Pros and Cons of Stenocast versus Rapid Refresh by Stenograph

I'm trying to decide whether to purchase a Stenocast system or the Rapid Refresh product from Stenograph.

Rapid Refresh provides a realtime feed that makes corrections into the text for the attorney as I make them.  That's a good thing.

Rapid Refresh requires a yearly subscription fee.  That's not so good.  It's never paid for.

I don't do a ton of realtime, so I don't want to spend a ton on equipment.

Rapid Refresh only works with CaseViewNet so if you have an attorney who wants to use Bridge or Livenote, it is not going to work.

I tried out the Stenocast unit and I really liked it.  I think it does refresh for a few lines, which is when I usually "fix" things.  It is really easy.  All you have to do is load a driver for the attorney and plug in the receiver and you are up and running.  It works with all kinds of viewing software.  Once it is paid for it is paid for.  There is no yearly subscription fee.

What has your experience been?  



Views: 807

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I would never continuously pay for something that I (1) will never own outright, (2) rarely use and (3) is so proprietary as to make it inconvenient/difficult to use. Stenocast has worked flawlessly for me, and getting it to work on an attorney's computer is a breeze. Although I'm very excited about Ecl's Connection Magic.

Yes, Quyen, 

I like the idea of Eclipse's Connection Magic too.  It looks really neat and makes me wish I was an Eclipse user.

I am really leaning towards the Stenocast for exactly the reasons you state.  Why rent when I can buy?  It's so easy to use.  I really loved Stenocast.  It worked like a charm.

Oh, and by the way, Stenograph has a streaming service too that they will let me purchase for the bargain price of $600 per year.  Really????????????????????

"Oh, and by the way, Stenograph has a streaming service too that they will let me purchase for the bargain price of $600 per year.  Really????????????????????"

My sentiments exactly. $600/year would buy me at least two to three nice pairs of shoes or a couple dresses. And that I would own outright, I might add. ;)

Quyen -


You are so funny.  You make me laugh and at the same time, make a very good point.  BTW, we need to get together again for lunch soon.  :)

Lol. :)

Yes! That was way FUN! Once I get out from under this humungous pile of work, we will do lunch again soon. In the meantime, I'm still locked up. :(

Does Stenograph's streaming service include refreshing everyone's screen when text edits and globals are made?  I'm wondering how close it is to the ConnectionMagic feature in Eclipse 6. 

Someone who has used it, please chime in.  Thanks.

I was kind of shocked too to see the $600/year for streaming, and yeah, no, I won't be using that. Maybe it's priced more for agency owners, though? Anytime I've streamed, it's the agency who's set up the streaming session; so I don't know what they're paying, but maybe it's a similar annual fee.

Yeah, I know, Randall.  I don't want to start all over so I guess I'm stuck with it.  :-(

I have both CVN and Stenocast Me2U.  I use CVN 99.9 percent of the time.  I only use the Stenocast on the rare, rare occasion I have an attorney insist on using his computer with LiveNote.

Some of the advantages of CVN are, you're not limited in connections to the number of dongles you purchase.  I think up to 16 connections can be put on the CVN router.  Also, another big advantage is tablet-based realtime.  With more and more attorneys requesting realtime on iPads, I'd go with a system that allows for that, which is CVN.

For me, the refresh is invaluable.  With the technical realtime jobs I do, a lot of times attorneys will scroll back at a break or lunch and read much further back than 5 lines or so.  I would hate for a chemical or technical term to be sitting there untranslated.

Of course, just my opinions with the type of work I do.  The biggest thing for me is the ability to provide realtime to iPads, which is done with the CVN router, not Stenocast.  I think realtime hardware and software can be as individual as a reporter's choice of machine:  whatever works best for the reporter.  For me, it's CVN hands down.



Hi, Rachel,

Thanks for posting this.

I wish I had more realtime to justify the CC subscription service but for right now I still think I'm going to go with Stenocast.  

Very good information in your post.


Rachel's the best! :) Has helped me a lot too.

As you have also helped me a lot, Lisa!


© 2024   Created by Kelli Combs (admin).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service