{"observation":{"id":"8cbbaf13-e580-4da0-b7b6-f8d82727a9a9","tool":"fish-audio","tool_name":"Fish Audio","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":"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.","evidence_state":"verified","source":null,"artifacts":[{"url":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-fishaudio-highquality-input-37844222acf0.wav","role":"input","alt":null},{"url":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-high-quality-input-output-1-868896ae57ec.mp3","role":"output","alt":null},{"url":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-high-quality-input-output-2-c54b7c11adfa.mp3","role":"output","alt":null},{"url":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-fishaudio-output-high-quality-016538dc1b5e.mp3","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":"fish-audio","tool_url":"https://aidemos.com/tools/fish-audio","permalink":"https://aidemos.com/evidence/8cbbaf13-e580-4da0-b7b6-f8d82727a9a9","api_url":"https://ai.aidemos.com/v1/observations/8cbbaf13-e580-4da0-b7b6-f8d82727a9a9"},"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":"26a0a7d9-d7d9-4bf8-b763-04b96a9ee7fc","tool":"elevenlabs","tool_name":"ElevenLabs","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.","artifact_count":8,"thumbnail":"https://d3epheqghktydj.cloudfront.net/research-media-elevenlabs-highquality-input-4dac94a57d04.wav","evidence_url":"https://aidemos.com/evidence/26a0a7d9-d7d9-4bf8-b763-04b96a9ee7fc"},{"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":"4257691f-67f2-4ab1-beb7-c82a2b63cab9","criterion":"naturalness","criterion_name":"Naturalness & Human Quality","rank_role":"decisive","verdict":"worked","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"Produces natural-sounding delivery on clean input: the first high-quality output had genuinely human pitch, pauses, and overall delivery, and the second was reported as equally human-like.","artifact_count":2,"evidence_url":"https://aidemos.com/evidence/4257691f-67f2-4ab1-beb7-c82a2b63cab9"},{"id":"e5f193fd-54a7-4c7b-bcb4-a7615a65bfd6","criterion":"pronunciation-accuracy","criterion_name":"Pronunciation Accuracy","rank_role":"decisive","verdict":"mixed","score":null,"score_total":null,"note":"Can still make isolated pronunciation mistakes on clean English input: one high-quality output had a single mispronounced word, about 2–3% of the generation, while the paired output had no such issue.","artifact_count":2,"evidence_url":"https://aidemos.com/evidence/e5f193fd-54a7-4c7b-bcb4-a7615a65bfd6"}],"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":"26a0a7d9-d7d9-4bf8-b763-04b96a9ee7fc","tool":"elevenlabs","tool_name":"ElevenLabs","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."},{"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."}]}