{"observation":{"id":"26a0a7d9-d7d9-4bf8-b763-04b96a9ee7fc","tool":"elevenlabs","tool_name":"ElevenLabs","criterion":"voice-match-accuracy","criterion_name":"Voice Match Accuracy","criterion_definition":"Whether the generated voice actually sounds like the original speaker, including tone, pitch, rhythm, and identity.","criterion_evidence_type":"transformation","criterion_rank_role":"decisive","criterion_rank_role_reason":"This ranking is fundamentally about whether the generated speech still sounds like the target speaker, so identity match is core. (3 of 3 judges)","scenario":"high-quality-voice-sample","scenario_name":"High-Quality Voice Sample","group_tag":"voice-cloning","scenario_description":"A clean studio-quality voice recording without background noise, used to test the best-case ceiling for voice cloning, pronunciation stability, and naturalness.","modality":"mixed","input_text":"Removing objects from videos used to take hours of manual editing. Now AI tools claim to do it in minutes. So we tested five AI video object removers to find the most reliable one. We used the same three inputs across all the tools for a fair comparison. ABC Labs showed unstable tracking and heavy distortion. Media.io offered fast processing but unusable outputs. PhotoRoom mostly relied on blur masking instead of real reconstruction. Runway delivered the cleanest removals with the most stable tracking and realistic scene reconstruction. Here's exactly how we tested it.","input_artifact_refs":[{"alt":null,"url":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-heygen-input-high-quality-884aedc4e603.wav","role":"input","filename":"heygen-input-high-quality.wav"}],"stresses":["Maximum voice-cloning accuracy","Naturalness with optimal source quality","Long-form consistency","Pronunciation stability","Voice preservation under ideal conditions"],"verdict":"mixed","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"Improves source resemblance only modestly: the report rates the clone at approximately 40–50% similarity, says the voice remains noticeably polished and processed, and notes that speaker identity is only partially preserved.","evidence_state":"verified","source":null,"artifacts":[{"url":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-elevenlabs-highquality-input-4dac94a57d04.wav","role":"input","alt":null},{"url":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-elevenlabs-output-high-quality-variant-1-9163a3782531.mp3","role":"output","alt":null},{"url":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-elevenlabs-output-high-quality-variant-2-6ff42b606618.mp3","role":"output","alt":null},{"url":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-voice-sample-high-quality-b0e555f0f9ae.wav","role":"input","alt":null},{"url":"https://cdn.futuresmart.ai/public/aidemos/54c0654b67bc4ce799c51713f8177ba3.wav?v=1","role":"output","alt":null},{"url":"https://cdn.futuresmart.ai/public/aidemos/0963535b7af14e01a1b262c8e650fd99.wav?v=1","role":"output","alt":null},{"url":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-elevenlabs-output-high-quality-bd3ece2a94db.mp3","role":"output","alt":null},{"url":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-elevenlabs-input-high-quality-882bf5708ca5.wav","role":"output","alt":null}],"run_id":"46222c41-0046-41cc-bfaa-5f7ba6aa4933","study_title":"Clone Your Voice and Generate Voiceover from Text","study_kind":"generation","research_task":"86ba42bx1","tested_at":null,"completeness":"input-and-output","input":{"state":"text-and-files","text":"Removing objects from videos used to take hours of manual editing. Now AI tools claim to do it in minutes. So we tested five AI video object removers to find the most reliable one. We used the same three inputs across all the tools for a fair comparison. ABC Labs showed unstable tracking and heavy distortion. Media.io offered fast processing but unusable outputs. PhotoRoom mostly relied on blur masking instead of real reconstruction. Runway delivered the cleanest removals with the most stable tracking and realistic scene reconstruction. Here's exactly how we tested it.","files":[{"url":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-heygen-input-high-quality-884aedc4e603.wav","filename":"heygen-input-high-quality.wav","alt":"High-Quality Voice Sample","role":"input"}],"modality":"mixed","stresses":["Maximum voice-cloning accuracy","Naturalness with optimal source quality","Long-form consistency","Pronunciation stability","Voice preservation under ideal conditions"]},"tool_page_slug":"elevenlabs","tool_url":"https://aidemos.com/tools/elevenlabs","permalink":"https://aidemos.com/evidence/26a0a7d9-d7d9-4bf8-b763-04b96a9ee7fc","api_url":"https://ai.aidemos.com/v1/observations/26a0a7d9-d7d9-4bf8-b763-04b96a9ee7fc"},"peers":[{"id":"e536c0ef-9074-43e8-998e-b304828aeb04","tool":"aiclonevoicefree-com","tool_name":"AICloneVoiceFree.com","verdict":"worked","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"The cloned voice closely matches the clean source speaker, with the report calling the match about 95% and saying tone and vocal characteristics were closely preserved.","artifact_count":2,"thumbnail":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-vocalai-input-high-quality-1c369166e815.wav","evidence_url":"https://aidemos.com/evidence/e536c0ef-9074-43e8-998e-b304828aeb04"},{"id":"8cbbaf13-e580-4da0-b7b6-f8d82727a9a9","tool":"fish-audio","tool_name":"Fish Audio","verdict":"worked","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"Recreates a clean studio voice with full identity match: the first high-quality output was described as fully matching the uploaded input, and the second stayed equally strong.","artifact_count":4,"thumbnail":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-fishaudio-highquality-input-37844222acf0.wav","evidence_url":"https://aidemos.com/evidence/8cbbaf13-e580-4da0-b7b6-f8d82727a9a9"},{"id":"27d76bf7-8e01-4067-ab1a-0aaa49bec331","tool":"heygen","tool_name":"Heygen","verdict":"mixed","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"The best high-quality clone still reached only about 70% similarity to the original voice, so it remained below a strong match despite being the best of the three.","artifact_count":2,"thumbnail":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-heygen-output-high-quality-variant-3-bes-3b44d7550666.wav","evidence_url":"https://aidemos.com/evidence/27d76bf7-8e01-4067-ab1a-0aaa49bec331"},{"id":"14343c6c-c79f-4fc3-9d1e-fc972c929209","tool":"inworld","tool_name":"Inworld","verdict":"mixed","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"On the clean studio sample, the clone did not match the source precisely and sounded more polished and balanced, suggesting the model optimized for pleasant delivery over exact identity.","artifact_count":2,"thumbnail":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-inworld-highquality-input-5a7af892998c.wav","evidence_url":"https://aidemos.com/evidence/14343c6c-c79f-4fc3-9d1e-fc972c929209"},{"id":"b9f0a7be-3871-41aa-bb76-0d5c5562c30c","tool":"minimax","tool_name":"MiniMax","verdict":"mixed","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"Even with a clean source recording, matching accuracy still was not fully there; the report rates this run as Fair (~35–45%) and says the output leaned softer than the original voice.","artifact_count":7,"thumbnail":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-minimax-highquality-input-058115a62ccc.wav","evidence_url":"https://aidemos.com/evidence/b9f0a7be-3871-41aa-bb76-0d5c5562c30c"},{"id":"a928a78c-e71f-4cc2-9000-714d3622ff79","tool":"speechify","tool_name":"Speechify","verdict":"struggled","score":40.0,"score_total":100.0,"note":"The clean source only matched modestly, at about 40% similarity, with roughly 60% of the output sounding noticeably different from the original.","artifact_count":2,"thumbnail":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-speechify-highquality-input-cd6fe714e081.wav","evidence_url":"https://aidemos.com/evidence/a928a78c-e71f-4cc2-9000-714d3622ff79"},{"id":"8167b0ac-f9dd-4ff4-aab8-d1bbda394f44","tool":"topmediai-voice-cloning","tool_name":"TopMediai Voice Cloning","verdict":"failed","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"Gen+ reduces similarity to the clean source voice by shifting toward a feminine tone, so speaker representation is inaccurate.","artifact_count":2,"thumbnail":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-topmediai-highquality-input-6c26a9323e7b.wav","evidence_url":"https://aidemos.com/evidence/8167b0ac-f9dd-4ff4-aab8-d1bbda394f44"},{"id":"17d6e619-374f-40bd-af46-c8d70522df45","tool":"uberduck","tool_name":"Uberduck","verdict":"failed","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"Cleaner source audio did not materially improve identity matching; the clone still did not closely track the original voice.","artifact_count":3,"thumbnail":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-high-quality-input-recording-f326629d7802.mp4","evidence_url":"https://aidemos.com/evidence/17d6e619-374f-40bd-af46-c8d70522df45"},{"id":"e71e3f67-5a4f-46d3-acea-6bac6c6ceb8f","tool":"vocalai","tool_name":"VocalAI","verdict":"struggled","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"Even with a clean studio sample, similarity stayed at only about 10–15%, so the cleaner input produced minimal improvement in identity preservation.","artifact_count":3,"thumbnail":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-vocalai-highquality-input-d2d56f461f81.wav","evidence_url":"https://aidemos.com/evidence/e71e3f67-5a4f-46d3-acea-6bac6c6ceb8f"}],"other_criteria":[{"id":"44e04da3-764d-4c4f-9b78-58fbdcfe7fd9","criterion":"long-form-consistency","criterion_name":"Long-Form Consistency","rank_role":"decisive","verdict":"worked","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"Keeps voice stability across extended scripts and is described as good for long-form narration, with no reported degradation over longer passages.","artifact_count":3,"evidence_url":"https://aidemos.com/evidence/44e04da3-764d-4c4f-9b78-58fbdcfe7fd9"},{"id":"b37ecb0b-4316-4f1c-a17f-6f589943e44a","criterion":"naturalness","criterion_name":"Naturalness & Human Quality","rank_role":"decisive","verdict":"worked","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"Sounds smoother and more human-like than the noisy-source run, though pacing inconsistencies still appear with occasional fast and slow delivery.","artifact_count":3,"evidence_url":"https://aidemos.com/evidence/b37ecb0b-4316-4f1c-a17f-6f589943e44a"},{"id":"a5510a96-7de7-461e-b9d0-fb42048de7a3","criterion":"pronunciation-accuracy","criterion_name":"Pronunciation Accuracy","rank_role":"decisive","verdict":"worked","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"Pronounces words correctly in the long-form English output, with pronunciation reported as stable across the generated script.","artifact_count":3,"evidence_url":"https://aidemos.com/evidence/a5510a96-7de7-461e-b9d0-fb42048de7a3"}],"appears_in":[{"page_type":"ranking","slug":"voice-cloning-tools","title":"Best AI Tools to Clone Your Voice and Generate Voiceovers from Text","url":"https://aidemos.com/best/voice-cloning-tools","binding":"run"}],"same_scenario":[{"id":"e536c0ef-9074-43e8-998e-b304828aeb04","tool":"aiclonevoicefree-com","tool_name":"AICloneVoiceFree.com","verdict":"worked","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"The cloned voice closely matches the clean source speaker, with the report calling the match about 95% and saying tone and vocal characteristics were closely preserved."},{"id":"8cbbaf13-e580-4da0-b7b6-f8d82727a9a9","tool":"fish-audio","tool_name":"Fish Audio","verdict":"worked","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"Recreates a clean studio voice with full identity match: the first high-quality output was described as fully matching the uploaded input, and the second stayed equally strong."},{"id":"27d76bf7-8e01-4067-ab1a-0aaa49bec331","tool":"heygen","tool_name":"Heygen","verdict":"mixed","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"The best high-quality clone still reached only about 70% similarity to the original voice, so it remained below a strong match despite being the best of the three."},{"id":"14343c6c-c79f-4fc3-9d1e-fc972c929209","tool":"inworld","tool_name":"Inworld","verdict":"mixed","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"On the clean studio sample, the clone did not match the source precisely and sounded more polished and balanced, suggesting the model optimized for pleasant delivery over exact identity."},{"id":"b9f0a7be-3871-41aa-bb76-0d5c5562c30c","tool":"minimax","tool_name":"MiniMax","verdict":"mixed","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"Even with a clean source recording, matching accuracy still was not fully there; the report rates this run as Fair (~35–45%) and says the output leaned softer than the original voice."},{"id":"a928a78c-e71f-4cc2-9000-714d3622ff79","tool":"speechify","tool_name":"Speechify","verdict":"struggled","score":40.0,"score_total":100.0,"note":"The clean source only matched modestly, at about 40% similarity, with roughly 60% of the output sounding noticeably different from the original."},{"id":"8167b0ac-f9dd-4ff4-aab8-d1bbda394f44","tool":"topmediai-voice-cloning","tool_name":"TopMediai Voice Cloning","verdict":"failed","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"Gen+ reduces similarity to the clean source voice by shifting toward a feminine tone, so speaker representation is inaccurate."},{"id":"17d6e619-374f-40bd-af46-c8d70522df45","tool":"uberduck","tool_name":"Uberduck","verdict":"failed","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"Cleaner source audio did not materially improve identity matching; the clone still did not closely track the original voice."},{"id":"e71e3f67-5a4f-46d3-acea-6bac6c6ceb8f","tool":"vocalai","tool_name":"VocalAI","verdict":"struggled","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"Even with a clean studio sample, similarity stayed at only about 10–15%, so the cleaner input produced minimal improvement in identity preservation."}]}