Loomscribe vs Notta: which fits your Loom workflow?

Loomscribe and Notta both convert speech to text, but they aim at different jobs. Notta is a broad AI transcription service: upload an audio or video file, or capture live speech, and it produces an accurate transcript with speaker labels, subtitle export, and support for a wide range of languages. Loomscribe is Loom-native: paste a Loom share link and it becomes a notebook with an AI summary, action items, key topics, and source-grounded chat across all the videos in a project.

The short verdict: if you need to transcribe many kinds of media in many languages, Notta is the more general tool. If your goal is to turn a library of Loom recordings into project knowledge you can search and question, Loomscribe is purpose-built for that.

Notta is strong where breadth matters: it supports dozens of languages, exports subtitles, identifies speakers, and can send a bot into live meetings for real-time notes. Loomscribe stays Loom-focused but covers the transcription essentials — it reads a video's captions instantly and falls back to AI speech-to-text when a Loom has no captions at all — and puts its depth into making that content searchable, including a chat that answers questions grounded in your own recordings, which Notta doesn't offer across a Loom library.