RX 12 vs Adobe Enhance Speech: The Free Browser Tool Won Two of Three Dialogue Rounds
What the first RX 12 shootout found, why Enhance Speech rebuilds rather than cleans a voice, and which tool to use for which bad-audio problem.
Cover illustration generated with AI for Fix It In Post.
In the most useful public test of iZotope RX 12 so far, Adobe's free browser version of Enhance Speech beat the $1,399 suite on two of three dialogue clips. That does not make RX obsolete. It means the two tools solve different problems, and an editor who reaches for the same one every time is wasting either money or the original voice.
What the test found
On 1 May 2026, two days after RX 12 shipped, Nick Lear published a shootout on ProVideo Coalition. He ran RX 12 Advanced and RX 11 (Dialogue Isolate in both), Adobe Enhance Speech in the browser and Enhance Speech inside Premiere Pro's Essential Sound panel across three dialogue problems, then tested stem separation separately.
- Steady background noise: RX 12 won. Lear heard "a noticeable improvement" over RX 11, with a clearer voice and less artefacting, "but granted it's not massive". The web Enhance Speech beat the Premiere version comfortably, but RX stayed "truer to the original".
- Poor phone recording in a reverberant room: the browser tool won. RX 12 showed "not that much improvement if any" over RX 11. Enhance Speech online "sounds better to my ear here – it is less like the original, but in a way it just sounds like it was recorded on a better mic."
- Heavy traffic: RX 12 had "significantly less artifacting" than RX 11 but an occasional booming reverb artefact. The online Enhance Speech sounded "a bit better". Oddly, Premiere's built-in version did much better here than on the easier clips.
- Stem separation: RX 12's new Scene Rebalance beat the free Ultimate Vocal Remover model, with what Lear called a clean vocal split and no artefacts.
His own conclusion was that no single tool wins every test. The scoreline is worth stating plainly because it is often summarised as the free tool "winning one round": on dialogue alone, the browser took two of three.
Read the result with the right caveats
This is one listener, on headphones, with one clip per problem, and the comparisons were published as YouTube videos, so readers hear them through another layer of compression. No settings or mix amounts were reported. Treat it as a strong hint about where each tool tends to sit, not as a ranking. As far as we know, nobody has published a blind, multi-listener comparison of RX 12 against the current Enhance Speech, so test on your own material before you change your workflow.
The most important phrase in the review is "less like the original". Enhance Speech does not so much clean a recording as rebuild it into something that sounds like a better microphone. That is wonderful for a single phone interview that will play on its own. It is a problem when the cleaned line has to cut against clean lav or boom takes from the same scene, because the voice now has a different timbre. RX's Dialogue Isolate is more conservative. It leaves more of the room, but it keeps the speaker sounding like themselves.
What each option costs and limits
- RX 12 Elements, $99: six repair modules including Voice De-noise, De-reverb and De-hum, but no Dialogue Isolate. The tool in Lear's test needs Standard or Advanced.
- RX 12 Standard, $399; Advanced, $1,399 (iZotope list prices). Per WeRaveYou's release coverage, Scene Rebalance and Trim Silence are Advanced-only, Stems View is in Standard and Advanced, and De-bleed has been rebuilt so it no longer needs a reference track. The same article lists upgrades at $129 and $269; we did not confirm those on iZotope's site.
- Adobe Enhance Speech, free: Adobe lists one hour of enhancement a day, files up to 500 MB and 30 minutes long.
- Adobe Podcast Premium (now reached through the Firefly Pro plan): four hours a day, files up to 1 GB and two hours long. Adobe did not show the plan price on the pages we checked. The March 2026 update added source separation, with separate speech, background and music controls and downloadable stems. Lear's test did not cover that feature.
Why the Premiere versus web gap matters
Lear found the browser version "MILES better" than the panel inside Premiere on steady noise, and noted a similar gap in other tests. In practice that turns a one-click fix in the timeline into a round trip: export the clip, upload, wait, download, relink, check sync. On a fast turnaround that adds real minutes per clip (how many depends on file size and connection), and it puts client audio on a third-party server, which some contracts and NDAs do not allow. Check the paperwork before you upload an unreleased interview.
It also means that "we tried Enhance Speech and it was bad" may be a verdict on the Premiere version. Before you dismiss the tool, try the web one on the same clip.
Which tool for which problem
This is our decision rule, built from Lear's findings and the way each tool works. It is a starting point, not a test result.
- Steady noise (HVAC, fridge, fan, camera hiss) that must cut with other takes: RX Dialogue Isolate or Voice De-noise. It keeps the voice's character.
- Reverberant room or phone audio that stands alone (a remote interview, an archive call): browser Enhance Speech first. It is likely to sound better and costs nothing.
- Heavy, changing noise (traffic, crowds): run both and listen. In Lear's test the web tool was slightly ahead, but RX lets you tune the result module by module, which matters when the line has to sit in a mix.
- Music or effects under dialogue you need to rebalance: RX 12 Advanced Scene Rebalance if you own it. Otherwise try Enhance Speech's new music control, which we have not seen independently tested.
- Anything going to a broadcaster or a feature mix: do the main repair in RX, where every move is adjustable, and keep the untouched original in the session so the re-recording mixer can undo you.
Whatever you use, do not drive either tool to 100%. Blend a little of the original back in, check on speakers as well as headphones, and listen to the cut, not the clip.
The takeaway
The free tool is better at one specific job: making a single bad recording sound like a good one. RX is better at the editor's real job, which is making many recordings sound like the same scene. Keep the browser tab open for triage and standalone phone audio, and save the paid suite for anything that has to match.
