ChatGPT answers, unedited

For a freelance producer working with clients worldwide, I’d look closely at Audiomovers LISTENTO.

audiomovers.com

My recommendation: LISTENTO

It’s particularly suited to professional music-production workflows because it can transmit lossless PCM audio at up to 32-bit/384 kHz, including 96 kHz and 192 kHz, rather than relying on the compressed audio typical of video-call platforms. Audiomovers Audiomovers

For a producer, the useful features are:

• High-resolution PCM: 24/32-bit and up to 384 kHz; 96 kHz is explicitly supported. Audiomovers
• DAW integration: plugins are available for major DAW formats, so you can stream directly from your production environment. Audiomovers
• Multichannel: supports up to 16 channels, including surround/Dolby Atmos workflows. Audiomovers
• Worldwide collaboration: clients can listen through a browser, desktop/mobile app, or receiver plugin without needing the same DAW setup. Audiomovers
• Adjustable latency: useful when balancing responsiveness against audio quality/network stability. Audiomovers
• Professional pedigree: Abbey Road says its remote sessions use Audiomovers for high-resolution remote audio collaboration. Abbey Road

One important distinction: LISTENTO is primarily a high-quality remote audio transport/collaboration tool, not necessarily the whole recording platform. If your workflow is "I need to hear my client in real time while I record them into my DAW," it's a particularly interesting choice.

What about Riverside?

Riverside is excellent if you need an easy client-facing recording studio with video, but its current recording settings top out at 48 kHz, so it doesn't meet your high-sample-rate requirement if 96 kHz is important. Riverside Help Center Riverside Help Center

For your use case, I'd therefore think of it this way:

SessionLinkPRO is also worth investigating; it specifically markets bidirectional studio-quality audio with low latency through a browser and is positioned as a professional alternative to ISDN. SessionLinkPRO

If your priority is recording singers/instrumentalists remotely at 96 kHz into your DAW, I'd start with LISTENTO. The key thing I'd want to establish next is whether you need actual local multitrack recording of the remote performer or primarily real-time monitoring/communication while the performer records locally—those lead to somewhat different ideal setups.

For a freelance producer working with clients worldwide, I’d look first at Riverside—but there’s an important caveat about your high-sample-rate requirement.

My recommendation: Riverside

riverside.fm

• Local recording: Each participant’s audio is recorded on their own device and uploaded, so a client's unstable internet connection doesn't directly degrade the master recording. Riverside Help Center Riverside
• Separate tracks: You get individual WAV tracks for each participant, which is much more useful for professional post-production than a mixed remote-call recording. Riverside Help Center
• Easy for international clients: Browser-based workflow means you can send a link rather than asking every client to install complicated recording software.
• Video + audio: It supports up to 4K video as well as separate audio, making it useful if you're producing both podcasts and video content. Riverside Help Center
• However: Riverside's current high-quality audio recording is 44.1 or 48 kHz, not 96 kHz. Riverside Help Center

If 96 kHz is a hard requirement

I'd look beyond the mainstream podcast platforms. Cleanfeed is particularly worth testing for professional audio work:

cleanfeed.net

Cleanfeed is designed around high-quality audio rather than video, and it uses the sample rate supplied by the connected audio interface rather than forcing a platform-wide sample-rate setting. RØDE Help

That makes it potentially more appropriate for a producer/studio workflow where audio fidelity matters more than video. I'd verify its current maximum sample-rate support with your exact interface and browser before committing to a 96 kHz client workflow.

For your particular use case

Bottom line: If your clients need video or you want the smoothest all-around production workflow, I'd use Riverside at 48 kHz. If 96 kHz capture is non-negotiable, I'd investigate Cleanfeed or a true high-resolution double-ender workflow rather than choosing Riverside simply because it's popular.

If you tell me whether you're recording music, voiceover, podcasts, or remote studio sessions, I can narrow this down to the tools that genuinely make sense at 96 kHz/24-bit and compare their workflows.

If high sample rate is a hard requirement, I’d narrow the field quite a bit.

My recommendation: Cleanfeed

For a freelance producer recording clients internationally, Cleanfeed is probably the best fit if you care primarily about professional audio rather than video. It’s designed around broadcast-quality remote audio, supports separate tracks, low-latency monitoring, and professional workflows. Riverside The Podosphere

The important caveat: Cleanfeed tops out at 48 kHz, so it does not satisfy a requirement for 88.2/96/192 kHz recording. The Podosphere

If you specifically need 96 or 192 kHz

That's where browser-based remote recording platforms become problematic. For comparison, Riverside records local, uncompressed WAV tracks, but its current documentation specifies 44.1 or 48 kHz, not 96/192 kHz. Riverside Help Center

So if you're recording music, vocals, overdubs, or other material where 96/192 kHz genuinely matters, I'd use a remote-session workflow rather than a podcast-style browser recorder:

• Have the client record locally in their DAW at 96 kHz/24-bit (or 192 kHz when justified).
• Use a low-latency communication/monitoring system for the live session.
• Have them send/upload the original WAV files afterward.
• You, as producer, can direct the session remotely while retaining the actual high-resolution source.

For interviews, podcasts, voiceover, or spoken-word production, I'd choose Cleanfeed at 48 kHz and not worry about the higher sample rate—the recording workflow and uncompressed local capture matter much more.

Bottom line:
Audio-only + remote clients → Cleanfeed.
Video + audio → Riverside.
96/192 kHz music production → remote DAW/local-recording workflow, not a conventional browser recorder.

If you tell me whether you're recording vocals/instruments, voiceover, podcasts, or full music sessions, I can recommend the best 96 kHz+ remote setup, including the monitoring/latency side.

If high sample rate is a hard requirement, I’d be careful with the usual remote-recording recommendations.

My pick: Cleanfeed

For a freelance producer doing professional audio sessions with clients worldwide, Cleanfeed is the one I’d investigate first. It’s designed specifically around high-quality remote audio rather than being a video-conferencing product with recording bolted on. It supports multitrack recording, local audio capture, and professional monitoring/routing workflows. riverside.com

However: if by “high sample rates” you specifically mean 88.2/96 kHz, verify the exact workflow before committing. Cleanfeed takes the sample rate from the connected audio interface rather than offering a simple sample-rate selector. help.rode.com

An important caveat about Riverside/SquadCast

I would not choose Riverside if 96 kHz is essential. Riverside's current documentation says its recorded audio is 44.1 or 48 kHz, with 48 kHz being its standard. support.riverside.com

Likewise, SquadCast's published local WAV specification is 48 kHz/16-bit. squadcast.fm

So I'd rank them for your use case roughly:

One distinction matters: if you're recording music—vocals, instruments, overdubs, mixing-quality stems—rather than interviews/podcasts, I'd approach this differently. In that case, I'd prioritize a service that can genuinely deliver 24-bit/96 kHz isolated tracks and robustly handles clients' DAW/audio-interface setups.

If you tell me whether you're recording music sessions, voiceover, podcasts/interviews, or all three, I can recommend the best 2–3 platforms specifically for a freelance producer workflow. 

For a freelance producer working with clients worldwide, my top recommendation is Source Elements Source-Connect.

Why Source-Connect

• High sample-rate support: Source-Connect Pro supports 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96, 176.4, and 192 kHz audio I/O. Source Elements Support Center Source Elements
• Built for professional sessions: It's designed specifically for remote voice, music, and sound production rather than primarily being a video-conferencing platform. Source Elements
• DAW integration: Source-Connect I/O can connect directly with Pro Tools, Logic, Nuendo, and other DAWs, supporting up to 24 channels. Source Elements Support Center
• Worldwide workflow: Source-Connect 4 is designed for connecting studios and talent across different locations, with bidirectional audio and support for multiple participants. Source Elements
• Professional-client compatibility: In commercial voice/production work, Source-Connect remains a commonly requested standard, particularly in the U.S. Sovas

One important nuance: supporting 96/192 kHz locally doesn't mean the internet stream itself is transmitted at that sample rate. Source-Connect's documentation notes that higher-rate sessions can be downsampled for transmission; the high-resolution recording can remain on the local side. Source Elements Support Center

How I'd choose

Riverside is excellent for frictionless client sessions because it records each participant locally and uploads separate high-quality tracks, but its high-quality audio/video tracks are currently 44.1 or 48 kHz. Riverside Help Center Cleanfeed is another strong choice when you want clients to simply open a browser, but if 96/192 kHz capability is a hard requirement, Source-Connect is the clear choice. toneofchoice.com

source-elements.com

Bottom line: If your clients are paying for professional remote recording and you want a tool you can confidently put into a serious studio workflow, I'd invest in Source-Connect Pro/Source-Connect 4 rather than a podcast-oriented platform.

If high sample rate is a hard requirement, I’d look beyond the usual podcast platforms.

My top pick: SessionLinkPRO

SessionLinkPRO is the one I’d investigate first for a freelance producer doing professional music/voice/ADR work internationally. It’s designed specifically for professional remote recording, with low-latency, studio-quality bidirectional audio and browser-based client access. SessionLinkPRO SessionLinkPRO

The important caveat: don’t choose it simply because your interface can run at 96/192 kHz. SessionLinkPRO’s own support documentation recommends 48 kHz for transmission and warns that higher interface sample rates can cause transmission problems. SessionLinkPRO

If you specifically need 96/192 kHz

The workflow I’d recommend is:

• Remote connection: SessionLinkPRO or another low-latency professional link.
• Local recording: Have both you and the client record locally in the DAW at your desired sample rate—96 or 192 kHz.
• Remote audio: Use the connection for monitoring, communication, direction and synchronization rather than relying on the transmitted audio as your master.
• Final files: Collect the client’s original local WAV rather than an internet-transmitted recording.

That gives you the benefits of high-resolution recording without making the internet connection itself the limiting factor.

Other options

Cleanfeed Pro is excellent if you're primarily doing voice, broadcast, narration or interviews. It's browser-based, designed for professional audio, supports remote guests worldwide, and is used by organizations including BBC, Warner Bros., Discovery and NPR. Cleanfeed Cleanfeed However, I'd choose it more for its excellent remote-audio workflow than for a 96/192-kHz production workflow.

Riverside is better if you're doing video + podcast/client content production. It locally records participants and provides separate tracks, which makes it much more resilient to internet problems. Its documented studio sample-rate options are 44.1 and 48 kHz, though, so I wouldn't make it your choice if 96/192 kHz delivery is central to your business. Riverside Help Center Riverside

What I'd use in your position

For a freelance producer recording clients worldwide, I'd prioritize local uncompressed multitrack recording + reliable low-latency monitoring over a platform advertising an impressive sample-rate number. The internet link should not be your master recording.

If you tell me whether you're recording music, vocals, voiceover/ADR, or interviews, I can narrow this down to the best 2–3 platforms and compare latency, sample rates, WAV format, remote monitoring, DAW integration, and pricing.

If high sample rate is a hard requirement, I’d narrow the field considerably. A lot of popular remote-recording platforms top out at 48 kHz.

My pick: Cleanfeed Pro

Cleanfeed is probably the best fit for a freelance producer doing professional music/voice sessions worldwide.

• Very low latency and designed specifically for professional audio rather than video conferencing. Cleanfeed Cleanfeed
• Multitrack recording keeps participants on separate, synchronized tracks. Cleanfeed
• Supports high-quality, high-bitrate audio and can automatically use the sample rate supplied by the connected audio interface. Cleanfeed RØDE Help
• Browser-based for clients, so you can send someone a link rather than asking them to install complicated software. Cleanfeed
• It is explicitly positioned for commercial production and remote studios, including workflows connecting producers and talent internationally. Cleanfeed

One caveat: Cleanfeed's published documentation emphasizes high bitrates and interface-dependent sample rate rather than advertising a specific 192 kHz recording mode. So if by "high sample rates" you specifically mean 96/192 kHz, I'd verify your exact interface/browser workflow with Cleanfeed before standardizing on it.

Another strong option: Sessionwire

Sessionwire is particularly attractive if you're producing music sessions rather than primarily podcasts/voiceover. It has DAW integration, talkback/automute, file transfer, and client-friendly browser access. Sessionwire Sessionwire

However, its current published streaming spec is 48 kHz stereo, so I wouldn't choose it specifically for 96/192 kHz remote capture. Sessionwire

What I wouldn't choose for this requirement

Riverside is excellent for remote video/podcast production, but its current high-quality audio tracks are 44.1 or 48 kHz, not 96/192 kHz. Riverside Help Center Riverside Help Center

Bottom line: for your use case, I'd start with Cleanfeed Pro. If you're recording actual music sessions and need DAW-to-client monitoring and talkback, Sessionwire is worth testing too. If you tell me whether you're recording vocals, instruments, full bands, ADR/VO, or mixing/mastering clients, I can recommend the best setup—including 96/192 kHz capability, latency, monitoring, DAW routing, and client experience.

For a freelance producer recording clients worldwide, I’d prioritize remote recording tools that capture locally at the client’s end (rather than streaming compressed audio) and then upload full-resolution files. For professional music work, look for 24-bit/96 kHz minimum, reliable sync, easy client setup, and good session management.

Here are the strongest options:

1. SonoBus — best for high-quality live remote sessions

• Supports high-quality PCM audio streaming and can be used for real-time collaboration.
• Works well for producers who want to monitor and direct a performer remotely.
• Best paired with each person using a proper audio interface and wired connection.
• More technical than browser-based tools, but very flexible.

Best for: vocal sessions, instrumental overdubs, producer/artist collaboration.

2. Audiomovers — best for professional studios

• Widely used in professional production workflows.
• The company’s LISTENTO service is designed for high-quality remote monitoring and mix review.
• Supports high-resolution audio streaming suitable for studio workflows.

Best for: mixing feedback, attended sessions, label/client approvals.

3. Sessionwire — best all-in-one producer workflow

• Built specifically around remote studio sessions.
• Combines audio, video, chat, talkback, and file exchange.
• Designed for producers who need a “virtual studio” experience rather than just an audio link.

Best for: freelance producers running paid sessions with clients who may not be technically experienced.

4. Soundtrap — easiest for non-technical clients

• Very accessible because it runs in a browser.
• Good for songwriting, demos, and simpler productions.
• Less appropriate if your clients expect a traditional high-end studio workflow.

Best for: remote songwriting, beginner artists, quick ideas.

5. Pro Tools + remote workflow — best for traditional studio clients

If your clients are already in professional environments, many will prefer:

• local recording into their DAW,
• sending consolidated WAV files,
• or joining through a dedicated remote link.

For serious production, this often gives the cleanest results.

My recommendation for a freelance producer

A strong professional setup would be:

1. Sessionwire for full client-facing sessions
2. Audiomovers LISTENTO for high-quality monitoring and approvals
3. SonoBus as a flexible backup for technically comfortable clients

For actual recording delivery, I would still have clients record locally at 24-bit/96 kHz WAV whenever possible and upload the files afterward. Real-time streaming quality is improving, but local capture avoids internet latency, packet loss, and monitoring compromises. High sample-rate support matters most at the recording endpoint, not just the stream. soundbridge.io

If you mainly record vocals, voiceover, instruments, or full bands, the best choice changes a bit.

If high sample rate is a hard requirement, I’d look beyond the usual Riverside/Zoom-style remote recorders. Most mainstream platforms top out at 48 kHz—for example, Riverside explicitly records at 48 kHz, and SquadCast’s local WAV recording is also 48 kHz/16-bit. Riverside SquadCast

My recommendation: Sessionwire

Sessionwire is particularly well suited to a freelance producer working with clients internationally. It is designed around the concept of a remote studio session rather than simply recording a video call: clients join through a browser, you can route your DAW audio to them, communicate with them, and transfer files during the session. Sessionwire

The important caveat: Sessionwire's publicly documented client-monitoring stream is 48 kHz, so I wouldn't choose it solely because you need the client's remote recording captured above 48 kHz. Sessionwire

If you specifically need 96/192 kHz remote recording

That's a different category. I'd look for a service that can capture the client's microphone/interface locally at 96 or 192 kHz and upload the resulting WAV, rather than relying on a compressed real-time audio stream.

For your workflow, I'd prioritize:

• 96 kHz WAV minimum if you're doing music production, vocal production, sound design, or material that will undergo substantial processing.
• 24-bit capture.
• Local recording at each participant's device, so internet quality doesn't determine the recorded audio.
• Separate WAV tracks, rather than a mixed remote stream.
• Progressive/background upload and recovery if the client's connection drops.
• Browser-based joining with minimal setup—important when you're dealing with clients worldwide.

For comparison, Riverside is excellent for remote interviews/content production because it records locally and gives you separate uncompressed WAV tracks, but its standard audio capture is 48 kHz, so it wouldn't meet a genuine 96/192 kHz requirement. Riverside Riverside

Bottom line: if your clients are recording music/vocals through their own audio interfaces, tell me whether you need 96 kHz or 192 kHz, and whether you want to monitor your DAW in real time while directing the session. I can narrow this down to the 2–3 tools that actually fit a professional producer workflow rather than podcast-oriented recorders.

That's a different category. I'd look for a service that can capture the client's microphone/interface locally at 96 or 192 kHz and upload the resulting WAV, rather than relying on a compressed real-time audio stream.

For your workflow, I'd prioritize:

If you’re recording music/vocals remotely for paying clients, I’d look beyond typical podcast platforms. The key distinction is whether you need high-resolution files recorded locally or merely high-quality audio streamed over the internet.

My top pick: Kormix

kormix.io is particularly interesting for a freelance producer because it supports lossless PCM at 48, 96 kHz and 16/24/32-bit, with VST3/AU integration into DAWs. It also supports bidirectional audio, so you can work inside your normal production environment rather than treating the session like a video call. Kormix

That makes it a much better fit than Riverside or SquadCast if 96 kHz recording actually matters to your workflow.

Other options

• Sessionwire — very good for music-production collaboration, with DAW plugins and studio-oriented workflows. Its current browser streaming is 48 kHz stereo, so I wouldn't choose it specifically for 96/192 kHz remote capture. Sessionwire
• Riverside — excellent if you're doing interviews, vocal sessions, content, or client-facing video. It records locally rather than relying on the internet audio path, but its selectable recording rates are currently 44.1 or 48 kHz, not 96/192 kHz. Riverside Help Center Riverside Help Center
• SquadCast — similarly polished for remote production and local WAV recording, but its documented audio recording is 48 kHz, so it isn't my recommendation if you're specifically after high sample rates. SquadCast

What I'd use in your situation

If you're producing vocals/instruments and need 96 kHz, I'd start with Kormix. If you're mainly doing remote mix reviews, songwriting, or producer/client collaboration, I'd also look seriously at Sessionwire.

One important caveat: 96/192 kHz over the internet isn't the same thing as recording the client's microphone at 96/192 kHz locally. For critical vocal/instrument tracking, I'd prioritize a platform that gets the performer's signal into your DAW or delivers a genuine local high-resolution recording, rather than judging it by the advertised streaming sample rate.

If you tell me your DAW (Pro Tools, Logic, Ableton, etc.) and whether you're recording vocals, instruments, or full-band sessions, I can narrow this down to the best 2–3 options for a professional producer workflow.

For a freelance producer recording clients worldwide, I’d prioritize local high-resolution recording at each participant’s location (so internet quality doesn’t degrade the audio), separate isolated tracks, WAV/BWF export, and support for at least 48/96 kHz. My top recommendations:

Best overall: SonoBus + a proper DAW

• Best for: Remote sessions with musicians, vocalists, voice actors, and producers who want real-time monitoring.
• Sample rates: Supports high-quality PCM audio (commonly used at 44.1/48/96 kHz depending on system configuration).
• Strengths: - Very low-latency audio streaming
• Peer-to-peer architecture (less cloud dependency)
• Works well with professional interfaces and DAWs
• Good for “real session” workflows where you are directing talent live
• Weakness: Requires more technical setup than browser-based platforms.

Best turnkey remote studio: Audiomovers LISTENTO

• Best for: Professional producers, mixing engineers, and label/studio workflows.
• Strengths: - Designed specifically for high-quality remote audio monitoring
• Integrates with DAWs through plugins
• Excellent for sending a mix feed while recording locally
• Widely used in professional production environments
• Workflow: You record locally in your DAW at 48/96 kHz while the client hears a high-quality stream.

Best for client-friendly recording: Riverside

• Best for: Voice, podcast, interviews, content creators, and corporate clients.
• Strengths: - Records each participant locally
• Easy browser-based experience for non-technical clients
• Separate tracks
• High-resolution audio options depending on plan
• Weakness: Less optimized for musicians needing ultra-low-latency live performance monitoring.

Best for music sessions: SessionLinkPRO

• Best for: Vocalists, instrumentalists, ADR, and studio-quality remote tracking.
• Strengths: - Built around professional remote recording
• Designed for low-latency collaboration
• Supports high-quality audio workflows
• Weakness: Usually a better fit for experienced clients/studios than casual users.

Best “record anywhere, upload later” workflow: Zencastr

• Best for: Spoken-word projects.
• Strengths: - Simple client experience
• Local track recording
• Good reliability for distributed guests
• Weakness: Not my first choice for critical music recording.

My recommendation for a freelance producer

A professional stack would usually look like:

1. Music production / vocals / instruments

• DAW: Pro Tools, Logic, Ableton, Cubase, etc.
• Remote link: Audiomovers LISTENTO or SonoBus
• Record at: 24-bit / 96 kHz when the project justifies it
• Voiceover / podcasts / interviews

• Riverside or similar local-recording platform
• Deliver: separate WAV stems
• High-end clients

• SessionLinkPRO + your DAW workflow

A few things I’d avoid for paid production work:

• Zoom/Teams/Meet as the recording source (they are communication tools, not studio recorders)
• Any platform that only records a compressed stream
• Any workflow where the “master” recording exists only on a server

If you tell me whether you mainly record singers/instrumentalists, voice actors, podcasts, or film/ADR, I can narrow this to a specific setup.

If high sample rate is a hard requirement, I’d look beyond the usual Riverside/Zoom-style remote recorders.

My pick: SoundBridge Global Studio Link

SoundBridge’s Global Studio Link is aimed much more at professional music production than podcast/video recording. It supports sample rates up to 192 kHz, integrates with the DAW, and is designed for low-latency remote tracking between studios. SoundBridge

soundbridge.io

For a freelance producer, that's attractive because you can keep your actual DAW/session workflow rather than treating the remote call as a separate recording.

One important distinction

If by "supports high sample rates" you mean the remote recording itself needs to be captured at 96/192 kHz, don't choose Riverside or Sessionwire as your primary recorder. Riverside's locally recorded audio tops out at 44.1/48 kHz, while Sessionwire's remote stream is 48 kHz stereo. Riverside Help Center Sessionwire

I'd therefore rank them:

• SoundBridge — best fit for professional music tracking at 96/192 kHz
• Sessionwire — excellent for DAW collaboration, producer/client communication, mix review, but 48 kHz streaming Sessionwire
• Riverside — excellent for remote voice/video production, but 48 kHz maximum audio Riverside

For your use case, I'd choose SoundBridge if you're actually recording musicians remotely at 96/192 kHz. If you tell me whether you're recording vocals, instruments, voiceover, or full-band sessions, I can narrow this down to the best 2–3 professional options and compare latency, sample rates, DAW compatibility, and client ease-of-use.

soundbridge.io

For a freelance producer, that's attractive because you can keep your actual DAW/session workflow rather than treating the remote call as a separate recording.

One important distinction

If by "supports high sample rates" you mean the remote recording itself needs to be captured at 96/192 kHz, don't choose Riverside or Sessionwire as your primary recorder. Riverside's locally recorded audio tops out at 44.1/48 kHz, while Sessionwire's remote stream is 48 kHz stereo.

I'd therefore rank them:

If high sample rates are a priority, I’d look beyond the usual podcast platforms.

My recommendation: Soundtrap

Soundtrap is worth considering for your freelance production work because it supports up to 96 kHz sample rates. That puts it ahead of Riverside if your clients expect 88.2/96 kHz workflows. Soundtrap Support

The catch: Soundtrap is more of an online DAW/collaborative music-production environment than a dedicated remote-recording studio. For professional client sessions, that can be a feature rather than a drawback if you want clients to collaborate on actual music projects.

If ease of remote sessions matters more: Riverside

riverside.com is excellent for recording clients worldwide: each participant is recorded locally, you receive separate tracks, and internet problems don't directly degrade the local recording. Riverside Riverside Help Center

However, Riverside tops out at 48 kHz, so I wouldn't choose it if 96 kHz delivery is a hard requirement. Riverside Help Center Riverside Help Center

For your use case

I'd rank them:

• 96 kHz music/production sessions → Soundtrap
• 48 kHz vocal/instrument recording with extremely easy client onboarding → Riverside
• 192 kHz requirement → neither; you'll want a specialized remote-studio/DAW workflow

If you tell me whether you're primarily recording vocals, instruments, voiceover, or full music sessions, I can recommend the best 2–3 professional options for that workflow (including ones supporting 96/192 kHz and lossless multitrack recording).

The catch: Soundtrap is more of an online DAW/collaborative music-production environment than a dedicated remote-recording studio. For professional client sessions, that can be a feature rather than a drawback if you want clients to collaborate on actual music projects.

If ease of remote sessions matters more: Riverside

riverside.com is excellent for recording clients worldwide: each participant is recorded locally, you receive separate tracks, and internet problems don't directly degrade the local recording. riverside.com support.riverside.com

However, Riverside tops out at 48 kHz, so I wouldn't choose it if 96 kHz delivery is a hard requirement.

For a freelance producer recording clients around the world, I’d shortlist Zencastr first.

My pick: Zencastr

zencastr.com supports up to 48 kHz WAV, separate tracks for each participant, and local recording on each participant’s device. That local-recording architecture is particularly important for international sessions: a client's unstable connection can affect the conversation/monitoring, but shouldn't degrade the locally captured master. Zencastr Zencastr Help Center

It also has a relatively frictionless guest workflow—clients can join through a link rather than installing specialized recording software. Zencastr

One important caveat: "high sample rate"

If by high sample rate you mean 96 kHz, I would not choose the mainstream browser-based remote-recording platforms I've checked. The current offerings I found top out at 48 kHz:

• Zencastr: up to 48 kHz WAV. Zencastr
• Riverside: 44.1 or 48 kHz; its high-quality tracks are locally recorded and delivered as WAV. Riverside Help Center Riverside Help Center
• SquadCast: 48 kHz/16-bit local WAV. SquadCast
• Cleanfeed: particularly interesting for audio-only/broadcast work and can use the sample rate supplied by the connected audio interface, but its workflow is different from a local-track recorder. RØDE Help

So for professional client recording, I'd prioritize 48 kHz, uncompressed WAV, isolated local tracks, and reliable uploads over chasing 96 kHz. If you're ultimately mixing in a 96 kHz production session, you can upsample the 48 kHz remote tracks, although you obviously don't recover information that wasn't captured originally.

Bottom line:
Zencastr = my first choice for a freelance producer wanting a professional, client-friendly remote workflow. Riverside is the other one I'd seriously test, particularly if you also need high-quality video. If 96 kHz is an absolute requirement, tell me whether you're recording music, vocals, voiceover, or instruments, because I'd recommend a different workflow rather than forcing a browser recorder to do something it isn't designed for.

If high sample rate is a hard requirement, I’d look beyond the usual remote-podcast platforms.

My recommendation: SessionLinkPRO

SessionLinkPRO is probably the best fit for a freelance producer doing professional sessions with clients worldwide.

• Uncompressed PCM L16 transmission is available, rather than relying solely on a lossy codec. SessionLink Pro
• It’s designed specifically as a professional remote-recording/ISDN replacement, with very low latency and bidirectional studio-quality audio. SessionLink Pro
• You can send clients a browser link, so they don't generally need to install software.
• It supports separate channels, MIDI/MTC, local/remote recording and DAW synchronization, which are useful for production work rather than just podcasting. SessionLink Pro
• For dubbing/ADR, it can record the talent's local signal as 48 kHz/24-bit PCM with timecode, which is particularly relevant to professional post-production. SessionLink Pro

One important caveat: SessionLinkPRO's actual network transmission is generally operated around 48 kHz, and its own support documentation warns that higher interface sample rates can cause transmission problems. SessionLink Pro So if by "high sample rates" you specifically mean 96 or 192 kHz end-to-end remote recording, this isn't the solution.

If 48 kHz/24-bit is sufficient

Cleanfeed would be my other top pick. It's exceptionally well suited to freelance production: clients join through a browser, it has multitrack recording, very low latency, routing/mixer features, and is explicitly aimed at professional broadcast, voice, film/TV and commercial production. Cleanfeed Cleanfeed

cleanfeed.net

What I wouldn't choose for this requirement

Riverside is excellent for easy client-facing video/audio sessions, but its professional recording workflow tops out at 48 kHz WAV, so it doesn't meet a genuine 96/192 kHz requirement. Riverside Riverside

Bottom line: if you're recording voiceover, ADR, music, commercials, interviews, or other serious production, I'd choose SessionLinkPRO for the more production-oriented workflow, or Cleanfeed Pro for the easiest client experience. If you specifically need 96 kHz or 192 kHz remote capture, tell me what you're recording (voice, vocals, instruments, ADR, etc.) and I can find the best platform that actually supports that sample rate.

If you’re recording professional clients worldwide, I’d prioritize local, uncompressed recording at each participant’s end rather than trying to transmit studio-quality audio in real time. That protects the actual recording from internet fluctuations.

My pick: Riverside

riverside.fm is probably the best fit if you need audio + video and a client-friendly workflow. It records each participant locally and uploads the high-quality tracks separately, so a client's unstable connection doesn't directly degrade the master recording. Riverside Help Center

But there's an important catch for your requirement: Riverside currently supports 44.1 or 48 kHz, not 96/192 kHz. Riverside Help Center So if by "high sample rates" you specifically mean 96 or 192 kHz, I wouldn't choose Riverside.

If 96/192 kHz is essential

I'd look at a DAW-based remote workflow rather than a browser recorder. You want each musician/client recording directly into their DAW/interface at your desired sample rate, with the remote platform handling communication and synchronization.

For example, an interface such as the

supports 32-bit/192 kHz, while the

supports 32-bit/192 kHz. The interface/DAW determines the actual recording resolution; the remote-call platform doesn't need to carry that full-resolution signal over the internet.

One alternative worth considering: Cleanfeed

cleanfeed.net is excellent for professional audio-only remote sessions, particularly broadcast/interview work. It's designed around low-latency audio and multitrack workflows. However, its normal recording ceiling is 48 kHz, so again it isn't a solution if you're specifically demanding 96/192 kHz masters. The Podosphere CreatorStackClub

For a freelance producer, I'd choose:

• Riverside → easiest professional client experience, video + separate local tracks, up to 48 kHz.
• Cleanfeed Pro → excellent audio-only remote production, up to 48 kHz.
• DAW + remote-link workflow → best choice if 96/192 kHz is non-negotiable.

If you tell me whether you're recording vocals/instruments, voiceover, podcasts, or mixing sessions, I can recommend a specific 96/192 kHz remote setup (including the lowest-latency option and what your clients need on their end).

cleanfeed.net is excellent for professional audio-only remote sessions, particularly broadcast/interview work. It's designed around low-latency audio and multitrack workflows. However, its normal recording ceiling is 48 kHz, so again it isn't a solution if you're specifically demanding 96/192 kHz masters.

For a freelance producer, I'd choose:

If high sample rate is a hard requirement, I’d look beyond the usual remote-recording platforms.

My recommendation: Cleanfeed

cleanfeed.net is probably the best fit for a freelance producer who cares primarily about professional remote audio. It’s designed around high-quality, low-latency audio rather than video/podcast production, supports multitrack recording, and can use the sample rate supplied by the guest’s audio interface. Riverside RØDE Help

The important caveat: Cleanfeed doesn't have a fixed “96 kHz” recording switch. Its sample rate follows the connected interface, so you need to verify the exact behavior of your interface/browser setup before promising clients 96 kHz delivery. RØDE Help

What about Riverside?

riverside.fm is excellent for remote production—especially if you need video, separate isolated tracks, producer controls, and an easy client experience. It records locally on each participant's device, so a bad internet connection doesn't directly degrade the recorded master. Riverside Help Center Riverside

However, Riverside currently tops out at 48 kHz audio, not 96 kHz. Its settings allow 44.1 or 48 kHz. Riverside Help Center Riverside Help Center

So I'd choose:

• 96 kHz / audio-first production: Cleanfeed, after testing your particular interface/workflow.
• 48 kHz / professional audio + video production: Riverside.
• Music recording where 96 kHz is mandatory: I'd use a dedicated remote music-recording workflow rather than a podcast platform.

If you're recording vocals, instruments, ADR, or other music clients rather than interviews/podcasts, tell me what DAW/interface you use and whether you need 96 kHz/24-bit, and I can narrow this down to the best professional workflow.

The important caveat: Cleanfeed doesn't have a fixed “96 kHz” recording switch. Its sample rate follows the connected interface, so you need to verify the exact behavior of your interface/browser setup before promising clients 96 kHz delivery. help.rode.com

What about Riverside?

If you’re recording professional clients worldwide, I’d recommend cleanfeed.net if audio quality is the priority, but there’s an important caveat: if by “high sample rates” you mean 96 kHz, the mainstream browser-based remote-recording platforms I checked generally top out at 48 kHz.

My picks

• 🥇 Cleanfeed — best for audio-first production. It’s designed specifically for high-quality remote audio, with local/uncompressed recording and multitrack support. It’s particularly well suited to voice, music, radio, ADR, interviews, and other producer-led sessions. Riverside
• 🥈 riverside.fm — best all-around production platform. It records each participant locally and gives you separate WAV tracks, so a client's unstable internet connection doesn't become the quality of your master recording. Its current recording options are 44.1 or 48 kHz, not 96 kHz. Riverside Help Center Riverside Help Center
• 🥉 squadcast.fm — another solid client-friendly option. Its local WAV recordings are currently 48 kHz/16-bit. SquadCast

The key point for a freelance producer

If your clients are sending you music, vocals, instruments, or other material intended for a DAW, I'd distinguish between remote capture and remote monitoring.

For example, if your requirement is:

“I need my client to record a pristine 96 kHz/24-bit track on their end, while I direct the session remotely.”

I wouldn't choose Riverside/SquadCast/Zoom simply because they advertise “studio quality.” Their native remote recording isn't equivalent to a 96 kHz DAW recording. Riverside's raw WAV tracks, for example, are 16-bit and 44.1/48 kHz. Riverside Help Center

Instead, I'd use a DAW-based remote workflow where the client records locally at your specified interface settings and you use a separate low-latency connection for communication/monitoring. That's considerably closer to a real remote studio session.

If you tell me whether you're recording primarily vocals/instruments, voiceover/podcasts, or full music sessions, I can recommend the best 96 kHz-capable workflow and software stack for your clients.

If high sample rate is a hard requirement, I’d be careful with the usual remote-recording recommendations. A lot of “studio quality” platforms top out at 48 kHz, which is excellent for voice/video but not what you want if your clients are delivering music, sound design, or other production work at 88.2/96 kHz.

My recommendation: SureTake

For a freelance producer working with clients worldwide, I’d look closely at suretakes.com. It’s positioned more as a professional remote recording studio than a podcast/social-video platform, with separate local recordings and a workflow aimed at producers and studios. A recent 2026 comparison specifically lists it as a strong choice for studios wanting a focused, reliable recorder rather than an AI-heavy all-in-one platform. SureTake

The important distinction for you is local recording: the client's audio is captured on their own computer/interface rather than relying on the compressed audio traveling through the internet. That means the internet connection doesn't determine the quality of the recorded file. SureTake Vox Boy

What I'd avoid for your specific requirement

• Riverside — excellent for remote video/podcast production, but its native recording is 48 kHz WAV, so it isn't my choice if you specifically need 96 kHz. Riverside
• SquadCast/Descript — very good professional remote recording, with separate local WAV tracks, but its published specs list 48 kHz/16-bit local audio. SquadCast
• Cleanfeed — excellent broadcast-oriented audio and multitrack workflow, but its published spec is 48 kHz/16-bit. Riverside

One caveat: if by “high sample rates” you specifically mean 96 kHz, I'd verify SureTake's current technical specification before committing, because that's a more specialized requirement than simply getting lossless remote audio.

If you tell me whether you're recording vocals/instruments, voiceover, or remote mixing/production sessions, I can narrow this down to the 2–3 best tools for a professional producer, including 96 kHz support, bit depth, DAW workflow, guest ease-of-use, and pricing.

If high sample rate is a priority, I’d look beyond the usual podcast platforms. The key distinction is between high-quality local recording and high sample-rate recording: many services capture locally at 48 kHz, but relatively few are designed around professional music/voice production workflows.

My picks

• sessionlinkpro.com — best fit for professional production

• Designed specifically for professional remote recording rather than just video calls.
• Supports uncompressed PCM L16 transmission, with very low latency, and can record local/remote signals in the browser. SessionLinkPRO SessionLinkPRO
• Its Dubbing product is particularly production-oriented: remote performers can be recorded locally at 48 kHz/24-bit PCM with timecode, with separate channels and MIDI/timecode support. SessionLinkPRO
• Caveat: if by “high sample rates” you specifically mean 88.2/96/192 kHz, SessionLinkPRO isn't the obvious solution; its documented remote workflow centers on 48 kHz.
• riverside.fm — best for ease of use with worldwide clients

• Guests simply click a browser link.
• Each participant is recorded locally, so an unstable internet connection doesn't directly degrade the recorded track. Riverside Help Center Riverside
• Supports uncompressed WAV at 48 kHz on its higher-quality workflows. Riverside Help Center Riverside Help Center
• Very good if you're doing interviews, vocals, voiceover, podcasts, or content production.
• But 48 kHz is the ceiling, so I wouldn't choose it if 96 kHz delivery is a hard requirement.
• cleanfeed.net — excellent audio-first alternative

• Particularly attractive if you don't need video.
• Built around high-quality remote audio and multitrack workflows; current documentation describes 48 kHz capture. Riverside
• I'd consider it for voice, broadcast, interviews and music collaboration, but again, it's not a 96/192 kHz remote-recording solution.

What I'd use as a freelance producer

If you're recording professional musicians/vocalists/VO artists, I'd rank them:

SessionLinkPRO > Cleanfeed > Riverside

If you're primarily recording podcasts, interviews, content creators and corporate clients:

Riverside > Cleanfeed > SessionLinkPRO

One important point: if you specifically mean “I want my remote client to record at 96 kHz or 192 kHz and send me the untouched WAV afterward,” that's a different requirement from simply wanting high-quality remote audio. In that case, I'd recommend a local-DAW + remote-session workflow rather than relying on a browser recorder.

If you tell me whether you're recording music/vocals, voiceover, podcasts, or live instruments, I can recommend the best setup—including 96/192 kHz options, latency, DAW integration, and what your clients need to install (if anything).

For a freelance producer working with clients worldwide, I’d prioritize local, isolated recording on each participant’s machine over a conventional video-call recorder. That way, a client’s unstable internet connection doesn’t degrade the master audio.

My top pick: Riverside

riverside.fm is probably the best fit if you want a polished, client-friendly remote studio.

• Records each participant locally rather than relying on the call stream.
• Separate tracks make post-production much easier.
• Supports high-quality audio and video, with video up to 4K on supported plans.
• Guests can join from a browser, which is excellent when you're dealing with clients who aren't technically inclined.
• It also gives you editing/production tools if you want an all-in-one workflow. Riverside Descript

Important caveat for your specific requirement: Riverside's current professional workflow is centered around up to 48 kHz audio, so if by "high sample rates" you specifically mean 88.2/96 kHz, I wouldn't choose it as your primary recorder. RØDE Help

If 96 kHz is a hard requirement

I'd look at Sessionwire instead. It's designed more around music/studio collaboration and DAW integration than podcasting, which makes it much more relevant if you're recording vocals, instruments, voiceover, or other material where you actually want to preserve a 96 kHz production workflow. A current 2026 comparison specifically identifies Sessionwire as the option for "music and studio collaboration" with DAW integration and high-quality audio. Guideflow

Another option worth investigating is Cleanfeed if your sessions are audio-only. It's extremely well suited to broadcast-style remote recording, but its published workflow is generally 48 kHz, so again it isn't my first choice if 96 kHz is non-negotiable. RØDE Help SureTake

What I'd use in your position

One other distinction: sample rate isn't the same thing as recording quality. For remote sessions, I'd take a reliable local 48 kHz WAV over a nominal 96 kHz recording that is actually derived from a compressed network stream. Local isolated WAV capture, 24-bit/32-bit float where appropriate, and good microphones/interfaces matter more.

If you tell me what you're actually recording (music, VO, podcasts, interviews, ADR, etc.) and whether you need 96 kHz specifically, I can narrow this down to the 2–3 best professional platforms and compare their current pricing, sample rates, track formats, latency, and client experience.

If high sample rates are a hard requirement, I’d look beyond the usual Riverside/SquadCast recommendations. Most mainstream remote-recording platforms top out at 48 kHz: Riverside currently records uncompressed WAV at 44.1 or 48 kHz, while SquadCast’s local WAV recordings are 48 kHz/16-bit. Riverside Help Center SquadCast

My recommendation: Cleanfeed

cleanfeed.net is probably the best fit if you’re a professional audio producer working with clients worldwide and audio quality matters more than video.

• Designed specifically for professional remote audio and broadcasting.
• Very low-latency, browser-based sessions.
• Multitrack recording on the Pro tier.
• Excellent for voice, interviews, voiceover and music-related sessions.
• It automatically uses the sample rate supplied by the client's audio interface rather than forcing a fixed rate. RØDE Help
• The big caveat: it's fundamentally a live/streaming audio platform, so it isn't the same kind of isolated local "double-ender" recording architecture as Riverside.

If you mean 96/192 kHz specifically

That's where things get tricky. I wouldn't choose Riverside or SquadCast if your deliverable genuinely requires 96 or 192 kHz. Their published recording specs don't support those rates. Riverside Help Center SquadCast

For high-end client work, I'd instead use a local double-ender workflow: have each participant record locally at your required sample rate in a DAW, while using Cleanfeed/Zoom/etc. purely for communication and synchronization. That gives you much more control over sample rate, bit depth, gain staging and file format.

For example, a client could record locally through an interface capable of 24-bit/192 kHz such as the

, while you monitor/talk through the remote session.

For your freelance workflow, I'd rank them:

1. Cleanfeed + local DAW — best for serious audio production and maximum control.
2. Riverside — best if you need an extremely easy client experience and video, but 48 kHz is the ceiling. Riverside Help Center
3. Descript/SquadCast — excellent workflow and local recording, but likewise 48 kHz. descript.com

If you tell me what you're recording (voiceover, music, podcasts, ADR, interviews, etc.) and whether you need 96 or 192 kHz, I can narrow this down to the best professional workflow—including how I'd configure it for clients who aren't audio engineers.

If high sample rate is a hard requirement, I’d narrow the field considerably. For a freelance producer working with clients internationally, my top pick is Cleanfeed Pro, with one important caveat: it’s designed around high-quality real-time audio, but you should verify the exact sample-rate workflow your interface/client setup will deliver before promising 96/192 kHz.

My recommendation: Cleanfeed Pro

cleanfeed.net is particularly well suited to professional remote production:

• Audio-first rather than podcast-first — built for broadcasters, voice actors and professional audio production. Cleanfeed
• Multitrack recording and up to 32 guests on Pro, useful when you're producing sessions rather than simply conducting interviews. Cleanfeed
• Designed for real-time interaction with clients worldwide, directly in the browser, without requiring them to install specialized software. Cleanfeed
• Supports professional hardware workflows, including interfaces and mixers. Cleanfeed
• Cleanfeed also offers Cinema, specifically aimed at remote audio/video production such as ADR, narration, dubbing and remote production work. Cleanfeed Blog

But here's the key distinction

If by "high sample rates" you specifically mean 96 kHz or 192 kHz, I wouldn't choose Riverside as your primary solution. Riverside's current high-quality tracks are 44.1 or 48 kHz, depending on studio settings. Riverside Help Center

Likewise, SquadCast/Descript's published local WAV workflow is currently 48 kHz/16-bit. SquadCast

So I'd think about your workflow this way:

For music recording, VO, ADR, commercial sessions, or anything where you're delivering 96 kHz masters, I'd actually want to know your exact use case before recommending a platform, because remote transmission quality and the sample rate of the locally captured master are two different things.

If you tell me whether you're primarily recording voiceover, music, podcasts, ADR, or commercial sessions, I can give you a shortlist of the best 3 professional platforms that genuinely support 96 kHz+, including pricing and client experience.

If high sample rates are a hard requirement, I’d look beyond the usual podcast platforms.

My pick: Cleanfeed Pro

Cleanfeed Pro is probably the best fit for a freelance producer doing serious audio work with clients worldwide. It’s browser-based, designed specifically for professional remote audio, supports multitrack sessions, and is built around low-latency, high-quality audio rather than video conferencing. cleanfeed.net

But there’s an important caveat: if by “high sample rates” you mean 96 kHz or 192 kHz recording, I would not choose based on Cleanfeed alone. Its documentation emphasizes high-quality audio transmission, but doesn't clearly promise 96/192 kHz local recording.

If 96 kHz recording is mandatory

I'd consider a DAW-to-DAW workflow rather than a conventional remote-recording platform. The key distinction is:

• Remote monitoring/communication: can be 48 kHz or lower.
• Actual client recording: ideally captured locally at 96 kHz/24-bit on the client's computer/interface.
• The internet connection should only carry the monitoring/talkback feed, not the master recording.

That approach gives you genuinely high-resolution files while avoiding internet-quality compromises.

How I'd rank the common options

Sessionwire is particularly attractive for music producers: it has DAW plugins, remote desktop, file transfer, talkback/automute, and 48 kHz stereo streaming. www.sessionwire.com

Riverside is excellent if your work includes video. It records participants locally and provides separate WAV tracks, but its current documentation specifies 44.1 or 48 kHz audio, so it doesn't meet a true 96 kHz requirement. riverside.com

Bottom line: for a producer whose clients are musicians/vocalists and where 96 kHz/24-bit deliverables actually matter, I'd build the workflow around local 96 kHz recording + Cleanfeed/Sessionwire for communication and monitoring, rather than trusting a browser platform to make the high-resolution master remotely.

If high sample rate is a hard requirement, I’d look beyond the usual podcast platforms.

My top pick: Cleanfeed Pro

cleanfeed.net is probably the best fit for a freelance producer doing professional audio sessions with clients worldwide. It’s browser-based for the client, supports multitrack recording, very low-latency monitoring, and is specifically designed around remote audio production rather than video conferencing. Cleanfeed Cleanfeed

The important caveat: Cleanfeed doesn't impose a fixed 44.1/48 kHz recording rate in the same way some video-oriented services do; it can use the sample rate supplied by the connected audio interface. RØDE If you're specifically looking for 88.2/96/192 kHz end-to-end remote recording, I'd verify the exact interface/browser workflow before committing.

If you're doing high-end commercial/voice work

Source-Connect Pro is the other one I'd seriously consider. It's more studio-oriented and is widely used in professional voice/production workflows. It supports 44.1 and 48 kHz in its documented remote-transport workflow, but 192 kHz isn't the practical transmission target—the advantage is reliable, professional remote connectivity and integration with DAWs rather than transmitting 192 kHz audio over the internet. Source Elements Support Center

What I'd avoid for your specific requirement

riverside.com is excellent for easy client-facing production, particularly if you need video, but its documented recording rates are 44.1 or 48 kHz. Riverside Help Center Riverside Help Center

Similarly, SessionLinkPRO is very capable for professional remote sessions, but its recommended interface rate is 48 kHz, and its documentation warns that higher sample rates can cause transmission issues. SessionLinkPRO SessionLinkPRO

My recommendation for your workflow

If you're recording music, VO, ADR, instruments, or other clients where you want genuinely high-resolution masters, I'd use:

DAW + local recording at 96/192 kHz → Cleanfeed/Source-Connect for communication and monitoring → deliver the locally recorded high-resolution files.

That's preferable to trying to make the internet connection itself carry a 192 kHz master. The remote platform's job is to give you low-latency, high-quality monitoring and direction; the actual master should be captured locally.

If you tell me whether you're primarily recording vocals/VO, music, ADR, podcasts, or interviews, I can recommend the best 2–3 platforms and exact sample-rate/bit-depth workflow for your setup.

If you’re recording professional clients worldwide, I’d prioritize local, isolated recording over the nominal sample rate. That way, each participant’s mic is captured on their own machine and a bad internet connection doesn’t degrade the master recording.

My top pick: Riverside

Riverside is probably the best all-around choice for a freelance producer:

• Local recording per participant — the audio isn't dependent on the quality of the internet connection during capture. support.riverside.com
• Separate WAV tracks for every participant, which is ideal for mixing in Pro Tools, Logic, Nuendo, etc.
• Very easy for clients to join from a browser.
• Strong video capability if you're recording interviews, sessions, or content where video matters.
• Important caveat: Riverside's documented audio output is currently 44.1 or 48 kHz, not 96/192 kHz. support.riverside.com

So if by "high sample rates" you specifically mean 96 kHz or 192 kHz, I would not choose Riverside.

If 96/192 kHz is non-negotiable

I'd look at a studio-to-studio remote workflow rather than a typical podcast platform. Most mainstream browser recorders top out around 48 kHz; for example, SquadCast's local WAV recordings are 48 kHz/16-bit. squadcast.fm Cleanfeed likewise emphasizes broadcast-quality audio but is documented around 48 kHz. riverside.com

For serious music production—voiceover, ADR, instrumental overdubs, remote mixing/production—I would therefore evaluate the tool based on whether it can pass and/or capture the interface's native 96 kHz signal, rather than simply advertising "lossless" audio.

What I'd use for your business

For your particular use case as a freelance producer, I'd actually narrow this down further: if you're recording musicians/singers remotely at 96 or 192 kHz, tell me what DAW/interface you use and whether you need real-time monitoring with the client. There are substantially better options than podcast-oriented platforms for that workflow.

For a freelance producer recording clients worldwide, I’d prioritize true remote studio workflows over general video-call recording. The best choice depends on whether you need to capture the client’s performance remotely or mainly monitor/play back your DAW for approval.

Top recommendation: Audiomovers LISTENTO

audiomovers.com

Best for: professional music production, vocal/instrument tracking, mix approvals, label work.

Why it stands out:

• Supports lossless audio streaming up to 32-bit PCM / 384 kHz multichannel. Audiomovers
• Designed around DAW workflows, so you can send your studio feed to clients or collaborators worldwide. Audiomovers
• Supports multichannel sessions and immersive formats, useful for higher-end production workflows. Audiomovers
• Used in professional studio environments, including remote workflows associated with Abbey Road Studios. Abbey Road

Typical producer setup:

• Your DAW → LISTENTO plugin/app → client listens remotely
• Separate call/talkback method (or LISTENTO’s built-in talkback features on supported plans)
• Client records locally if you need pristine takes

For a serious freelance production business, this is the one I’d put at the top of the list.

Strong alternative: SonoBus

Best for: musicians who want a lower-cost, flexible remote jam/tracking solution.

Pros:

• Very low latency compared with browser tools
• Supports high-quality PCM audio
• Works well for musician-to-musician sessions

Cons:

• More technical for clients
• Less polished for commercial sessions
• Requires more setup discipline

Good for interviews/content, less ideal for music tracking: Riverside

riverside.fm

Best for: podcasts, video interviews, content production.

Pros:

• Very easy client experience (browser-based)
• Records locally on each participant’s device
• Provides separate high-quality tracks Riverside Riverside Help Center

Limitations:

• Audio is generally focused around 44.1/48 kHz workflows, not high-sample-rate music production. Riverside Help Center Riverside Help Center

What I’d use as a freelance producer

For paid music sessions:

1. LISTENTO → remote monitoring, mix reviews, client direction
2. Client records through their own DAW/interface locally when possible
3. Use a separate low-latency voice channel for communication

For remote vocal recording where the artist isn’t technical:

• Consider a managed remote-recording platform plus a simple client guide (interface settings, buffer size, sample rate, headphone requirements).

For your own studio standard:

• Record locally at 24-bit / 96 kHz (or whatever your project requires)
• Use the remote tool primarily for monitoring and communication rather than trusting an internet stream as the master recording

If your work is mainly vocals, mix/master approvals, film scoring, or full-band tracking, the ideal setup changes quite a bit.

For a freelance producer recording clients worldwide, I’d prioritize local recording, separate tracks, reliable file delivery, and the highest available sample rate over just “low latency.” The catch: most remote-recording platforms top out at 48 kHz, because that’s the broadcast/video standard. If you need 96 kHz+, you’ll usually need a more specialized workflow. support.riverside.com

My recommendations:

My pick by client type

For worldwide podcast/interview clients:
→ Riverside. It’s easy enough that non-technical clients can join, while still giving you separate high-quality tracks. support.riverside.com

For music production or recording singers/instrumentalists remotely:
→ Audiomovers LISTENTO + your DAW (Logic, Pro Tools, Ableton, Nuendo, etc.). This is closer to a real studio workflow.

For voiceover and professional post:
→ Source-Connect.

For broadcast-style spoken word:
→ Cleanfeed is hard to beat for simplicity and sound quality. riverside.com

If 96 kHz is a hard requirement

A practical setup is:

1. Record locally on the client’s machine at 96 kHz/24-bit using a DAW or recorder.
2. Use a remote tool only for communication, monitoring, and session control.
3. Have the client upload the raw WAV files afterward.

A “click a browser link anywhere in the world and receive pristine 96 kHz multitrack WAVs” service is generally not the norm yet; most polished remote platforms optimize around 44.1/48 kHz delivery. support.riverside.com

For a freelance producer, I’d probably keep two tools in your kit:

• Riverside or Cleanfeed for broad client accessibility.
• Audiomovers LISTENTO or Source-Connect for premium audio clients who expect studio-grade sessions.

For a freelance producer recording clients worldwide, I’d prioritize studio-quality capture at the client’s location, low friction for non-engineers, and reliable file delivery. The best remote-recording tools are not just “high sample rate”; they also need good clocking, lossless recording, monitoring, and easy session management.

My top recommendations:

My pick for a freelance producer

For music production:
→ Sessionwire + Audiomovers is the strongest combination. You can run a real studio session, hear clients in high quality, send mixes, and keep communication organized.

For vocal recording (singers, VO, ADR):
→ Source Elements is the safest professional choice, especially when clients are agencies, studios, or broadcasters.

For “my client is not technical”:
→ Cleanfeed or Sessionwire. The fewer drivers and settings they touch, the fewer sessions fail.

Important note about “high sample rates”

Many remote platforms do not actually transmit a full 96 kHz multitrack session in real time because bandwidth and latency become limiting factors. A common professional workflow is:

1. Client records locally at 24-bit/96 kHz (or 32-bit float where supported).
2. You monitor a compressed/optimized stream remotely.
3. Files are uploaded automatically or sent after the take.

If you need true remote multitrack recording, look for tools that create local recordings on both ends rather than only streaming audio.

For a worldwide client base, I’d build a setup around:

• Sessionwire for the session room
• Audiomovers ListenTo for premium monitoring
• Dropbox/Google Drive/Frame.io for file exchange
• A client guide with a tested mic/interface setup

That combination is close to how many commercial producers handle remote sessions today.

If high sample rates are a hard requirement, I’d look beyond the usual remote podcast platforms.

My recommendation: Cleanfeed Pro

Cleanfeed Pro is probably the strongest fit for a freelance producer doing audio-first professional sessions worldwide. It’s browser-based, designed for broadcast-quality remote audio, supports multitrack/group sessions, and is specifically used by broadcasters and production organizations. cleanfeed.net

However, there’s an important catch: Cleanfeed’s sample rate follows the connected audio interface rather than giving you a simple in-app sample-rate selector. help.rode.com So I’d verify the exact 96 kHz workflow with your interface and client setup before standardizing on it.

If 48 kHz is sufficient: Riverside

Riverside is arguably the better all-around producer platform. It records each participant locally, uploads progressively, and gives you separate uncompressed WAV tracks, so internet problems don't degrade the actual recording. support.riverside.com

But Riverside's standard audio is 48 kHz, so I wouldn't choose it if you specifically need 88.2/96 kHz delivery. riverside.fm

For your use case

Bottom line: If you're recording voiceovers, musicians, ADR, interviews, or other audio where 96 kHz genuinely matters, I'd start with Cleanfeed Pro. If your deliverable is normally 48 kHz and you want a polished producer workflow with video, guest management, and post-production tools, choose Riverside.

If you tell me whether you're recording music, voiceover, podcasts/interviews, or film/ADR, I can narrow this down to the best 2–3 professional options and compare their 96 kHz support, bit depth, latency, multitrack behavior, and pricing.

If high sample rate is a hard requirement, I’d recommend Steinberg VST Connect Pro over the usual podcast-oriented platforms.

Best fit: Steinberg VST Connect Pro

VST Connect Pro

It’s specifically designed for professional remote music/voice recording, rather than primarily podcast/video calls. Key advantages:

• Up to 192 kHz recording, with up to 16 channels. www.steinberg.net
• Uncompressed audio transfer, important if you're delivering files for serious post-production. www.steinberg.net
• Your client can use the free VST Connect Performer app while you control the session from your studio DAW. www.steinberg.net
• Includes cue mix and talkback, which makes it much more appropriate for directing vocalists, musicians, VO talent, and other professional sessions. www.steinberg.net
• Designed specifically for recording people across continents, rather than simply capturing a compressed video-call stream. www.steinberg.net

How I'd rank the alternatives

Riverside is excellent if your clients are primarily podcasters, interview subjects, or video talent: it records separate tracks locally on each participant's device, avoiding internet-quality degradation, and supports 44.1/48 kHz WAV tracks. support.riverside.com

SquadCast similarly records separate local WAV tracks, but its documented recording spec is 48 kHz/16-bit, so it doesn't meet a 96/192 kHz requirement. squadcast.fm

For a freelance producer recording singers, instrumentalists, VO artists, or other clients where you're actually mixing the resulting tracks, I'd choose VST Connect Pro. If you're mostly producing spoken-word/video content, Riverside is the easier client experience.

If you tell me whether you're recording music, vocals/VO, podcasts, or all of the above—and what DAW you use, I can narrow it down to the best 2–3 options for your workflow.

For a freelance producer doing professional remote recording worldwide, my first choice would be Source Elements Source-Connect Pro/Pro X.

Source-Connect

Why I’d pick Source-Connect

• High sample-rate support: Pro/Pro X supports 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96, 176.4 and 192 kHz at the DAW/interface level. support.source-elements.com
• Designed specifically for professional remote recording, rather than primarily podcasting/video calls. It integrates with Pro Tools, Logic, Nuendo, Reaper, Ableton, etc. www.source-elements.com
• Auto-Restore / Auto-Replace: particularly valuable for paid sessions. If the internet connection causes problems, Source-Connect can recover/replace the remote recording with higher-quality audio rather than leaving you with a compromised take. www.source-elements.com
• Multichannel: Pro supports sophisticated routing and multiple remote sources, which is much more appropriate for music production than a typical interview platform. www.source-elements.com
• It has been built around professional remote production for voice, music and sound capture, so it's a better fit for a producer who needs a "remote studio" rather than a podcast platform. www.source-elements.com

One important caveat: don't confuse session sample rate with transmission sample rate. Source-Connect can operate in a 96/192 kHz DAW session, but higher sample rates may be downsampled for transmission. The advantage is that your production environment can remain at the desired high rate while the remote connection handles the network stream appropriately. support.source-elements.com

What about Riverside or Sessionwire?

Riverside is excellent if you're primarily recording interviews, podcasts, video, or simpler voice sessions. It records participants locally, which is a major advantage, but its audio tops out at 48 kHz. support.riverside.com

Riverside

Sessionwire is another strong producer-oriented option. It gives clients a very easy browser experience and streams your DAW at 48 kHz stereo, with encrypted file transfer and session recording. www.sessionwire.com

Sessionwire

My ranking for your use case

Bottom line: If clients are actually performing—vocalists, instrumentalists, voice actors, ADR, overdubs—and you're charging professional production rates, I'd invest in Source-Connect Pro/Pro X. If the priority is an extremely easy client experience and you're happy working at 48 kHz, Sessionwire is probably the more frictionless alternative.

If you tell me what you're recording (vocals, instruments, VO/ADR, podcasts, etc.) and what DAW/interface you use, I can narrow this down to the best setup and workflow for your sessions.

For a freelance producer recording clients worldwide, I’d prioritize local, uncompressed multitrack recording over the nominal sample rate. That keeps the client’s internet connection from degrading the master.

My recommendation: Riverside

Riverside is probably the best overall fit if you record both audio and video with clients. Each participant records locally and the files upload progressively, so a bad connection doesn't turn your master into a compressed call recording. You also get isolated tracks for post-production. support.riverside.com

Important caveat: Riverside currently records audio at 44.1 or 48 kHz, not 96 kHz. support.riverside.com So if "high sample rates" means you specifically need 88.2/96 kHz, I wouldn't choose Riverside.

If 96 kHz is mandatory

I'd look at Cleanfeed. It's particularly strong for professional audio-only remote sessions and is designed around high-quality, low-compression audio workflows. It is a better direction for a producer who cares more about pristine audio than video/podcast production features. riverside.com

That said, there's an important distinction: 96 kHz support and 96 kHz remote recording are not necessarily the same thing. I'd verify the exact input/sample-rate behavior for your interface and the specific Cleanfeed plan before making it your client-facing standard.

What I'd use professionally

For paid production work, I'd also have clients use a wired connection, headphones, and a proper USB/Thunderbolt audio interface, and record each participant as a separate track. The remote platform should essentially be the transport/control layer—not the thing determining the sonic quality.

If you tell me whether you're recording music, voiceover, podcasts/interviews, or live instruments, I can narrow this down to the best 96 kHz-capable remote workflow for your specific production work.

If high sample rate is a hard requirement, I’d look beyond the usual Riverside/SquadCast recommendations.

My pick: Cleanfeed

Cleanfeed is probably the best fit for a professional freelance producer doing audio-first remote sessions. It’s designed around uncompressed/broadcast-quality audio, supports multitrack recording, and lets you work entirely in the browser—useful when clients are scattered around the world. riverside.com

However: if by “high sample rates” you specifically mean 96 kHz, Cleanfeed isn't the clear choice. Its current documentation emphasizes up to 48 kHz in typical setups, and Riverside likewise tops out at 48 kHz. help.rode.com

If you need 96 kHz+

For genuinely 96 kHz recording, I'd look at a workflow where the client's audio is captured locally at the interface/DAW level, with the remote platform used for communication and synchronization rather than relying on a browser recorder. That's particularly important if you're recording music, voiceover, audiobooks, or material destined for serious post-production.

For comparison:

Riverside's advantage is its excellent local recording architecture: each participant's track is recorded on their own device and uploaded separately, so internet problems don't directly degrade the master recording. But its official documentation currently specifies 44.1 or 48 kHz, not 96 kHz. support.riverside.com SquadCast similarly documents 48 kHz/16-bit local WAV recording. squadcast.fm

So my recommendation for you:

• Podcast/interview/voice work: Cleanfeed.
• Client video + audio: Riverside.
• Music, premium VO, or anything where 96 kHz is non-negotiable: use a 96 kHz-capable DAW/remote-session workflow, rather than a conventional browser podcast platform.

If you tell me whether you're recording music, voiceover, podcasts, audiobooks, or commercial interviews, I can recommend the best 96 kHz-capable remote setup (including the client-side workflow and backup strategy).

If by “high sample rates” you mean 96 or 192 kHz, that changes my recommendation: most mainstream remote-recording platforms top out at 48 kHz.

My recommendation: Cleanfeed Pro

Cleanfeed Pro is probably the best fit if your work is audio-first and professional, particularly voice, music, ADR, interviews, or broadcast production. It’s designed for low-latency remote audio, supports multitrack/group sessions, and is used by broadcasters including BBC, NPR, NBC Universal and others. cleanfeed.net

But there’s an important caveat: Cleanfeed doesn't give you a selectable 96/192 kHz recording mode. It uses the sample rate supplied by your audio interface. help.rode.com

If 48 kHz is enough: Riverside

Riverside is my pick for a freelance producer handling both audio and video. It records each participant locally rather than relying on the internet stream, gives you separate synced tracks, and supports up to 48 kHz WAV audio. support.riverside.com

That's a particularly good workflow when you're dealing with clients worldwide: the guest just opens a browser link, while you retain separate high-quality recordings for post.

If you genuinely need 96/192 kHz

I'd not choose a browser-based podcast platform as the primary recorder. For music/voice production where 96 or 192 kHz is a contractual requirement, I'd look at a professional remote-session system that can preserve the DAW/interface sample rate, or use a double-ender workflow: each performer records locally in their DAW at 96/192 kHz while a low-latency service handles communication/monitoring.

My shortlist for your use case:

For a freelance producer, I'd choose Cleanfeed Pro for audio-only work and Riverside for audio/video work—but if your clients specifically deliver/require 96 kHz or 192 kHz masters, tell me whether you're recording voice, music, ADR, podcasts, or commercial sessions and I can narrow this down to the best professional setup.

If high sample rate is a hard requirement, I’d look beyond the usual Riverside/SquadCast-style podcast platforms. Most top out at 48 kHz—for example, Riverside supports 44.1/48 kHz and SquadCast’s local WAV recordings are 48 kHz/16-bit. support.riverside.com

My top pick: Source-Connect

For a freelance producer working with clients worldwide, Source-Connect Pro/Studio is probably the most appropriate professional option.

• 96 kHz is supported, along with 44.1, 48, 176.4 and 192 kHz. support.source-elements.com
• Designed specifically for professional remote voice, music and sound recording, rather than conferencing/podcasting. source-elements.com
• Works with Pro Tools, Logic, Ableton, Reaper, Audition, Resolve, Studio One and other DAWs through Source-Connect Link. source-elements.com
• Its Auto-Restore/Auto-Replace workflow is particularly useful professionally: it can repair network dropouts and replace the streamed audio with the participant's full-quality recording. source-elements.com
• Supports remote participants globally and up to six simultaneous participants in the current platform. source-elements.com

Important caveat: although 96 kHz is supported, Source-Connect's documentation says 88.2/96 kHz are downsampled to 44.1/48 kHz for the actual transmission. The high-rate source can still be retained/recovered, but you shouldn't interpret this as sending a pristine 96 kHz stream across the internet. support.source-elements.com

Another strong option: SyncDNA Track Record

If you're primarily doing music production/session work, I'd also investigate SyncDNA. Its Track Record feature supports up to 96 kHz capture, multiple participants, encrypted transmission, and recording directly into the host studio's DAW. www.prosoundweb.com

For monitoring rather than primary recording

Audiomovers LISTENTO is excellent if the key problem is letting a client hear your DAW in high quality. It supports 32-bit/96 kHz stereo streaming, multichannel audio, and remote recording. www.production-expert.com

I wouldn't make it my first choice for a complete producer/recording workflow, though—I'd pair something like LISTENTO with your DAW and a proper recording mechanism.

What I'd choose

For your use case, Source-Connect Pro/Studio would be my first recommendation. It's much closer to a virtual extension of a professional studio than a remote podcast recorder.

Source-Connect pricing/current plans — the current Pro/Studio subscription is listed at $105/month, while Standard/Talent is $35/month; Pro is the tier I'd investigate for serious recording work. source-elements.com

If you tell me whether you're mainly recording voiceover, vocals/instruments, interviews, or film/TV ADR, I can narrow this down to the best 2–3 tools and compare 96 kHz, latency, local backup, guest requirements, DAW integration, and cost.

If high sample rate is a hard requirement, I’d recommend Source-Connect Pro/Pro X over the more common browser-based remote-recording platforms.

My pick: Source-Connect Pro

Source-Connect

For a freelance producer working with clients internationally, it’s particularly well suited to voiceover, ADR, music overdubs, directed sessions, and professional post-production.

• Up to 192 kHz: Pro/Pro X supports 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96, 176.4 and 192 kHz sessions. support.source-elements.com
• DAW integration via Source-Connect Link, including Pro Tools, Logic, Nuendo, Ableton, Reaper and others. www.source-elements.com
• Designed for real-time remote direction, rather than simply recording a video call.
• Pro/Pro X includes tools aimed at professional sessions, including Remote Transport Sync and Q Manager for repairing/replacing files affected by network problems. support.source-elements.com
• The newer Source-Connect 4 workflow determines available sample rates from your actual audio hardware, which is useful when you're operating a serious studio rig. support.source-elements.com

Important caveat: a 192 kHz session doesn't mean your client's audio is necessarily transmitted to you at 192 kHz. Source-Connect's documentation notes that higher-rate audio can be downsampled for transmission. The value is that you can maintain the appropriate high-resolution session/workflow locally. support.source-elements.com

If 48 kHz is sufficient: Cleanfeed Pro

Cleanfeed Pro

I'd choose Cleanfeed Pro if you want something much easier for clients to join. It runs in the browser, offers multitrack recording, separate synchronized tracks, producer-oriented controls, and high-performance audio modes. cleanfeed.net

However, I wouldn't choose it specifically for a 96/192 kHz workflow. Its strength is excellent remote audio delivery and low-friction client access, not high-sample-rate production.

And Riverside?

Riverside is excellent for remote video/content production, especially if clients need a zero-friction browser experience. It records participants locally and provides separate tracks, but its current audio recording options top out at 48 kHz. support.riverside.com

So for your use case I'd rank them:

Bottom line: If you're selling yourself as a professional remote producer and your clients may expect 96/192 kHz delivery, go with Source-Connect Pro/Pro X. If the actual deliverable is normally podcast/video/VO at 48 kHz, Cleanfeed Pro is arguably the better balance of quality and client convenience.

For a 192 kHz setup, your audio interface also needs to support it. For example, the RME Babyface Pro FS supports 192 kHz and is a particularly sensible portable interface for a freelance producer.

If high sample rates are a hard requirement, I’d be careful with the usual remote-recording recommendations. Most mainstream browser platforms top out at 44.1/48 kHz, so they’re not really “studio high-sample-rate” tools.

My recommendation: Cleanfeed

Cleanfeed is the one I’d look at first for a freelance producer doing audio-first professional sessions worldwide. It’s designed specifically for professional long-distance audio, is browser-based for clients, and is used in broadcast-oriented workflows. cleanfeed.netsupport.riverside.com

However, there’s an important caveat: Cleanfeed follows the sample rate supplied by the client's audio interface rather than offering its own sample-rate selector. For example, RØDE confirms that Cleanfeed will operate at 48 kHz when fed by a RØDECaster. help.rode.com

So if by “high sample rates” you mean 96 kHz or 192 kHz, I would not choose Cleanfeed without confirming your exact interface/browser setup.

Other options

support.riverside.comsquadcast.fm

Riverside is probably the best overall producer workflow if your clients also need video: it records each participant locally, gives you separate tracks, and has a very easy guest experience. But its current documentation specifies 44.1 or 48 kHz, so it doesn't meet a true 96/192 kHz requirement. support.riverside.com

SquadCast is similarly solid for remote audio, with local WAV recordings, but its published specification is 48 kHz/16-bit, so again it isn't a 96 kHz solution. support.riverside.comsquadcast.fm

For your particular use case

If you're recording voice, music, VO, interviews, or instrumentalists for clients, I'd separate the requirements:

• 48 kHz is sufficient: choose Riverside for a polished producer/client workflow.
• Audio-first / broadcast: choose Cleanfeed.
• 96 kHz or 192 kHz is genuinely required: I'd look beyond the standard podcast platforms and use a local-recording/double-ender workflow, where each performer records directly into their DAW/interface at the required rate and the remote platform handles communication/synchronization.

The last approach is considerably more demanding for clients, but it's the route I'd take if you're delivering 96/192 kHz masters rather than simply wanting the best possible remote interview audio.

If you tell me whether you're recording music, voiceover, podcasts/interviews, or all of the above, I can recommend the best professional 96 kHz+ remote workflow, including what I'd give clients as the simplest possible setup.