Let’s dissect this a bit:
Both of those two AcoustIds have exactly one fingerprint attached. We can compare those fingerprints here:
They are nearly identical, even if there are small differences. So why are those not assigned to a single AcoustId? Likely because of the length difference. As mentioned above AcoustId fingerprints are based on the first ~30 seconds~ 2 minutes* of audio, but that’s not all information the AcoustId server uses. In addition to the fingerprint the total length of the recording is considered.
Now why are both AcoustIds linked to the same recording? Basically because someone decided to do so. The connection between recordings and AcoustIds is essentially a manual process (done by submitting the fingerprint with a recording ID with a tool like Picard).
If it is correct that both AcoustIds are linked to the same recording depends on whether we consider both the shorter and longer version the same recording on MB. If they are considered the same obviously both AcoustId should be linked to it. If the longer version is considered a separate recording the corresponding AcoustId shoud lribably also be removed from the shorter recording.
- EDIT: The fingerprint is based on up to 2 minutes of audio, not as I wrote originally 30 seconds. I got confused by the previous discussion.