Have a listen to these and compare ...

[L5730]

Hi,
I am struggling to hear a difference between these two files. Maybe I am going deaf today, maybe not...

FLAC 24 bit 96 kHz
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1GXTub65pd2evo3bxn1QtI9dyfajZTZti?usp=sharing

Cheers!

If these are a bit long of a sample of the song, let me know and I'll cut them into shorter parts, or find something that is royalty free. No intention to fall foul of copyright - it's not the whole song, after all.

 

[AnalogSteph]

Spoiler

ADFASD sounds a bit fuller, the other one is correspondingly leaner with more highs. The better clarity of the latter wins out overall, I think.

What's the turntable, btw? I suspect it's either a quartz lock job with an oscillator that's not winning any awards for thermal stability or a non-quartz-lock but fairly stable direct drive. If you line them up at the start, they drift apart over time with a maximum of 112-113 samples (>1 ms) around the 1:30 mark (so about a 13 ppm difference in average speed), but then the delta reduces again to around 50 samples towards the end.

 

[L5730]

I do own the vinyl records, (and numerous versions on CD) but not any halfway decent turntable, so that was digitised by someone else.
It's indeed a direct drive turntable SL-1210.

I appreciate your comments, folks.

 

[Vini darko]

According to my download manager they are the same file. I did listen to one and it sounds like my 1982 awia aa8500. Heavy coloration but in a nice way.

 

[L5730]

They aren't the exact same digital file, that's for sure, but the audio?
FIUHDF = CRC32: A92C1104
ADFASD = CRC32: B95B9CB7

 

[L5730]

They are check sums.
It's a way to show that the raw data is the same (or in this case, not the same). See file copy error checking.
For important use (like downloading a program or something) we'd want to use a more robust cryptographic secure hash algorith (SHA).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CRC-32

I know what I use 'em for, but explaining them better than the wiki, I dunno
If I cloned an audio file, they'd both have the same CRC32 value. Then if I even made a change to any meta data, they would no longer match CRC32 values, as the raw data is different. If the two clones (with now no longer matching CRC) were put into a program and the audio data only compared, there would be no differences, after all they are clones and only the metadata tag was changed.

 

[L5730]

Seems like not too many folks are fussed one way or the other about this one.
Sufficient time has gone on, so I shall spill the beans.

ADFASD = The original recording, turned down 2dB and dithered with TPDF.
FIUHDF = That same original recording, played on HiBy on Amazon tablet, through Tempotec Sonata HD Pro into Realtek ALC1220. So basically a re-recording through the Tempotec DAC.

I think, perhaps, I should have chosen something that wasn't a recording from vinyl to begin with. Maybe one of the CD versions or something very clean (Donald Fagen : The Nightfly).
But anyway, just shows how decent some of this budget audio gear is. With a better ADC the differences would be even smaller I think.

 

[¥€$]

ADFASD sounded more natural and dynamic even, FIUHDF sounded like someone had increased treble in EQ, it was especially obvious with the vocals. Shows how dynamic range isn't everything, now that the truth was revealed

 

[L5730]

With the answers being public, we're in the realm of biased listening now, so any further votes and comments are to be taken with that in mind.

The ADC is a bit lousy, but it's a lot better than onboard has been in the past.
I agree that the vocal sounds a pinch more forward, or slightly higher vertically in position. It is rather subtle and I clearly wasn't listening well enough before. (this is with eyes closes switching tracks in the DAW and I don't know which I am actually listening to).

Interesting, but probably not the best test method

 

[¥€$]

With the answers being public, we're in the realm of biased listening now, so any further votes and comments are to be taken with that in mind.

The ADC is a bit lousy, but it's a lot better than onboard has been in the past.
I agree that the vocal sounds a pinch more forward, or slightly higher vertically in position. It is rather subtle and I clearly wasn't listening well enough before. (this is with eyes closes switching tracks in the DAW and I don't know which I am actually listening to).

Interesting, but probably not the best test method

The vocals in ADFASD seemed to be more centered than in FIUHDF, where their position was slightly on the upper left. Take it with a grain of salt, but I didn't properly read any of the messages here before testing, and that was intentional. If I had to do it again I'd still probably come to the conclusion that the latter file sounds like it's been compressed, because a lot of albums that have been sound very trebly