# AudioMuse-AI vs Tube 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).

## Details

- [AudioMuse-AI](https://selfhost.directory/project/audiomuse-ai) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/audiomuse-ai.md)
- [Tube Archivist](https://selfhost.directory/project/tube-archivist) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/tube-archivist.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/audiomuse-ai-vs-tube-archivist