Mopidy vs Tube Archivist
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted media servers options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Mopidy
Extensible music server that plays from many sources
VS
Tube Archivist
Self-hosted YouTube media server with metadata and search
| Feature | Mopidy | Tube Archivist |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Media Servers | Media Servers |
| License | Apache-2.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | Python | Python |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 2,048 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal | docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 8,553 | ★ 8,342 |
| First released | 2010 | 2021 |
| Replaces | Spotify | YouTube |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is Mopidy or Tube Archivist better?
Neither is universally better. Mopidy has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Mopidy and Tube Archivist free and open-source?
Yes. Mopidy is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Tube Archivist under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Mopidy and Tube Archivist with Docker?
Mopidy: yes. Tube Archivist: yes.