Play.ht vs. ReadSpeaker speechCloud API

Play.ht is generally suited for almost all text-to-speech needs. If you wanted clear and realistic audio, Play.ht was really good for that. However, the main challenge it had was its payment model. In our experience, from paying roughly $500 for our package, they jumped the cost to $10,000 and justified it by saying we should not have been paying that low.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

It was very simple to use and easy to learn for the most part. The biggest challenge in using it was that you would need to know how to use the International Phonetic Alphabet to get the precise tone that you wanted the tool to make. This was easier said than done since not everyone could write in that way easily. That said, knowing IPA was not essential.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

Overall, they do roughly the same thing. I switched out of Play.ht into NaturalReader because, in my experience, NaturalReader had clearer pricing models. In terms of functionality, they weren't much different. I'd recommend NaturalReader more since it is simpler to subscribe to them and start rather than use Play.ht and be confused about their pricing model.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info