SnapcastvsTube Archivist
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Snapcast | Tube Archivist | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 72/100 | 72/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 14 in Audio Streaming | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 8 039 | 8 552 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +149 | +83 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 1 | 6 |
| Latest release | v0.35.0 · 10 Mar 2026 | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | GPL-3.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | C | Python |
Which one should you pick?
Snapcast and Tube Archivist score the same (72/100), so the choice comes down to the details below.
Tube Archivist ships more often: 6 stable releases in the past year, against 1 for Snapcast.
If you want the quickest setup, Snapcast is easier to run; Tube Archivist needs more configuration.
Snapcast details →Tube Archivist details →
Swap a project
Keep Snapcast, compare it with
Keep Tube Archivist, compare it with