paint-brush
Zero-shot Text-to-Speech With Prompts of 1s, 3s 5s, and 10sby@fewshot

Zero-shot Text-to-Speech With Prompts of 1s, 3s 5s, and 10s

tldt arrow

Too Long; Didn't Read

We compare the performance of zero-shot TTS according to different prompt lengths of 1s, 3s 5s, and 10s.
featured image - Zero-shot Text-to-Speech With Prompts of 1s, 3s 5s, and 10s
The FewShot Prompting Publication  HackerNoon profile picture

Abstract and 1 Introduction

2 Related Work

2.1 Neural Codec Language Models and 2.2 Non-autoregressive Models

2.3 Diffusion Models and 2.4 Zero-shot Voice Cloning

3 Hierspeech++ and 3.1 Speech Representations

3.2 Hierarchical Speech Synthesizer

3.3 Text-to-Vec

3.4 Speech Super-resolution

3.5 Model Architecture

4 Speech Synthesis Tasks

4.1 Voice Conversion and 4.2 Text-to-Speech

4.3 Style Prompt Replication

5 Experiment and Result, and Dataset

5.2 Preprocessing and 5.3 Training

5.4 Evaluation Metrics

5.5 Ablation Study

5.6 Zero-shot Voice Conversion

5.7 High-diversity but High-fidelity Speech Synthesis

5.8 Zero-shot Text-to-Speech

5.9 Zero-shot Text-to-Speech with 1s Prompt

5.10 Speech Super-resolution

5.11 Additional Experiments with Other Baselines

6 Limitation and Quick Fix

7 Conclusion, Acknowledgement and References

5.9 Zero-shot Text-to-Speech with 1s Prompt

We compare the performance of zero-shot TTS according to different prompt lengths of 1s, 3s 5s, and 10s. For evaluation, we use all samples over 10s from the test-clean subset of LibriTTS (1,002 samples), and we randomly slice a speech for each prompt length. TABLE 9 shows that our model has a robust style transfer performance using 3s, 5s, and 10s prompts. However, using 1s prompt could not synthesize a speech well. We can discuss two problems: 1) we do not consider an unvoice part during slicing the speech so some prompts contain only a small portion of speech in their prompt, and we also found that there is no voice part in prompts. 2) we utilize a full-length of prompt during training so synthesizing long sentences may require a long speech prompt for robust speech synthesis, specifically in the prosody encoder. To reduce this problem, we propose a style prompt replication as in section 4.3, and this style prompt replication significantly improves the robustness of TTS. By replicating the prompt like DNA replication, we simply extend a style prompt by n× and the replicated prompt is fed to the style encoder. This simple trick for style transfer significantly improves the robustness and similarity. With HierSpeech++ using SPR, we could synthesize a speech with only 1s speech prompt even in a zero-shot TTS scenario.


Fig. 8: Spectrograms of GT and speech super-resolution results with AudioSR and SpeechSR (Ours).


TABLE 10: Results of Speech super-resolution on the VCTKdataset.


This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 DEED license.

Authors:

(1) Sang-Hoon Lee, Fellow, IEEE with the Department of Artificial Intelligence, Korea University, Seoul 02841, South Korea;

(2) Ha-Yeong Choi, Fellow, IEEE with the Department of Artificial Intelligence, Korea University, Seoul 02841, South Korea;

(3) Seung-Bin Kim, Fellow, IEEE with the Department of Artificial Intelligence, Korea University, Seoul 02841, South Korea;

(4) Seong-Whan Lee, Fellow, IEEE with the Department of Artificial Intelligence, Korea University, Seoul 02841, South Korea and a Corresponding author.