also give you a short 3-option comparison, including pricing and which one I'd pick for a six-caller show.

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d shortlist these:

My recommendation: Riverside

For your specific requirement, Riverside is probably the easiest choice. It records each participant locally rather than simply recording the internet call, so a momentary connection problem doesn't degrade the master audio. It also continuously uploads recordings in the background, and supports up to 10 participants total on separate tracks. riverside.com

That means with six callers, you'd get six clean, independently editable tracks rather than one mixed recording. Guests can also join through a link without creating an account or installing software. riverside.com

The important distinction

Don't use ordinary Zoom/Meet-style recording as your master. You want this architecture:

Guest microphone → local recording → progressive/background upload → cloud master

rather than:

Guest microphone → internet → compressed call → recording

The former means a Wi-Fi hiccup can interrupt the conversation but doesn't necessarily ruin the audio that was already captured. That's the key feature you're looking for. www.descript.com

SquadCast is particularly strong here: its Progressive Uploads system continuously saves chunks to the cloud, while local recordings preserve the high-quality source. It also has a mechanism to continue a session after a device/network problem. squadcast.fm

Zencastr is another excellent choice. It records each participant locally and keeps the recording safe even when someone disconnects; paid plans support up to 12 people total. support.zencastr.com

If this were my production setup

I'd choose:

Riverside → 6 isolated WAV tracks → edit/mix in your DAW.

If connection resilience is more important than everything else, I'd seriously consider SquadCast instead.

If you tell me whether this is audio-only or audio + video, and whether the six callers are six guests plus a host or six people total, I can narrow it to the best plan/software and explain the workflow.

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d use a remote podcast recording platform that does local recording + separate tracks. That combination is what protects you when someone’s Wi-Fi drops: the live call may glitch, but the guest’s locally captured audio is still available. airtape.co

My shortlist:

My recommendation for your specific case

For six-person interview episodes, I’d choose:

1. Riverside — if you want the safest all-around production workflow.

• Separate track for every caller
• Local capture so connection drops don’t ruin the recording
• Browser-based guest joining
• Good for video podcasts too

riverside.fm

2. Zencastr — if you are audio-only and want fewer production features.
violetrecording.com

Setup practices I’d use regardless of platform

• Require every caller to use headphones (prevents echo).
• Have everyone join 10 minutes early for mic checks.
• Record a local backup on the host side (for example, your own DAW or recorder).
• Avoid relying on Zoom/Meet as the master recording; they are built for calls, not studio-quality isolated tracks. homehustlehub.com
• Make sure guests have enough disk space because local recording platforms often capture locally before uploading. airtape.coriverside.fm

If this is a weekly show with six rotating guests, I’d lean Riverside. If it is audio-only and you hand files to an editor, I’d compare Riverside vs. Zencastr.

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d choose Riverside.

Why Riverside is the best fit:

• Individual tracks: each participant gets a separate high-quality audio track (and video if needed), rather than one mixed recording. riverside.fm
• Connection-drop resilience: Riverside records locally on each participant's device and progressively uploads the recording. A guest's unstable internet connection therefore doesn't degrade the locally recorded master. riverside.fm
• Six callers is comfortably within its capacity: Riverside currently supports up to 10 participants in a recording session. riverside.fm
• Guest experience is simple: guests can join via a link without creating an account or installing software. riverside.fm

Runner-up: Zencastr

Zencastr is also a very strong option. It records each participant locally, keeps local backups, and progressively uploads files, so it has essentially the same important protection against connection problems. It supports substantially more than six guests. support.zencastr.com

The distinction I'd make is Riverside for the smoother all-around interview workflow; Zencastr if you're especially focused on audio/podcast production and want another robust local-recording option.

One important operational tip: regardless of platform, have everyone use headphones and do a 30–60 second test recording before the actual interview. Also make guests keep the recording window open until their uploads are confirmed. support.riverside.fm

Riverside
Zencastr

For a remote interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d choose Riverside.

Why Riverside is the best fit

• Individual tracks: Each participant gets a separate high-quality audio track (and separate video track if you're recording video), rather than a single mixed recording. Riverside records locally on each participant's device. riverside.fm
• Connection drops are handled well: The recording continues locally even if someone's internet becomes unstable or drops. Riverside progressively uploads the recording to the cloud as the session proceeds. riverside.fmriverside.fm
• Six callers is comfortably within its capacity: Riverside currently advertises recording with up to eight participants for its podcast workflow. riverside.fmriverside.fm
• Good audio: You can get separate, uncompressed 48 kHz WAV tracks, which is what you want if you're going to mix/edit the podcast afterward. riverside.fmriverside.fm
• Browser-based: Guests can generally join from a link rather than installing a complicated recording setup.

My ranking

SquadCast is probably the closest alternative. Its Progressive Uploads system records participants separately and preserves recordings through disconnections; it also lets participants rejoin the same session after a network interruption. squadcast.fm

Zencastr is another very good option: it records locally, keeps local browser backups, and provides separate files for each participant, specifically protecting recordings when someone loses their connection. support.zencastr.com

Bottom line: For your use case, I'd go Riverside first, SquadCast second. The key feature to prioritize isn't merely "separate tracks"—it's local recording + progressive/background uploading, because that's what protects the interview when a caller's connection drops.

If this is audio-only and you don't need video, I can also compare the best audio-focused options on price, track quality, caller limits, and recovery from disconnects.

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d use Zencastr.

Why it fits your requirements particularly well:

• Individual tracks: Each participant gets a separate audio track, with WAV available on paid plans. support.zencastr.com
• Connection-drop resilience: Recording happens locally on each participant’s computer, rather than recording the internet call itself. If someone's connection glitches, the locally recorded audio isn't degraded. Files are progressively uploaded to the cloud. support.zencastr.comzencastr.com
• Graceful rejoining: If someone drops offline and reconnects, Zencastr now creates a single continuous participant track, inserting silence for the period they were offline. That makes post-production much cleaner. support.zencastr.comzencastr.com
• Six callers is comfortably within its limits: Paid plans support up to 11 guests plus the host (12 total). support.zencastr.comzencastr.com
• Easy for guests: Guests can join via a link without creating a Zencastr account. support.zencastr.comzencastr.com

Runner-up: SquadCast / Descript

Descript's SquadCast is also a strong option. It records each participant as a separate file and supports lossless WAV recording. help.descript.com I'd favor it if you also want to do substantial editing in Descript afterward.

My pick

For a six-person show where the biggest concern is “don't lose the interview if somebody's Wi-Fi goes bad,” I'd choose Zencastr. Its local/progressive recording architecture and single-track handling after reconnections are exactly what you want. support.zencastr.comzencastr.com

One operational recommendation: have every participant use headphones and stay on the recording page until their files finish uploading at the end. Zencastr specifically recommends waiting for uploads to complete. support.zencastr.com

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d choose Riverside as the default.

My ranking

Why Riverside: Each participant is recorded locally on their own device rather than relying on the internet connection for the master recording. It then continuously uploads the files in the background. Riverside says it can record up to 10 participants total, so six callers is comfortably within its capacity. It also gives you an individual audio/video track for each participant. riverside.fm

That distinction is important: if someone's Wi-Fi briefly drops, the conversation may glitch, but the locally captured recording doesn't inherit that glitch. Riverside also says recordings remain safe through browser crashes because of the local recording/upload architecture. riverside.fm

Riverside

Zencastr is the strongest alternative

I'd pick Zencastr if this is primarily an audio podcast and you don't need Riverside's broader video/production ecosystem. It records each participant locally, progressively uploads the files, and maintains local/cloud backups. It currently supports up to 11 guests, so six callers is no problem. zencastr.com

Zencastr

One important caveat

For six callers, I'd strongly prefer a platform designed around local recording rather than simply recording a Zoom/Teams call. You want six independent master tracks, so if Caller 4 has background noise, distortion, or talks over someone, you can fix that person's track without damaging everybody else's audio.

Bottom line:

• Best overall: Riverside
• Best audio-focused alternative: Zencastr
• If you're already heavily invested in Descript: consider its remote recording workflow
• Avoid using ordinary video-conferencing recording as your master if production quality matters.

If you tell me whether this is audio-only or video + audio, and roughly how long each episode is, I can narrow it down to the best plan/tier as well.

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d choose Riverside.

Riverside is particularly well suited to your two requirements:

• Individual tracks: Each participant gets their own locally recorded audio/video track, rather than everyone being baked into one mixed recording. Riverside supports uncompressed 48 kHz WAV audio tracks. support.riverside.fm
• Connection drops: The important part is that recording happens on each participant's device, while files are progressively uploaded to the cloud. So a weak or temporarily lost internet connection doesn't ruin the master recording. Riverside specifically says guests continue recording if the host disconnects. riverside.fm
• Six callers is no problem: Riverside supports substantially more than six participants. riverside.fm
• Easy for guests: Guests can join through a link without creating an account or installing software. riverside.fm

The other one I'd seriously consider

SquadCast is the closest alternative if connection resilience is your absolute #1 priority. Its Progressive Uploads system records participants separately and uploads progressively; it also lets a participant rejoin the same session after a disconnection and continue recording. squadcast.fm

SquadCast

My pick

I'd go with Riverside unless your production team already lives in Descript, in which case SquadCast becomes particularly attractive. The combination of local recording + progressive upload is exactly what you want for a six-person remote interview: the call can briefly fall apart without destroying the underlying recordings. riverside.fm

One caveat: connection resilience doesn't mean the conversation itself continues normally during a total disconnect. Participants may temporarily lose the ability to hear each other; what you gain is that their local recordings remain intact.

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d use Riverside as the default choice.

My ranking

Why Riverside: it records each participant locally on their own device and uploads the files continuously. So if someone's Wi-Fi briefly drops, the high-quality recording doesn't turn into a garbled/dropout-ridden recording. Riverside supports up to 10 participants and provides separate high-quality tracks. riverside.fm

Riverside

Zencastr is an excellent second choice. It similarly records each participant locally, progressively uploads the recording, and keeps local backups. Its paid plans support up to 12 people total, so six callers is comfortably within its limits. support.zencastr.com

Zencastr

One important distinction

No platform can make a live conversation continue normally if someone's internet completely disappears—their audio/video connection will still drop. What local-recording platforms do is protect the recorded file: the participant's microphone keeps recording locally, so when they reconnect you don't have a hole or degraded audio in their master track. Zencastr explicitly documents this behavior, and Riverside uses the same basic architecture. support.zencastr.com

For your use case: Riverside. If this is primarily audio and you want to minimize cost, I'd seriously consider Zencastr instead.

For a podcast with up to six callers, I’d shortlist Riverside and Zencastr, with Riverside as my default choice.

🥇 My pick: Riverside

Riverside records each participant locally on their own device, then uploads the files in the background. So if someone's Wi-Fi gets choppy, the recording itself doesn't inherit the choppy connection. It also supports up to 10 participants total, comfortably covering your host + five callers. riverside.fm

The important part for your use case is resilience: Riverside says it can withstand browser crashes because the recording is local, and each participant gets an individual high-quality track. riverside.fm

🥈 Zencastr is an excellent alternative

Zencastr has essentially the same architecture: each participant is recorded locally, with the files progressively uploaded to the cloud. It explicitly preserves the recording quality through internet drops/disconnections and provides separate tracks. support.zencastr.com

A particularly nice feature for your scenario: if someone goes offline during a recording, Zencastr now keeps a single track for that participant, inserting silence during the offline period rather than creating a mess of separate files. That makes editing after a connection drop much easier. support.zencastr.com

What I'd use

If this is a serious interview podcast: Riverside.
If it's primarily audio and you want a simpler podcast-oriented setup: Zencastr.

I would not use Zoom/Teams as the primary recording system if individual, high-quality tracks and graceful connection recovery are priorities. Their recording is fundamentally tied more closely to the internet call, whereas these dedicated podcast platforms record locally.

One operational rule matters whichever you choose: have every caller keep the recording page/app open until their upload is confirmed after the interview. Local recording protects the audio during a connection problem, but the file still needs to finish uploading afterward. support.zencastr.com

If you tell me audio-only vs. video podcast, your budget, and whether callers are likely to be nontechnical, I can narrow this to the best specific plan.

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d shortlist these three:

🥇 My pick: Riverside

Riverside is probably the easiest fit for your use case. Each participant is recorded locally on their own device, rather than simply recording the internet call, and the files are uploaded progressively while you record. That means a guest's connection can briefly drop without ruining the underlying high-quality recording. Riverside says it can record up to 10 guests plus the host on separate tracks. riverside.fm

That's particularly important with six callers: you don't want one person's flaky Wi-Fi to contaminate everybody's recording.

🥈 SquadCast

SquadCast is arguably the strongest alternative if recording reliability is your #1 concern. Its Progressive Uploads system continuously saves recordings to the cloud, while each participant is recorded locally on a separate track. It also supports up to 10 people total (host + 9 guests). squadcast.fm

One particularly nice recovery feature: if someone gets disconnected, SquadCast says they can rejoin the same session and continue recording. squadcast.fm

🥉 Zencastr

Zencastr is also a very good choice, especially if this is primarily an audio podcast. It records each participant locally and progressively uploads the files, so an internet dropout doesn't inherently degrade the recorded track. Paid plans support up to 11 guests (12 people total). support.zencastr.com

What I'd choose

Riverside if you want the best all-around experience, particularly if you're doing video as well as audio.

SquadCast if your overriding requirement is “I absolutely cannot lose a recording if somebody's connection dies.”

Zencastr if it's primarily an audio podcast and you want a straightforward remote-recording workflow.

I would not use Zoom as the primary recorder for this setup. Its normal cloud/meeting recording approach isn't equivalent to having a pristine locally recorded track for every caller; the dedicated podcast platforms are specifically designed around that problem. Riverside itself notes that its separate local tracks avoid the compromises of recording the whole conversation as a single stream. riverside.fm

For six callers, I'd personally go Riverside + everyone on headphones + wired Ethernet where practical. That gives you the best combination of individual tracks, recovery from connection problems, and manageable production afterward.

For an interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d prioritize a remote recording platform that does local (“double-end”) recording, not a normal video-call app. The key features you want are:

• Separate track per participant (one WAV/audio file per caller)
• Local capture on each person’s device so a bad connection doesn’t ruin the recording
• Progressive upload / recovery so files survive browser crashes or dropped connections
• Easy guest joining (ideally just a browser link)
• Good export workflow for your editor/DAW

My shortlist:

My recommendation for your case

For a recurring interview podcast with up to six callers, I’d choose:

1. Riverside — best overall if you record video too or want a polished production workflow. violetrecording.compodcastpontifications.com
2. bodalgoCall — worth considering if the six-caller limit is a hard requirement and you mainly care about clean remote audio. www.bodalgo.compodcast.adobe.com
3. Zencastr or SquadCast/Descript — good middle ground for audio-first shows. violetrecording.compodcastpontifications.com

I would not use Zoom as the primary recorder for a serious podcast. It is excellent for the conversation itself, but podcast platforms generally outperform it because they preserve isolated local tracks instead of relying on a compressed call recording. violetrecording.compodcastpontifications.com

A practical setup:

• Host + producer in Riverside/bodalgo
• Require every caller to use headphones
• Require a USB mic when possible
• Have a backup local recorder (even a phone voice memo from the host) for emergencies
• Do a 2-minute test recording before every episode

For six callers specifically, I’d also verify the platform’s maximum simultaneous participant count and plan limits before committing, because some services distinguish between guests, hosts, and active recording tracks. www.bodalgo.compodcast.adobe.com