sw-voice/swamiji-tail-artifact-clips
Reported end-of-clip artifact: the raw clips The exact phrases reported as having "a weird sound at the end", straight out of the production engine, three independent draws each. No processing at all — this is what the model produced. phrase text doingwell I am doing well, thank you. hereif also I am here if you need anything. hereforyou I am here for you. welcome You are very welcome! glad Glad you think so! scope I can only answer about Sri Ganapati… See the full description on the dataset page: https://huggingface.co/datasets/sw-voice/swamiji-tail-artifact-clips.
Reported end-of-clip artifact: the raw clips
The exact phrases reported as having "a weird sound at the end", straight out of the production engine, three independent draws each. No processing at all — this is what the model produced.
Model sw-voice/swamiji-voxcpm2-ft-src0-lr0.0001-10ep-deva, cfg_value=1.5, inference_timesteps=10, 48 kHz mono, tail trim disabled.
What has been ruled out
And a correction
The metric used to count "dirty" draws — loudest transient in the trailing silence above −60 dBFS — was measuring the natural decay of the final phoneme, not a click:
... -32 -36 -39 -41 -47 -53 | -92 -93 -91 smooth release, then silenceSo the dirty-rate figures reported earlier (9/24, 14/20, 4/20) were largely false positives. final_300ms_db_* here is the raw dB sketch of each clip's last 300 ms at 10 ms resolution, so the decay shape is visible per clip instead of being collapsed into a single number that has already proven misleading.
An attempted fix that trimmed the tail was reverted: it targeted this non-artifact and removed real phoneme release, and tail_trim: false is now the default.
What is still open
Whether the sound is in these clips at all. If they sound clean here but the live agent does not, the artifact is downstream of the engine — in the agent, the LiveKit track, or playback — and not in the TTS.
