I purchased the yearly package with 8000 credits. Managed to make about 6 good music videos by simply adding a photo and a mp3 file. Noticed the program takes anywhere from 10 to 18 minutes to create a video. The video doesn’t really follow the story told by the lyrics. AI kept using the same or similar outfit. The lip singing voice is slightly off. In a few videos AI either added an extra hand or arm or object out of nothing. When placed inside a car, the scene or angle seemed backwards or something weird in the matrix. The developers have the concept right, but need to ensure things look normal and not from a science fiction movie. Overall, pictures and scenes look amazing.

If you’re considering Sondo as an AI video generation tool for anything beyond casual fun, it is not quite ready yet. The app has real potential, especially for turning music into quick videos, but it needs several more rounds of serious development before the current pricing feels justified.Lip-sync remains one of the biggest weaknesses. Characters’ mouths often fail to match the vocals properly. Sometimes the alignment looks decent, but more often the AI adds random or mismatched movements that pull attention away from the performance. On the visual side, the output frequently feels like a blend of two or three different generation models, with noticeable hallucinations, artifacts, and inconsistencies running through the entire video. It can be entertaining to experiment with, but it does not reach professional or even semi-professional quality.For pure entertainment, you can usually get better or more controllable results by creating individual clips or images with something like Grok’s video tools and then stitching them together yourself, often at a lower effective cost.The credit system also feels expensive for the output you receive. A single music video can consume around 1,500 credits, while lower-tier plans provide far fewer credits than that burn rate would suggest (for example, base plans around $10 for 800 credits, higher ones $30 for 3,000). If they reduced the entry price to about $9.99 per month and increased credits to something closer to 6,400, it would offer much stronger value. That kind of change could attract far more casual users, generate more revenue, and speed up the development of needed upgrades.Bottom line: Keep an eye on Sondo and check its progress in a year or two. It has the potential to become genuinely useful. For now, I would hold off on subscribing unless you are only dabbling for amusement and do not mind the current rough edges.

I’ve made nine videos with Sondo, and every single one of them has had the same problem: it can’t keep my identity consistent. I upload a picture of myself — a clear, accurate photo — and somehow the system still turns me into a white guy at different points in the videos. There’s no excuse for that. If I’m giving the platform my actual face, how does it depict me as anything else?The lip‑syncing is always off, the movement never matches the rhythm, and the overall animation feels sloppy. But the worst moment was in a video I made for my daughter. A personal, emotional song — and instead of showing me, the Black father she knows, the video randomly morphs into a sobbing white man. That’s not just inaccurate. It’s disrespectful.On top of all that, fixing their mistakes costs extra. Every correction, every regeneration, every attempt to fix what their system broke requires more money. I bought the subscription thinking it would give me flexibility, but the second I tried to adjust anything, I hit paywalls. And when I asked for a refund? They refused.My entire experience with Sondo has been frustrating, expensive, and honestly disappointing. I strongly urge anyone considering it to stay away. It’s not worth the money, the time, or the disrespect that comes with being misrepresented in your own art.I don’t see where I could add photos but if I could I certainly would.

One Star Deeply DisappointedIt takes a great deal for me to describe a product this bluntly but this app earns itThe pricing model is not merely expensive it is aggressively disproportionate to the value provided Users are funneled toward high cost subscriptions before having any meaningful opportunity to evaluate functionality quality or legitimacy There is no substantive demonstration of capability no transparent breakdown of deliverables and no defensible justification for the financial demandCharging premium rates without premium substance is not bold innovation it is exploitation of trustWhat is most troubling is the opacity You are asked to invest first and discover later if there is anything to discover at all That is not how ethical software operates A confident product invites scrutiny This one avoids itAn app that commands high tier pricing must meet high tier standards Clear feature transparency Verifiable performance Trial access or demonstrable output Measurable valueNone of those standards are convincingly met hereAt best this feels unfinished At worst it feels strategically structured to monetize curiosity rather than deliver substanceConsumers deserve clarity They deserve proof before payment They deserve a product that respects their intelligenceUntil transparency accountability and genuine value are implemented I cannot recommend this app and I strongly caution others to approach it with skepticismDisappointed Informed Unwilling to normalize this model