Updated: July 2026 ยท 7 min read
The two biggest names in paid playlist and curator pitching, compared side by side. Both work โ the right pick depends on your budget, timeline, and target audience's geography.
| SubmitHub | Groover | |
|---|---|---|
| Currency / model | USD credits, pay-per-pitch | Grooviz (โโฌ1 each), pay-per-pitch |
| Entry cost | Small packs from ~$10 | Minimum pack ~โฌ46 |
| Cost per submission | 1-5 credits (~$1-3+) depending on curator tier | 2 Grooviz standard, 4-6 for top curators |
| Response guarantee | 48 hours | 7 days |
| Missed-response refund | Written feedback guaranteed regardless | Automatic credit refund if no response |
| Free credits | 1-2 free credits/day for activity | Not offered |
| Curator base | Global, large blog + playlist network | 3,000+, Europe-weighted |
| Includes blogs? | Yes | Yes, plus radio and labels |
These aren't mutually exclusive โ many artists run both platforms per release, especially once free-platform submissions are exhausted. SubmitHub for speed and a US/global reach, Groover for European curators and the larger network. The overlap in curators between the two is small enough that running both isn't wasted spend.
Song Pitch tracks submissions and spend across both platforms โ and every other one โ in a single log, so comparing what actually worked isn't a manual spreadsheet job.
Install Song Pitch โ FreeNeither platform is objectively "better" โ SubmitHub wins on speed and low entry cost, Groover wins on network breadth and automatic refunds. If budget allows, running both across a release covers the most ground; if not, pick based on the response-time and geography factors above.