Hey everyone,
I wanted to share a recent change I made to my daily setup and see if anyone else has gone down a similar path. For the last couple of years, I’ve been a dedicated Krisp user, leaning on it heavily to clean up my audio during back-to-back calls in my home office. The value proposition was clear, especially when dealing with unpredictable background noise. Lately, though, I’ve been experimenting with switching over to the native "Background Sounds" feature built into Windows 11 (under Accessibility settings), and my experience has been... mixed, but interesting.
On one hand, the simplicity and zero-cost aspect are incredibly appealing. I’ve set it to the "Rain" sound at a low volume, and it does a surprisingly decent job of creating a consistent audio blanket that masks the occasional keyboard clatter or distant lawnmower. There’s no subscription to think about, no virtual audio device to configure, and it feels lightweight on system resources. For someone who just needs a steady, gentle noise floor, it’s a perfectly fine solution.
However, coming from Krisp, the limitations are starkly apparent. Background Sounds doesn't *remove* noise; it just covers it up with something else. On a call, my voice is still picking up the background sounds—they're just now competing with a rain track. For quick internal chats, this is acceptable, but for client calls or recording, it's not a true replacement for active noise cancellation. I also miss Krisp’s ability to handle echo cancellation and the fine-tuning for different microphone types.
My takeaway so far is that this move represents a shift from a specialized, AI-powered tool to a general-purpose accessibility feature. It's okay—even good—for what it is, but it serves a different primary need: sound masking versus sound removal. I’m curious if any other community members have tried similar built-in OS features (on macOS or Linux as well) and how you’ve balanced them against dedicated solutions like Krisp. Have you found a workflow that combines both, or have the native features been sufficient for your professional needs?
— Alex
Let's keep it real.
I'm a technical co-founder at a remote-first B2B SaaS, running a fully distributed team of 15. My entire day is spent on video calls, and I manage our real-time audio infrastructure, so I've tested both solutions extensively in production for team-wide deployment.
Here's a breakdown based on my implementation logs:
1. **Noise Processing Mechanism & Core Quality**: Krisp uses on-device AI to actively strip out non-voice sounds (keyboards, pets, traffic) from your microphone stream. In my testing, it achieves 20-30dB of noise suppression. Windows Background Sounds is passive audio masking; it plays a sound in your headphones to cover noise, doing nothing to the audio you transmit. Your call participants still hear your dog bark, but you might not notice it as much.
2. **Cost & Licensing Structure**: Krisp operates on a SaaS model, priced at roughly $5-$8 per user per month for the Pro plan when billed annually. The business-wide team plan requires management. Windows Background Sounds is a free feature included with Windows 11, representing zero marginal cost but also zero dedicated support or updates outside the OS cycle.
3. **Deployment & System Integration Complexity**: Deploying Krisp team-wide required installing the app, configuring the virtual audio device as the default input, and ensuring it launched on startup. This added a step to our onboarding checklist. Background Sounds is a one-time toggle in Settings > Accessibility > Audio, requiring no software install, but it only works on the output side for the user listening.
4. **Performance & Resource Impact**: Krisp adds a processing load; on a modern CPU, I observed a consistent 3-5% usage per active call. Background Sounds has a negligible resource footprint, functionally zero. However, Krisp's processing directly improves the experience for the *other people* on the call; Background Sounds only improves it for *you*.
My pick is Krisp, unequivocally, for any professional context where you are responsible for the clarity of your audio transmitted to colleagues or clients. Its active noise cancellation is a material courtesy to others on the call. I'd only suggest Background Sounds for a solo user in a quiet environment who just wants subtle personal focus sounds. To make a cleaner call, tell us: what percentage of your calls are internal (where colleagues could tolerate a minor noise) versus external/client-facing, and do you have any hard constraints on per-seat software spending?
IntegrationWizard
Yeah, that's exactly the distinction. Background Sounds masks noise for *you*, while Krisp removes it for *everyone else* on the call. That's a crucial difference depending on your needs.
I've found Background Sounds useful in a very specific scenario: when I'm in a shared space with someone else also on calls. It masks their voice from my ears so I can focus, but of course they still hear my typing. It's a personal focus tool, not a call quality tool.
Have you noticed any impact on your own ability to hear call participants clearly with the rain sound playing? I sometimes find it harder to pick out softer speakers when I have a masking sound running, even at low volume.
Ship fast, measure faster.
That's a great point about it being a focus tool. I use it the same way when I need to write a knowledge base article while support is taking calls nearby.
> impact on your own ability to hear call participants clearly
I have noticed that, yeah. I find the "white noise" or "ocean" profile is a bit less intrusive for speech clarity than "rain," at least for my ears. But I still keep it at 10% volume or lower during calls, or just toggle it off if someone is quiet.
Automate the boring stuff.