Murf API vs. Play.ht

The best way to compare Murf API vs. Play.ht: audio samples, features, plans, pricing, and more.

Get Started for Free →

Live Demo

Non-Fiction

Fiction

News

Blog

Conversation

0/250

Speed

0 s

Filesize

0 kb

Murf API

Deploy high quality voices for your apps, website and other services at scale.

Play.ht

Transform written content into high-quality, lifelike voiceovers with AI-powered text-to-speech technology.

Voice Quality

Mean Opinion Score

Fiction

N/A

Non-Fiction

N/A

Conversation

N/A

Mean Opinion Score

Fiction

4.17

Non-Fiction

4.17

Conversation

3.48

Mean Opinion Score (MOS) is a numerical measure that represents the perceived quality of audio samples, commonly used in evaluating text-to-speech systems. The score ranges from 1 to 5, with 1 indicating poor quality and 5 signifying excellent quality. These scores are derived from comprehensive, professionally-conducted evaluations, and are anonymized to ensure unbiased results.

Features

Voice Cloning

Multi-lingual

Per-word Timestamps

Pitch Control

Speed Control

Phone Formats (e.g. pcm_mulaw)

Voice Cloning

Multi-lingual

Per-word Timestamps

Pitch Control

Speed Control

Phone Formats (e.g. pcm_mulaw)

Both Murf API and Play.ht offer a range of features tailored for diverse text-to-speech applications, including voice cloning, multi-lingual support, and compatibility with phone formats.
However, Murf API distinguishes itself with pitch control, while Play.ht offers unique features such as per-word timestamps.
The choice between the two services may hinge on specific feature requirements like pitch adjustment or detailed timing control for applications.

Pricing & Plans

API Subscription

$3000/year

12M characters (per year)

Free

$0/mo

12,500 characters

Creator

$39/mo

250,000 characters

Unlimited

$99/mo

2.5M characters limit

For those seeking cost-effective text-to-speech services, Play.ht emerges as the superior choice across various usage levels, from its unbeatable free plan for small-scale projects to its highly economical unlimited plan for extensive needs.
Murf API, with its singular annual plan, offers a straightforward option but doesn't match the flexibility and value provided by Play.ht's tiered pricing structure.
Overall, Play.ht caters to a broader range of budgets and project scales, making it the go-to option for users prioritizing affordability.

Customer Reviews

3.8 out of 5

Average of 819 ratings from leading review sites.

Murf API generally receives praise for its variety of natural-sounding voices, user-friendly interface, and quick setup, making it a popular choice for voiceover projects. Customers appreciate the diverse voice options and the ability to customize speech patterns. However, there are significant concerns about the pricing model, which many find too expensive and restrictive in terms of voice generation limits. Additionally, there are complaints about customer service and misleading information regarding free trials and subscriptions. Issues with billing practices and refund policies are also frequently mentioned, causing distrust among some users.

Voice quality

User interface

Setup

Voice variety

Customization

Pricing

Customer service

Billing practices

Refund policy

4.6 out of 5

Average of 293 ratings from leading review sites.

Play.ht is highly praised for its diverse and realistic voice options, ease of use, and excellent customer support. Users appreciate the ability to create audio content efficiently, especially for multilingual and varied voice needs. However, some users note issues with natural inflection, especially with complex terms, and express concerns about the pricing structure and occasional technical glitches. The platform's continuous updates and addition of new features are well-received, though some desire more control over voice modulation and better integration with certain plugins.

Voice diversity

Ease of use

Customer support

Pricing

Natural inflection

Technical reliability

Compare Alternatives

Murf API vs. Unreal Speech

Murf API vs. Amazon Polly

Murf API vs. ElevenLabs

Murf API vs. Google Cloud Text-to-Speech

Murf API vs. Microsoft Azure AI Speech

Murf API vs. OpenAI Text-to-Speech

Murf API vs. Neets.ai

Murf API vs. IBM Watson

Murf API vs. Resemble.AI

Murf API vs. LOVO AI

Murf API vs. Deepgram Aura

Play.ht vs. Unreal Speech

Play.ht vs. Amazon Polly

Play.ht vs. ElevenLabs

Play.ht vs. Google Cloud Text-to-Speech

Play.ht vs. Microsoft Azure AI Speech

Play.ht vs. OpenAI Text-to-Speech

Play.ht vs. Neets.ai

Play.ht vs. IBM Watson

Play.ht vs. Resemble.AI

Play.ht vs. LOVO AI

Play.ht vs. Deepgram Aura

Summary

When comparing Murf API and Play.ht for text-to-speech services, Play.ht stands out for its affordability and flexible pricing plans, catering to a wide range of budgets and project sizes.
While both platforms offer essential features like voice cloning and multi-lingual support, Murf API provides pitch control, and Play.ht offers per-word timestamps, highlighting their suitability for different user needs.
Ultimately, the choice between Murf API and Play.ht will depend on the user's specific requirements, including voice quality, feature preferences, and budget constraints.

Looking for a better alternative to Murf API & Play.ht?

Try Unreal Speech! You get 250,000 free characters every month.

Get Started for Free →

Murf API vs. Play.ht

Live Demo

Murf API

Play.ht

Voice Quality

Murf API Samples

Play.ht Samples

Features

Murf API Features

Play.ht Features

Features - Conclusion

Pricing & Plans

Murf API Pricing

Play.ht Pricing

Pricing & Plans - Conclusion

Customer Reviews

Murf API Reviews

Play.ht Reviews

Compare Alternatives

Murf API Alternatives

Play.ht Alternatives

Summary

Looking for a better alternative to Murf API & Play.ht?

Try Unreal Speech! You get 250,000 free characters every month.

Recent Posts