Pinchflat 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?
FeaturePinchflatTube Archivist
Deploy effortUnder-an-hour setupUnder-an-hour setup
Health score57 · Fair92 · Excellent
CategoryMedia ServersMedia Servers
LicenseAGPL-3.0GPL-3.0
LanguageElixirPython
Setup difficultyEasyMedium
Min. RAM512 MB2,048 MB
Deploymentdockerdocker
GitHub stars★ 5,368★ 8,469
First released20242021
ReplacesYouTubeYouTube

What are Pinchflat and Tube Archivist?

Pinchflat

Pinchflat is a self-hosted application for downloading and archiving YouTube content in a way that media servers like Plex and Jellyfin can use. It applies naming conventions and metadata for smooth library integration.

  • YouTube archiving for media servers
  • Media-server-friendly naming
  • Metadata embedding
  • Channel automation

Read the full Pinchflat guide →

Tube Archivist

Tube Archivist is a self-hosted YouTube media server that downloads, indexes, and organizes videos and channels for offline viewing. It maintains metadata, subtitles, and full-text search across your archived library.

  • Automated channel downloads
  • Full-text search
  • Metadata and subtitles
  • Watch progress tracking

Read the full Tube Archivist guide →

Pinchflat vs Tube Archivist: key differences

Pinchflat is written in Elixir, while Tube Archivist is built with Python. Licensing differs — AGPL-3.0 for Pinchflat versus GPL-3.0 for Tube Archivist. Pinchflat is the lighter option, starting around 512 MB of RAM against 2,048 MB for Tube Archivist. Tube Archivist is the more established project (first released 2021), while Pinchflat arrived in 2024.

Why pick each one

Choose Pinchflat if…

  • Plays nicely with Plex and Jellyfin
  • Clean modern UI

Watch out for

  • Newer project
  • YouTube-focused
Pinchflat details

Choose Tube Archivist if…

  • Great for archiving channels
  • Powerful search

Watch out for

  • Requires Elasticsearch
  • Storage hungry
Tube Archivist details

Frequently asked questions

Is Pinchflat or Tube Archivist better?

Neither is universally better. Tube Archivist has the larger community, while Pinchflat is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are Pinchflat and Tube Archivist free and open-source?

Yes. Pinchflat is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and Tube Archivist under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Pinchflat and Tube Archivist with Docker?

Pinchflat: yes. Tube Archivist: yes.

Which is lighter on resources, Pinchflat or Tube Archivist?

Pinchflat has the smaller minimum footprint at 512 MB of RAM, compared to about 2,048 MB for Tube Archivist. Real-world usage depends on library size, user count, and enabled features.

Related comparisons