Side-by-side comparison · 24 data points
Audio editor to import audios, remove noise, cut & combine clips, and apply special audio effects.
| Audacity Online | Gestion en masa | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | ||
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | images | images |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
Its main functions are to facilitate the registration, modification, adhesion to groups and the elimination of users. Also the creation of shared folders,all in a massive, fast and easy way.
| Metric | Audacity Online | Gestion en masa |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | 4.1 ★ | ★ 5.0 ★ |
| Total reviews | ★ 356 | 8 |
| Active installs | 3,343,606+ | 508,367+ |
| Free plan | Yes | Yes |
| Pricing | Free of charge | Free of charge trial |
Based on the data on this page, Gestion en masa is the stronger choice for most Google Workspace Marketplace admins — 5.0★ vs Audacity Online's 4.1★ is a meaningful gap that usually reflects real product or support quality differences across the user base.
Pricing entry tiers: Audacity Online at Free of charge, Gestion en masa at Free of charge trial. Check each app's tier structure for the capacity limits you actually need before deciding — the headline number is the same shape, but the gating shape per tier (seats, usage volume, integrations) varies.
Audacity Online has the larger user base (356 reviews vs 8), which usually maps to broader integration coverage, faster bug-fix cadence, and a deeper bench of community workflow patterns. Gestion en masa's smaller cohort can be an advantage for niche workflows where the bigger app has accumulated bloat.
Recommended by size: small/early-stage admins who need fast install and low risk should default to Gestion en masa; mid-market and enterprise admins with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — Audacity Online's 356-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than Gestion en masa's broader-but-shallower coverage.
This verdict is generated from the live marketplace data on this page — rating, review count, pricing tier, and category position all refresh from the canonical Google Workspace Marketplace listing every 24 hours. AppRanks does not accept payment to influence comparison outcomes; the methodology is documented on the About page and applies identically to every pair on the site.
Read each app's audit: Audacity Online audit • Gestion en masa audit
Both Audacity Online and Gestion en masa offer paid plans only. Audacity Online starts at Free of charge; Gestion en masa starts at Free of charge trial. Compare the per-tier features in the Pricing section above before committing.
Gestion en masa has the higher average rating (5.0★ from 8 reviews) compared to Audacity Online (4.1★ from 356 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.
Gestion en masa holds the higher average rating (5.0★ vs 4.1★). That is the one dimension AppRanks can separate them on here — read both apps' detail pages for the feature breakdown and recent listing changes.
Both apps are one-click installs from the Google Workspace Marketplace. Audacity Online has the deeper published review base (356 vs 8), which often — though not always — accompanies better-tested setup docs. AppRanks doesn't measure setup time directly: read the recent reviews on each app's detail page for user-reported install experience.
Audacity Online typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (356 reviews). Gestion en masa typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (8 reviews). A larger review base generally means the app has been exercised at scale — relevant if you are processing high volume or handling enterprise compliance requirements.
Migration support varies by app and category. Audacity Online and Gestion en masa both publish their export options on their marketplace listing pages (or in their support docs); some apps offer one-click import from competitors, others require CSV. The fastest check: search "import from Gestion en masa" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.
