Hello,I am not entirely sure which version of the HTS demo or STRAIGHT you are using, as I don't think the demo normally sounds like this. Regardless, when you say you use the exact same data for hts_engine and STRAIGHT synthesis, you mean you are not using mixed excitation at all?In any case, 1mix / 2mix / stc will produce different parameters from what hts-engine is generating, so if you want to have a fair comparison, you are probably better off dumping the filter / excitation feature coefficients from hts_engine using the -om / -of parameters, and do the synthesis from the generated coefficients using STRAIGHT.If you still have problems with the synthesis using the parameters generated by HTS-engine, then probably you are using a bad version of STRAIGHT.If you don't have problems with the synthesis, then it is likely something wrong happened during model training, or, maybe as Rasmus mentioned, during the feature extraction.Regards,Blaise2016-03-25 14:21 GMT+00:00 Erica Cooper <ecooper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:Hi,We've started using STRAIGHT for synthesis, and we've found that for our data, it sounds worse than synthesis with hts-engine, despite the STRAIGHT SLT demo voice sounding very nice. We are using the exact same data with both STRAIGHT and hts-engine synthesis, but the STRAIGHT-synthesized utterances sound 'hoarse.' 1mix, 2mix, and stc are all not so good. I was wondering whether there is any advice for which parameters might be changed to solve this.original hts-engine voice: http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~ecooper/audio/eng_alice01.wavSTRAIGHT 1mix: http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~ecooper/audio/1mix_alice01.wavSTRAIGHT 2mix: http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~ecooper/audio/2mix_alice01.wav
Thanks,
Erica