2>1; Cleaner, more clear and precise. Just need the first 12 secs to figure it out.
JRiver 20>Pulse XFi (kernel streaming USB)>Sansui 5000>Logitech THX certified 3" drivers Dolby 2.0
*added spoiler
1 is a little mid forward. 2 has more bass. Makes the soundstage in 1 sound more forward, singer and sax is more up front.
As for what you did I am going to guess a downwards VTA adjustment which also slightly increased VTF.
Both are good but I very slightly prefer sample 1 because I like the forward vocals and sax at least with this track.
Edit: Went and listened to a youtube copy. Assuming what I hear is remotely correct track 2 with the bass is the proper tonal balance so clearly my preferences suck.
No, I can see that POV. At first I thought #1 was better but the more vivid and dynamic sound of #2 won me over. I already knew which one Anax would prefer before I even dropped the needle
You're close with the guess bit not quite. +5
2 > 1. Fuller sound, more defined bass and better dynamics. By comparison, #1 sounds like it's recorded in a more reverberant room / more distant / less focused. It's clear from just the intro (up till the first cymbal crash - which sounds more raspy on #1.)
2>1. The 2nd sample has better depth and air and is more natural sounding than the 1st one which is a bit too forward and appears a bit 'restricted' esp. in highs.
#1 has more prominent mids, slightly wall-of-sound effect, is more lively, but less controlled and dirty sounding. vocals and sax more forward in stage, rest of stuff in background but diffuse.
#2 has tighter bass, more precision, better damped.
I could go either way, slight tendency toward #1.
No contest on my side. I like 2 much better than 1. 1 is smaller, more "tinny" and doesn't open up on instruments. 2 sounds bigger, more filled out and has more development of tones.
Edit: Even after posting my comment above, I just re-listened. 1 just sounds more squished to me...I just don't like that kind of sound.
Yup, it's got more of that tonal and dynamic compression as I like to call it.
Hmm..
foobar2000 1.3.7 / Dynamic Range Meter 1.1.1
log date: 2015-09-10 23:53:30
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyzed: ? / ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR Peak RMS Duration Track
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR15 -1.66 dB -19.15 dB 6:19 ?-IveGotMineExtVer1
DR16 0.00 dB -18.72 dB 6:17 ?-IveGotMineExtVer2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of tracks: 2
Official DR value: DR15
Samplerate: 96000 Hz
Channels: 2
Bits per sample: 24
Bitrate: 4608 kbps
Codec: PCM
================================================================================
Take a look at the DR database on vinyl, it always varies on even the same album.
Ok. I'm gonna guess on the differences:
Not a bad guess, but no. That's worth trying some time.
Yea, I expected levels to be not quite matched. But I promise I'm doing more than just tweaking the pot on the TCC.
Heck, this is analog/vinyl folks. Do the same exact rip after a few months and it might not have the same DR after so many plays.
Votes are more or less even, which is surprising.
I wasn't complaining about the difference in levels, just that there was indeed a difference in dynamic range of the two samples.
My guess would be that
you cleaned the record for the 2nd sample