Caspian Studios vs Lower Street: which suits your show?

These two overlap more than most pairs on this site. Both make shows that are meant to stand next to professional media, and both have the client lists that come from doing it repeatedly. The useful distinction is the medium each starts from.

**Caspian are stronger when the show is filmed and the video is the asset.** Their positioning leads with video, their plan types run from interview through blended and scripted narrative to fiction, and the Webby citation is for video content. If the plan is a series that plays on YouTube and at events and in sales decks, built with writers and direction rather than cut from a conversation, that is the shape of thing Caspian sell as standard.

**Caspian's format range is the rarer capability.** Business fiction and scripted narrative for a B2B brand are hard to buy anywhere. Most agencies offer them as a stretch; Caspian list them as plan types. A brand that wants a produced series rather than a produced conversation is choosing between very few suppliers, and this is one of them.

**Lower Street are stronger on audio-first narrative and on the internal-show case.** Private podcasting for a large workforce is a stated specialism, and it's a genuinely different production problem: distribution inside a company, episodes that have to work for people who didn't choose to listen, and a standard that has to hold across many more episodes than a flagship series. That's the sort of programme a stated team of more than 30 is built to run.

**Lower Street also publish more about themselves**, which matters when you're comparing before a call. Founding year, team size and a long named client list are all on the homepage. Caspian state scale (100+ series) and clients but not size or age. Neither gives you a price, but Lower Street give you more to reason with.

**Where each is weaker is the mirror image.** Caspian's video-first build is overkill for an audio show, and you'd be paying for it. Lower Street's programme bundles strategy and growth with production, which a buyer with a settled format doesn't need. Both require a call to learn whether you can afford them, which for enterprise buyers is normal and for everyone else is the first filter.

Some people arrive at this page having assumed their podcast needs to be a piece of media, and then work out that it needs to be a good, consistent conversation that goes out every fortnight.

Both companies above are built for the flagship case: a produced series, a large brand, a budget that reflects writers and direction and a team. That is the right purchase when the show is a brand asset judged against professional media. It's the wrong one when the show is an expert-led interview that needs to sound excellent and arrive on time, for years, without anybody thinking about it.

For that case, and to be transparent about who's writing this, that's what we sell. Rates are published — £110 per episode for audio editing, £165 for audio and video, £335 for full production including show notes, clips, artwork and publishing — with no minimum term, and you deal with the person editing the show.

What we don't do is what each of these studios is best at. No scripted narrative, no fiction, no format design from scratch, no enterprise programme. If the show has to be a produced series, one of the two above is your answer.

Where we're strong is the long run on a technical subject: 189 episodes for The Genetics Podcast since taking it over at episode 65, and 122 for The Assembly since it launched, both with public feeds. If you'd like to see the wider market before deciding, our [roundup of B2B podcast production companies](/blog/best-podcast-production-companies-for-b2b) covers more of it.