Ffvoice vs Transcription

In-depth architectural comparison of the Ffvoice and Transcription MCP servers. Compare execution transports, security boundaries, tool capabilities, quality scores, and ready-to-paste client installation snippets for Claude, Cursor, Windsurf, and VS Code.

Which MCP Server Should You Choose?

Choose Ffvoice when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Speech-to-Text domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore Ffvoice Details

Choose Transcription when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Speech-to-Text domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: get_supported_languages, get_pricing, get_product_info.

Explore Transcription Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Ffvoice Speech-to-Text	Transcription Speech-to-Text
Summary	Offline speech-to-text & speaker diarization MCP server: transcribe audio on-device, no cloud	AI transcription from URLs. 99% accuracy, speaker diarization, 98+ languages.
Category & Scope	Speech-to-Text	Speech-to-Text
Quality signal

Tools & Capabilities Breakdown

Ready-to-Paste Client Configurations

Paste either (or both) of these JSON server blocks into your client config file (e.g. claude_desktop_config.json or ~/.cursor/mcp.json).

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "ffvoice": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "ffvoice"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "transcription": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "@scriptivox/mcp-server"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons