Side-by-side comparison · 24 data points
Audio editor to import audios, remove noise, cut & combine clips, and apply special audio effects.
| Audacity Online | Gopher for Groups | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | ||
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | images | images |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
Dig into your Google Groups settings and root out the hidden risks. Adds Google Groups administrative mojo to any Google Sheet.
| Metric | Audacity Online | Gopher for Groups |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | 4.1 ★ | ★ 5.0 ★ |
| Total reviews | ★ 356 | 3 |
| Active installs | 3,343,606+ | 672,035+ |
| Free plan | ★ Yes | — |
| Pricing | Free of charge | Not available |
Based on the data on this page, Gopher for Groups 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.
On pricing, Audacity Online offers a free tier (Free of charge) while Gopher for Groups starts at Not available. For early-stage teams validating fit, the free-tier path lets you run the app on real workloads before committing budget.
Audacity Online has the larger user base (356 reviews vs 3), which usually maps to broader integration coverage, faster bug-fix cadence, and a deeper bench of community workflow patterns. Gopher for Groups'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 Gopher for Groups; 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 Gopher for Groups'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 • Gopher for Groups audit
Audacity Online is the cheaper option — it offers a free plan (Free of charge). Gopher for Groups starts at Not available. Both publish their pricing on the Google Workspace Marketplace; AppRanks mirrors what's listed on each refresh cycle.
Gopher for Groups has the higher average rating (5.0★ from 3 reviews) compared to Audacity Online (4.1★ from 356 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.
Gopher for Groups 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 3), 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). Gopher for Groups typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (3 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 Gopher for Groups 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 Gopher for Groups" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.
