HTTP vs HTTP Streaming vs Websockets
What should you use?
Choosing the Right Protocol for Your TTS Application: HTTP, HTTP Streaming, or WebSocket?
If you’re integrating Waves TTS into your application, one important decision is how to connect to the TTS engine. We support three protocols: HTTP, HTTP Streaming, and WebSocket, each tailored to different use cases. In this post, we’ll break down the strengths of each and help you choose the best fit for your needs.
HTTP: Best for Simplicity and Short Requests
What it is:
A classic REST-style interaction. You send a complete request (e.g., the full text to be converted to speech), and receive the synthesized audio as a downloadable response.
When to use it:
- You have short or moderate-length texts.
- You want a simple integration, such as from a browser, mobile app, or backend job.
- You don’t need real-time feedback or streaming audio.
Pros and Cons:
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Simple to integrate with standard HTTP tools | Full audio is returned only after complete synthesis |
| Easy to debug and monitor | Not suitable for real-time or long-form audio |
| Stateless; good for serverless environments | Reconnect needed for each request |
| Works well with caching and CDNs | Higher latency compared to streaming methods |
HTTP Streaming: Best for Faster Playback Without Complexity
What it is:
An enhancement of standard HTTP. The client sends a complete request, but the server streams back the audio as it’s being generated, no need to wait for the full file.
When to use it:
- You want faster playback with lower perceived latency.
- You send full input text but need audio to start as soon as possible.
- You want low-latency audio delivery without handling connection persistence.
Pros and Cons:
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Lower latency than regular HTTP | Only one-way communication (client → server) |
| Compatible with standard HTTP infrastructure | Full input must still be sent before synthesis starts |
| Audio starts playing as it’s generated | No partial or live input updates |
| Easy to adopt with minimal changes | Slightly more complex than basic HTTP |
WebSocket: Best for Real-Time, Interactive Applications
What it is:
A full-duplex, persistent connection that allows two-way communication between the client and server. You can send text dynamically and receive streaming audio back continuously.
When to use it:
- You need real-time, interactive TTS responses.
- Input is dynamic or arrives in chunks (e.g., live typing, conversation).
- You want persistent connections with minimal overhead per message.
Pros and Cons:
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Ultra low latency | More complex to implement and manage |
| Supports real-time, chunked input and responses | Requires persistent connection management |
| Bi-directional communication | Not ideal for simple or infrequent tasks |
| Great for chatbots, live agents, or dictation apps | May require additional libraries or WebSocket support |