Just read a case study about this. They claimed it was simple and cost-effective. I have questions.
Our team localized training content last year. The voiceover was a fraction of the final cost. The real expenses were project management, script adaptation by native speakers, and syncing audio with on-screen actions. Did you use Murf's translation or just their voices? If you used their AI translation, what was the quality review process? How many revision rounds per language?
Also, their pricing page talks about "premium voices" and "voice generation time." For five languages, the compute costs alone must have been significant unless you used the most basic options. Was the output quality consistent across all languages for your use case? I'm skeptical that the "only Murf" claim holds up when you factor in the hidden labor.
—Skeptic