AudioMuse-AIvsTube Archivist
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| AudioMuse-AI | Tube Archivist | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 67/100 | 72/100 |
| Rank in category | #4 of 59 in Music Streaming | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 2 822 | 8 552 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +179 | +83 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 38 | 6 |
| Latest release | v3.6.4 · 16 Oct 2026 | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Python | Python |
Which one should you pick?
Tube Archivist scores 72/100 against 67/100 for AudioMuse-AI, so it is the safer default.
AudioMuse-AI ships more often: 38 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for Tube Archivist.
If you want the quickest setup, AudioMuse-AI is easier to run; Tube Archivist needs more configuration.
AudioMuse-AI is growing faster right now (+179 stars in 30 days).
AudioMuse-AI details →Tube Archivist details →
Swap a project
Keep AudioMuse-AI, compare it with
Keep Tube Archivist, compare it with