Text-to-speech (TTS) based on masked diffusion models (MDMs) achieves competitive zero-shot speech synthesis performance. Unlike autoregressive (AR) models, MDMs define a corruption process that maps clean speech-token sequences to masked maps and learn a reverse denoising process to recover the reference tokens. However, MDMs commit to intermediate predictions that cannot be revised in subsequent inference steps. Consequently, prediction errors accumulate and propagate, degrading synthesized speech quality. We present Revise-TTS, a single-stage framework that applies hierarchical binary quantization (HBQ) and generative refinement networks (GRN) to zero-shot speech generation. First, we replace finite scalar quantization (FSQ) with HBQ to introduce a scalable binary representation for speech tokens with an explicit coarse-to-fine structure. Second, GRN is trained to reconstruct the token sequence from a mixture of ground-truth and random tokens. During inference, iterative refinement enables self-correction by randomly discarding a small proportion of previously predicted tokens with new predictions. Experiments and ablation studies demonstrate that Revise-TTS achieves competitive zero-shot speech synthesis performance using HBQ. It can further be extended to any MDM-based TTS task as an alternative training and inference method.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Illustration of HBQ. Each round halves the selected quantization interval. For z=−0.113 , three rounds produce the bit sequence 011 , corresponding to the discrete index 3 .
Quantization
Testing set
SIM ↑
WER ↓
UTMOS ↑
HBQ [22]8
LS-PC
0.427
1.86
4.15
Seed-en
0.406
5.06
3.99
Seed-zh
0.576
1.83
2.78
HBQ [22]16
LS-PC
0.422
2.37
3.85
Seed-en
0.395
9.74
3.43
Seed-zh
0.598
2.71
2.46
Table 1: Comparison between FSQ and GRNind with different configurations. Best and second best are shown in bold and underline.
Config.
Mode
Testing set
SIM ↑
WER ↓
UTMOS ↑
[22]8
GRN-ind
LS-PC
0.427
1.86
4.15
Seed-en
0.406
5.06
3.99
Seed-zh
0.576
1.83
2.78
GRN-bit
LS-PC
0.382
2.15
3.94
Seed-en
0.366
12.71
3.73
Seed-zh
0.542
2.74
2.53
Table 2: Comparison between GRNind and GRNbit .
Codec
LS-PC
Seed-en
Seed-zh
SIM ↑
WER ↓
SIM ↑
WER ↓
SIM ↑
WER ↓
Higgs
0.877
2.33
0.904
2.33
0.903
1.20
XCodec 2.0 + FSQ
0.781
3.08
0.821
2.80
0.840
1.44
XCodec 2.0 + HBQ
0.764
3.60
0.802
3.12
0.830
1.92
Table 3: Comparison between codecs: Higgs, official checkpoint of XCodec 2.0 and XCodec 2.0 with HBQ.
Mode
Steps
LS-PC
Seed-en
Seed-zh
SIM ↑
WER ↓
SIM ↑
WER ↓
SIM ↑
WER ↓
Masking
100k
0.689
1.81
0.701
1.98
0.762
1.06
GRN
100k
0.646
1.80
0.637
2.50
0.719
1.27
OmniVoice
–
0.697
1.57
0.717
1.72
0.765
0.89
Table 4: Comparison of different decoding modes using the Higgs codec, fine-tuned on Emilia EN/ZH with 8 GPUs.
Model
Test set
SIM ↑
WER ↓
UTMOS ↑
CMOS ↑
GT
LS-PC
0.690
1.87%
4.01
0.00
Seed-en
0.734
2.14%
3.52
Seed-zh
0.755
1.25%
2.78
0.00
F5-TTS
LS-PC
0.655
1.89%
3.89
−0.30±1.69
Seed-en
0.664
1.85%
3.72
Seed-zh
0.750
1.53%
2.93
−0.47±1.81
Table 5: Objective and subjective evaluation results.