A Samply alternative for recording studios: when Samply is enough and when it isn’t

The idea for this post came from a TikTok user who asked if CuePort is essentially the same thing as Samply.

I should state upfront that CuePort is my own tool. So this comparison comes from someone who built one of the two tools, which is precisely why everything mentioned here about Samply is drawn either from Samply’s own website or from the test described below.

What Samply does really well

Samply is designed for sharing and listening, and it shows immediately. You send a track via a link; the recipient doesn’t need an account. According to Samply, playback is in full resolution, with gapless transitions between songs. New versions can be stacked on top of previous ones, and comments are pinned to specific timestamps. There’s even an iOS app that allows for offline listening.

The Indie plan adds features like password protection, download restrictions, and analytics on who listened and when. It also includes a paywall via Stripe, which unlocks downloads or access only after payment. The Pro plan supports Spatial Audio and adds watermarks.

Samply’s homepage features endorsements from mix and mastering engineers who work with major industry names, and for good reason.

I like the clean user interface and the easy-to-understand menus.

Two tools, two approaches

Samply starts from the player. You upload a file, share it, and someone listens and leaves a comment. CuePort starts from the studio, meaning everything that happens around the music. Every artist has their own login, and a production moves in steps from lyrics and instrumental through vocals and mix to the cover art. The platform also tracks scheduled sessions and payment status. Those who only need to listen to a track can use a guest link; no account is required. For Reaper users, there is a script that imports comments directly into the project as markers.

CuePort has no paywall before downloads. I think this feature is meant more for quick delivery to lots of clients and has less to do with looking after a project.

Measuring version switching

On its homepage, Samply promises that users can switch between stacked versions "seamlessly." Is this true?

I tried it out. It isn’t really gapless version switching; you can still hear dropouts.

Since subjective impressions can be misleading, I had it measured more precisely. The tests were conducted on October 20, 2026, using Chrome 155. Both players were opened as a guest via a shared link. The audio was a test tone in two versions that differed only in volume. In each of two runs, the version was switched 20 times during playback, roughly every three to five seconds, while the browser’s audio output was recorded automatically.

In all 40 switches, Samply had a brief dropout, mostly lasting between 0.14 and 0.55 seconds, with an average of about 0.3 seconds. On the very first switch to a version that hadn’t been loaded yet, the dropout lasted up to 1.2 seconds. After each dropout, playback picked up at roughly the same point. CuePort managed 39 out of 40 switches without any measurable pause, with the position carrying on to within a millisecond. At one point, there was a 20-millisecond gap, the kind that occasionally occurred in the test environment even without any switching taking place.

The network traffic shows why. Samply streams each version in small chunks; when switching, it fetches the other version again from the current playback position, which in the test came to eleven to fifteen requests per switch. CuePort, by contrast, loads all versions in full when the player opens and after that only switches between them. The trade-off is that everything must be fully loaded before playback can begin, which can take a moment with many long versions.

There are a few things the figures don’t reveal. While Samply is capable of lossless streaming, it delivered 256 kbps AAC during my test as a guest user, whereas CuePort provided FLAC. I did not test any browsers other than Chrome.

When you’re just listening to a finished mix, a pause like this hardly matters. In an A/B comparison, though, what counts is that both mixes keep playing from the same point without a pause.

In my experience, that’s how you hear the smallest differences, and it leads to a more deliberate decision.

Samply and CuePort at a glance (as of October 2026)

When Samply is the better choice

• If you primarily share finished mixes and masters and don’t need any studio organization around them.
• If you want listeners to be able to listen offline on an iPhone using a dedicated app.
• For Atmos or other spatial audio mixes.
• If you need clients to pay at the moment of download.
• If you need files to stay available longer on the free plan (CuePort deletes them there after 7 days).

CuePort does not support spatial audio. And why would it? By my estimate, 90–95% of music is still produced and listened to in stereo. CuePort is for music studios, not post-production studios.

If, on the other hand, you work with a steady roster of artists, compare versions head to head, and want to keep track of sessions and payments all in one place, then CuePort is built for you. How do you handle mix comparisons with your artists, and do they even notice the pause when switching between versions?

Full disclosure

CuePort is my product, so I took all information about Samply from Samply’s own website or had it measured in the test described above, as of October 2026. If anything changes at Samply or I got something wrong, write to me at info@cueport.app and I’ll update the article. Samply is a trademark of Samply, Inc. CuePort is not affiliated with Samply.