AudioCircle
Audio/Video Gear and Systems => The Vinyl Circle => Topic started by: jsaliga on 24 Jul 2022, 09:01 pm
-
Apparently for years MoFi vinyl has been cut from high resolution digital files.
https://youtu.be/5JW87LZFzqs
https://youtu.be/shg0780YgAE
https://youtu.be/Xl15-RC3wMU
I searched and didn't see anything about this here and was very surprised this wasn't getting more chatter. Maybe I missed it.
--Jerome
-
No surprise, only audiophools believe there analog master tapes available today.
In the pro audio market it is known that since the beginning of the vinyl comeback wave this is done, commonly the master is a regular CD from the nearest shop.
-
Missed what? There is no 'scandal' except in your mind perhaps? Actually no records can be made without it being a digital file now.. All those old analog lathes* are dead and gone. the only lathes now in use, use a digital file to cut a master. Period.
Beyond that tidbit ??
*(there may exist some tiny audiophile company using a old analog lathe, but I do not know of them)
-
In the second video the OP posted, MoFi neither admitted nor apologized for any wrongdoing or misleading. It was basically an FU to customers.
We have created a culture where it's acceptable for individuals, businesses, and corporations to not take responsibility for their actions.
-
I agree completely. I don't necessarily have a problem with cutting lacquers from digital files. Abbey Road Studios does it on all of their half-speed mastered releases. I own a bunch of them and love how they sound. But they disclose their process to customers and explain why they do things the way they do.
The issues with what MoFi has done relate to disclosure and transparency. I think customers who forked over $125 for a MoFi One-Step pressing are going to rightfully be pissed to learn that their vinyl was cut from a digital file when they were led to believe the source was the original master tape. And all of those people who paid blood money to buy MoFi 45's on the secondary market after they sold out are not going to be happy to see the value of their albums drop like a rock as word of this spreads.
--Jerome
-
I see a class action suit in their future unless they offer some compensation.
-
I had precisely the same thought. MoFi could very well find itself in a legal battle for its very survival.
--Jerome
-
There's 371 pages on it over on the Steve Hoffman forum.
https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/mobile-fidelity-cutting-vinyl-from-digital-since-a-long-time-ago.1150351/
I didn't read anything but one page in the middle that came up on a search, but they were going back and forth about a class action suit and what are the ramifications if one was filed. Someone compared it to the Ticketmaster suit where the settlement was millions, but each person got $5. Generally in any suit you need damages to collect, so some loss would need to be documented, which I'm assuming would be resale prices. But I do admit a perverse desire to see digital vs analog argued out in court.
-
All of MOFI's Original indicate on the top of the record that it was an "Original Mater Recording". That does not mean it came from the original master 2 track tape. It means that no-one has fiddled with the individual tracks or the way the tracks are mixed. Someone is reading in between the lines. All recordings that became vinyl started from a master recording. There are analog recordings, there are digital recordings. From the process of making the master until its cut on dead wax does not infer that there was not "further" processing. How old do you think some of the original master tapes are? What condition do you think they are in. Hopefully, some one or organization is transferring the analog to digital to preserve the music in its original mix.
Now on to reality. I doubt there is hardly anyone that can tell if their vinyl was cut from an analog tape or a digital file since the 80s. Even a digital file can be converted to analog and recorded back onto analog tape. I've done that myself.
A class action suit...really? I would say the class does not have a case.
BTW, I just picked up the newest release from MOFI on a Superdisc from ELectric Light Orchestra: Eldorado. I kicks ass and makes the original sound like it was mastered on a cheap cassette deck.
MOFI makes great products.
Wayner
-
All of MOFI's Original indicate on the top of the record that it was an "Original Mater Recording". That does not mean it came from the original master 2 track tape. It means that no-one has fiddled with the individual tracks or the way the tracks are mixed. Someone is reading in between the lines.
That's what you think. A bunch of lawyers and a jury might think differently.
--Jerome
-
There's 371 pages on it over on the Steve Hoffman forum.
https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/mobile-fidelity-cutting-vinyl-from-digital-since-a-long-time-ago.1150351/
I didn't read anything but one page in the middle that came up on a search, but they were going back and forth about a class action suit and what are the ramifications if one was filed. Someone compared it to the Ticketmaster suit where the settlement was millions, but each person got $5. Generally in any suit you need damages to collect, so some loss would need to be documented, which I'm assuming would be resale prices. But I do admit a perverse desire to see digital vs analog argued out in court.
There is a legal concept known as fraud in the inducement. I only know about it because I ended up suing someone in Florida over a car sale where I was ripped off. If you promote, make claims, and advertise something about the details that misleads a buyer into believing that what you are selling is a lot more valuable than what it is you can find yourself on the wrong end of a fraud lawsuit. In Florida they have triple damages for fraud and the person I was suing was facing over $100,000 in legal liability. They settled the case out of court and all I wanted was to be made whole. So I got my money back and they paid my legal fees. They got off very light.
--Jerome
-
I've read a lot in different audiophile forums and watched some of the Michaels videos. I'm glad I don't have any vested interest in LP's :lol:
MFSL would appear to correct about the claim of "Original Master Recordings", but perhaps not about "all analog". A lawyer experienced in the issues would need to weigh in about the viability of a class action suit. What percentage of today's LP lacquers are cut without a digital step is unknown to me but probably very small (1%? 5%? 0%?). Both that (to demonstrate fraud) and a quantification of damages would seem to be required.
-
Why speculate about something of which you admit you have no real knowledge? :scratch:
Look at Analogue Productions. They claim that 100% of their releases are cut from the original master tapes. That is why the pressings are very limited to small production runs of a few thousand LPs. No record label is going to allow a mastering studio to run their original tape enough times to create enough stampers to press, say, 40,000 records.
--Jerome
-
Firstly, I'm not an expert on any of this and anything I say should be considered my opinion.
Secondly, I'm not a vinyl guy, but more of a digital guy.
I don't know if MOFI has really misled customers or not. Obviously their original products were vinyl or mostly so. Over the years they have offered vinyl and digital (CDs and SACDs) products, probably to expand their market and survive. I believe at one time their process probably WAS all analogue and was stated so on their products (mostly vinyl). I suspect some of their wording, terminology and disclaimers have changed over the years and so have their processes. Some it of may be subtle but different enough that "legally" they haven't done anything wrong. It may not be transparent from a consumer standpoint, however.
Then the question becomes, should they be transparent? Of course we would like that as consumers of their product, but do they owe it to us and should we expect it? They are offering a product and we are free to purchase that product, or not. No doubt they have some proprietary steps that they aren't going to disclose anyway.
Again, I'm not a vinyl guy, but everyone seems to rave about the One-Step vinyl. Does it sound worse if it's now known that it's digital? I can't answer this as I've never heard any of it. Perception is a funny thing when it comes to audio. I suspect that MOFI is very, very aware of this and very careful about what they state on their products (i.e. I don't think they tell you much of anything, it's all marketing BS).
Sourcing recordings from the Original Master Tapes and keeping the chain all analogue are two different things.
For the record, I buy many of their CD and SACD releases. I don't care what their process is as long as it sounds great.
Just my $0.02.
-
There is a legal concept known as fraud in the inducement. I only know about it because I ended up suing someone in Florida over a car sale where I was ripped off. If you promote, make claims, and advertise something about the details that misleads a buyer into believing that what you are selling is a lot more valuable than what it is you can find yourself on the wrong end of a fraud lawsuit. In Florida they have triple damages for fraud and the person I was suing was facing over $100,000 in legal liability. They settled the case out of court and all I wanted was to be made whole. So I got my money back and they paid my legal fees. They got off very light.
--Jerome
Yes, I don't doubt you, but you still sustained some injury regardless of the legal argument used. Anyone filing a suit, let's say using your fraud argument, can win the suit, but without damages no monetary judgement can be awarded. You can seek an action of estoppel to make Mofi stop putting something on their label, but for cash you need damages. What are the damages here? Not doubting for a second there may be damages, I guessed resale value, but that's very hard to pin down. And there may be damages from not receiving what was advertised, but then again, we're getting a digital vs analog court battle, woo hoo!
-
Then the question becomes, should they be transparent? Of course we would like that as consumers of their product, but do they owe it to us and should we expect it? They are offering a product and we are free to purchase that product, or not. No doubt they have some proprietary steps that they aren't going to disclose anyway.
MoFi, and other audiophile labels such as Analogue Productions, are marketing and promoting their products to audiophiles as premium products. They are not trying to get Sue, who listens to music on her iPhone while riding the Metro North on her way to and from work, to pay $125 for a vinyl record. These labels know and understand the audience they are selling to.
--Jerome
-
Yes, I don't doubt you, but you still sustained some injury regardless of the legal argument used. Anyone filing a suit, let's say using your fraud argument, can win the suit, but without damages no monetary judgement can be awarded. You can seek an action of estoppel to make Mofi stop putting something on their label, but for cash you need damages. What are the damages here? Not doubting for a second there may be damages, I guessed resale value, but that's very hard to pin down.
Well, if they induced you through fraud to pay $1,000 for something that had a fair market value of $10 there is the damages.
we're getting a digital vs analog court battle, woo hoo!
I have no idea what you are going on about with this or why that would excite you.
--Jerome
-
Yawning. Who cares as long as the SQ is top notch. I think all of my MFSL vinyl pressings sound great.
Don P.
-
Steve Guttenburg did a good video today on this topic that seems balanced and thought out. It made the point that many masters exist for a given recording, and it is not as simple as going to a single identifiable master sitting in a vault at one of the major labels that is THE MASTER. He stated that what we call a master is often a mix-down from other R to R tapes made during the recording process. Do any of us know what level of tapes made during the production process remastering engineers are actually getting access to when they make a new pressing? The second point he made, was that if you liked the SQ and production values of a given MoFi recording before this revelation, you should still like it. Personally, I don't own any MoFI pressings, so no dog in the fight. But I do think MoFi traded in perception when it was to their benefit, not the most honest approach. The last thought; I realize that any R-to-R tape can only be played so many times before they degrade, not clear how many that is, but tape heads, storage, and time cause degradation to R to R. Also, I imagine that the recording companies that own these "masters" are concerned with transport damage or loss, damage during usage, etc. So not surprising that they would be anal about sharing them.
-
That isn't quite right, and any studio recording engineer or someone familiar with the process would know that. I don't know where Steve Guttenburg is getting his information but the source for a master tape is a multitrack. Multitrack tapes are not finished versions of the content. They are unmixed. Only the master tape is mixed and ready to use as a source for production of commercially released content. You can create more than one mix from the multitracks, but then each would ostensibly be different. A stereo mix vs. a 5.1 mix. But since we are talking about vinyl records here we are mainly interested in stereo mixes (and mono).
--Jerome
-
Educate me please, as this is not my background. Is it safe to say that a studio, such as Harvest EMI, would ship the sole copy (Master Tape) of let's say Pink Floyds the Wall to someone doing a remaster? Or do they ship a safety copy, or do they make a copy of the Master and ship that? I have read that large labels will do simultaneous feeds off the mixing board and create multiple masters at the time of recording.
-
Why speculate about something of which you admit you have no real knowledge? :scratch:
Look at Analogue Productions. They claim that 100% of their releases are cut from the original master tapes. That is why the pressings are very limited to small production runs of a few thousand LPs. No record label is going to allow a mastering studio to run their original tape enough times to create enough stampers to press, say, 40,000 records.
--Jerome
Aren't we all speculating from our admittedly incomplete knowledge? Do you know that Analogue Productions has no digital step in their process?
-
That isn't quite right, and any studio recording engineer or someone familiar with the process would know that. I don't know where Steve Guttenburg is getting his information but the source for a master tape is a multitrack. Multitrack tapes are not finished versions of the content. They are unmixed. Only the master tape is mixed and ready to use as a source for production of commercially released content. You can create more than one mix from the multitracks, but then each would ostensibly be different. A stereo mix vs. a 5.1 mix. But since we are talking about vinyl records here we are mainly interested in stereo mixes (and mono).
--Jerome
Well you appear to be wrong here. First, it is far from clear that all studios and labels use the same terminology. Second, in the vast majority of cases the mixed down, edited, EQ'ed, perhaps compressed "master" is not used to cut lacquers; a "production master" is copied from this "master" and used to cut lacquers. There may be many "production master" copies made since each one can only be played so many times before degradation. Sometimes an additional set of copies (one more analog gen) of this "production master" is made to be used in other countries to cut their LP lacquers.
In addition, there may be multiple "remasters" over time (sometimes at the same time), usually using the production master and applying processing (either digital or analog) to that.
-
First, it is far from clear that all studios and labels use the same terminology. Second, in the vast majority of cases the mixed down, edited, EQ'ed, perhaps compressed "master" is not used to cut lacquers; a "production master" is copied from this "master" and used to cut lacquers. There may be many "production master" copies made since each one can only be played so many times before degradation. Sometimes an additional set of copies (one more analog gen) of this "production master" is made to be used in other countries to cut their LP lacquers.
Yes, that's a very fair point and one that I was going to add myself later. But I work for a living and have limited time during the day to post on forums.
--Jerome
-
It seems to me that "Mobile Fidelity defrauded their customers" and "Mobile Fidelity products sound good" are not mutually exclusive statements.
The customer should (legally and ethically) be able to rely on the statements and representations of the seller.
Mobile Fidelity built its entire reputation on selling vinyl pressings cut from master tapes. Analogue to analogue. I don't own a record player and have not been a victim of their misleading marketing about their LPs. But integrity matters, and Mobile Fidelity has no integrity.
-
Aren't we all speculating from our admittedly incomplete knowledge? Do you know that Analogue Productions has no digital step in their process?
I make no claims to be all knowing on this subject and don't have a problem with someone proving me wrong.
Regarding Analogue Productions I can share with you part of an email exchange from about 2 years ago between myself and Chad Kassem, CEO of Analogue Productions, concerning one of his pressings of an RCA Living Stereo LP on 200g vinyl.
Digital was not used in the making of the RCA LSC 2068 that you are asking about. I even went back to the original mastering engineer to have him respond. He assured us that digital was not used anywhere in the chain.
Now, I think that is a fairly definitive and assertive statement. While I don't know for fact that no digital step was used (because I wasn't there), I have no reason to doubt Chad and I am not prepared to call him a liar. So let's just close the book on that ok?
--Jerome
-
Even in some very high-end analog oriented Internet groups (e.g., Audionirvana or What's Best Forum) there isn't a huge discussion about fraud, but more along the lines of what has been mentioned here. Sure, some purchasers are disappointed, but many are more interested in why MoFi might be doing this and how it relates to the sound of the final product, as well as how widespread similar practices might be. The major labels are of course well known to obfuscate about this kind of information; it has always been hoped that the smaller "audiophile" labels were more transparent.
-
Thanks. I can definitely understand the reasoning behind that sentiment. A number of vloggers on Youtube basically said the same thing, they are very disappointed but will still support MoFi.
--Jerome
-
Jerome - you're exactly right. Here is a picture of their literature for their "one-step" process.
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=243110)
-
Here is a link to the copy on the MoFi website that describes in detail their One Step process.
https://mofi.com/pages/technologies#one-step
--Jerome
-
I can like a product and criticize the company that made it. They are not mutually exclusive.
--Jerome
+1
-
"... MFSL engineers begin with the original master tapes and meticulously cut a set of lacquers. ..."
"... every UD1S pressing serves as an immaculate replica of the lacquer sourced directly from the original master tape. ..."
"... First and foremost, we only utilize first generation original master recordings as source material for our releases. ..."
At best, this is reckless; at worst it is disingenuous.
-
"... MFSL engineers begin with the original master tapes and meticulously cut a set of lacquers. ..."
"... every UD1S pressing serves as an immaculate replica of the lacquer sourced directly from the original master tape. ..."
"... First and foremost, we only utilize first generation original master recordings as source material for our releases. ..."
At best, this is reckless; at worst it is disingenuous.
Agreed, but at worst its fraud.
-
Very interesting interview with the principal engineers at MFSL.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shg0780YgAE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shg0780YgAE)
-
From my perspective this scandal broke on YouTube and continues to churn there. The signal to noise ratio is dropping by the hour as everyone and his uncle who want to be an audio or LP YouTuber posts on the subject. Over the weekend two of the better videos to drop IMHO are:
What Mofi Did - How They Can Fix It... by The Vinyl Attack! https://youtu.be/5JW87LZFzqs (https://youtu.be/5JW87LZFzqs)
Special Guest: Chad Kassem by 45 RPM Audiophile https://youtu.be/tmW_yfEBmVM (https://youtu.be/tmW_yfEBmVM)
Vinyl Attack states clearly and succinctly, the ethical issue MFSL/Music Direct has placed themselves in. In the second 45 RPM Audiophile’s interview with Chad Kassem (owner Acoustic Sounds and Analog Productions) goes into depth about how AP obtain actual analog masters for the LPs, R2R tape dubs, and SACDs reissues.
My opinion is MoFi Music Direct has placed themselves in a situation that has severely tarnished the brand. As I type this if I am shopping I can see here:
https://www.musicdirect.com/music/vinyl/paul-simon-there-goes-rhymin-simon-lmt-ed-ultradisc-one-step-45rpm-vinyl-2lp-box-set/ (https://www.musicdirect.com/music/vinyl/paul-simon-there-goes-rhymin-simon-lmt-ed-ultradisc-one-step-45rpm-vinyl-2lp-box-set/)
The claim that for $124.99 the Paul Simon - There Goes Rhymin’ Simon (Limited Edition UltraDisc One-Step 45rpm Vinyl 2LP Box Set) has this characteristic: “Mastered from the Original Master Tapes with Mobile Fidelity's One-Step Process: Paul Simon There Goes Rhymin' Simon UD1S 180g 45RPM 2LP Box Set Sounds Phenomenal.”
I have heard several of the MoFi one steps on my turntable in my system. They do sound amazing, even $125 amazing. The issue is prior to the “math problem” with the Thriller One-Step we all assumed “Mastered from the Original Master Tapes” referred to when the master is analog that actual original analog master tape would play into the cutting lathe and cut the one-step. MoFi has now admitted no the labels won’t ship master tapes so now its analog master tape to Quad DSD and the DSD is played back into the lathe. Again this process yields excellent results. If MoFi had announced a few years ago when they made the change we are doing this to obtain more and better titles for the one-steps all is well. That they did not raises questions, the top one being would the market bear $125 for a DSD sourced There Goes Rhymin’ Simon? Or once the limited edition is sold out the $2500 - $3000 each Santana Abraxas one-steps fetch on the collector’s market?
Many are commenting if the one-steps sound great what’s the issue? To me that demonstrates a naivety. In art providence is everything. If I am spending $17.98 on a HD Tracks download or $124.99 for a MoFi one-step before I decide where to spend my cash I deserve transparency and clarity from the seller.
-
Very interesting interview with the principal engineers at MFSL.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shg0780YgAE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shg0780YgAE)
Thanks for that link Digi-G. The dismissive attitude of the MoFi team has for many of us poured gas on the fire. Compare that attitude (and bob and weave damage control) vs. Chad Kassem's stories of going the extra mile to get analog masters for his products and care to note when circumstances forced using digital masters.
Another interesting video is: Michael Fremer from Tracking Angle Focus on the MoFi Video on 45 RPM Audiophile https://youtu.be/Xl15-RC3wMU (https://youtu.be/Xl15-RC3wMU)
Fremer goes into how the truth broke with the Thriller "math problem". I'm calling it that because it was the announcement that 30,000 or 40,000 Thriller one-steps were going to be sold that broke the story there is a DSD step in MoFi's master chain. They got caught because if each one-step master only produces 1,000 pressings would the Jackson estate really allow them to play the actual master tape 10s even 100s of time cutting the necessart lacquers? Math did not add up and questions were asked.
-
Just throwing this out there, since MoFi vinyl mastering has everybody's attention. Acoustic Sounds new video https://youtu.be/Y2LdW3zUsvg.
I talked to Chad many times at RMAF, love to hear about the new albums coming out.
-
Let me clear some things up here.
1. No one should be applauded for using the original tapes. People should be crucified for not using them. In the same way that no one should clap for you when you flush the toilet after you're done. It's part of the process done right.
2. Using the original tapes means absolutely nothing when it comes down to if there is a digital step in the process.
I know for a fact MoFi for a long time, years, has been using an ADC to DAC process for their records at a specific stage. Why? Because it's much easier to control all the problems this way. I don't know about Analog Productions but let's just say NO ONES HAS SPECIFICALLY STATED THEY DO NOT CONVERT TO DIGITAL AT ANY POINT IN THE PROCESS. Their YouTube video does not clarify anything about the process. There's a lot of machines that could be a digital step.
You have to remember a bunch of engineers and marketing guys don't see the problem with a ADC to DAC conversion process for doing work. In their minds they're adding value because they can achieve their goals for sound quality. Well for me I don't particularly care about minor surface noise so long as timbre, tone, etc, are correct - but they often think that is of the highest importance, as if quality itself is that. And when I pay a premium I expect them to take the hard route.
I told a friend recently that what MoFi does with the ADC to DAC process is like taking a vintage Rolex that needs cleaned, but instead of doing the pain staking approach to do it the right way and continue the most perfect imperfect possible time keeping... they throw in a digital Casio under the hood.
Anyone with a digital process in their chain is being extremely misleading with graphics, terminology, showing off analog equipment, etc. I doubt there are any grounds for recourse except maybe to distributors and stores selling them with marketing that is misleading, solely because the only legal action I can imagine is consumer protection stepping in and making them stop and desist misleading information.
All in all my biggest hope was just that everyone could finally admit that MoFi sound bad. Sadly lots of people think those awful things still sound good.
-
MoFi, MoFo, what’s the diff?
-
jsaglia - Could you explain why you find the following statement absurd:
"2. Using the original tapes means absolutely nothing when it comes down to if there is a digital step in the process."
Had you done so, instead of insulting the poster, it may have alleviated some consternation.
-
jsaglia - Could you explain why you find the following statement absurd:
"2. Using the original tapes means absolutely nothing when it comes down to if there is a digital step in the process."
Had you done so, instead of insulting the poster, it may have alleviated some consternation.
He simply believes if you get a good product then it's ok.
But it's extremely misleading not only for the source but the process. The rest of everyone else does not believe because some music is recorded digitally so the source has to be digital for the vinyl, that it makes anything at all acceptable about paying a high premium for an album you believe to be completely and wholly only ever analog. If you don't think it makes a difference in sound that could be debatable but it doesn't change the mistrust - especially as more marketing comes out that never answers the questions.
But also there's a reason with all the old music I prefer earlier pressings... just saying, even if the digital tech were good it would appear to me most haven't a clue how to do it correctly. I almost only own new music on newer vinyl for a reason. Most of the new albums I have that are good music rarely come close to richness of old pressings (on pretty much all qualities).
-
You know, someone lamented in a private message to me that he was saddened that a lot of folks who were very knowledgeable about vinyl have moved on from the Vinyl Circle and no longer post here...
--Jerome
There are any number of audio internet forums devoted primarily to LP playback and all things related. I may be over-reaching and/or misinterpreting, but Audio Circle to me has always had a much broader scope, with perhaps more emphasis on the manufacturers' circles.
-
...
But also there's a reason with all the old music I prefer earlier pressings... just saying, even if the digital tech were good it would appear to me most haven't a clue how to do it correctly. I almost only own new music on newer vinyl for a reason. Most of the new albums I have that are good music rarely come close to richness of old pressings (on pretty much all qualities).
I'm confused. On the one hand you seem to be saying that most haven't a clue about how to use digital to produce good LPs, then you say you (almost) only own new music on new vinyl? Why would you do that if most haven't a clue about how to do that?
-
Unless a marked "damage" has been inflicted in terms of loss of value or use due to deliberate obfuscation of the "facts," I just don't see how MoFi will be held liable for their lack of "candor." Although I have several hundred LPs, I don't own a single MoFi issued one, therefore all of this discussion might be too heated for my taste. What a person considers "sounding" good, lots of time, has a lot to do with what he has gotten used to in terms of expected sound. Maybe my ears are losing their capacity of hearing, but there are pressings that sound unbelievable and their lossless digital equivalents are just meh. How can I explain this? Is it the illusion that my vinyl rig extracts more nuance than the lossless file ? Perhaps it has a lot to do with the cartridge, the way the coils were wound up, the cleanliness of the stylus, the cleanliness of the power line during that one moment or.... or perhaps the time of the day or whether I have had a nice cup of Rioja. Who knows? Perhaps I am not a hardcore vinyl person like others are, so be it. Let those who have $ to spend, fight over the nuances of a vinyl reissue or a specific pressing. All I say is that many companies, from record labels to audio gear makers are jumping in the bandwagon... due to the boom of vinyl. I say it is time to rejoice since with this boom, perhaps a tiny sliver of these newly minted record connoisseurs will become the small stream of the now, slowly dying river of aging audiophiles. It is good news indeed, I say! These people will keep many manufacturers of your favorite gear alive! Is there something negative about this? I don't see but the upside. :thumb:
-
I'm confused. On the one hand you seem to be saying that most haven't a clue about how to use digital to produce good LPs, then you say you (almost) only own new music on new vinyl? Why would you do that if most haven't a clue about how to do that?
The answer is pretty simply. I don't have a digital side even hooked up to any stereos (my car has a CD changer though). So when new music comes out I still buy the vinyl knowing it came from digital.
Clearly I don't own old music on new vinyl except in rare circumstances.
-
Gustavo, I was looking at your system to see if you were spinning vinyl again, but it seems to be edited. Come on back to the analogue side. :D
-
There is more to analog than spinning (second rate) vinyl 8) :lol:
-
There is more to analog than spinning (second rate) vinyl 8) :lol:
That's true. But I haven't hooked up my reel to reel in years. I see the Tascam listed in your gear. :thumb:
Do you find tapes easily? If not, what do you use for sources?
-
Gustavo, I was looking at your system to see if you were spinning vinyl again, but it seems to be edited. Come on back to the analogue side. :D
Thanks Scott, I very much appreciate your friendship.
-
Thanks Scott, I very much appreciate your friendship.
Your quite welcome. Over the years, we do seem to get along pretty well, even when we disagree. Best to you.
-
That's not your call, as you're not the moderator here.
Also, I find it curious that those without vinyl rigs are posting... unless hopefully that means they are considering returning to the Light from years spent wandering in the digital wilderness. :thumb:
I'm not sure why I would have to have a vinyl rig to post in this thread. I buy plenty of MFSL releases, albeit the digital versions. And I have opinions that need to be released onto the world. :wink:
I do have vinyl and bought plenty of the Mofi vinyl back in the day as well. It's just not my preferred medium these days. And I do find this whole situation with Mobile Fidelity fascinating.
-
I have two vinyl rigs. Am I allowed to post? :lol:
Of course. Anyone can. Hopefully you have something to say about Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs. That is what we're here to discuss, isn't it?
-
Somewhat back to topic: Is the MFSL one step basically what Teldec has done for decades with their Direct Metal Master (DMM) process?
-
Looking at my MFSL 1-375"Sketches of Spain". The top banner on the cover says "ORIGINAL MASTER RECORDING"
In the fine print on the back bottom "Mastered from original master tapes" This is a 2013 pressing. Any idea how far back the questionable pressings go back?
-
Any idea how far back the questionable pressings go back?
2015 if I am not mistaken.
--Jerome
-
Just saw this on another forum
https://roon-community-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com/original/3X/7/2/726bb4f77704adac323918ee489bc823e348e2b2.jpeg
-
That's true. But I haven't hooked up my reel to reel in years. I see the Tascam listed in your gear. :thumb:
Do you find tapes easily? If not, what do you use for sources?
My main deck is now a hot-rodded Technics 1506 with the last 2-track FM head made and a custom tape head repro amp. There are quite a few gray market sources for tapes (in addition to all the "official" sources listed in the recent The Absolute Sound tape issue), most of which use safety and/or copy masters as the source tape. Over the last 40+ years many of those have left record company vaults, most legitimately (to pressing plants in other countries, to other recording engineers' studios, etc), a few more surreptitiously. A good thing, too, as the very destructive Universal fire a few years ago showed. With enough searching most albums that were originally recorded to analog tape can be found, and there are now a few more studios recording selected current artists to R2R.
But this is the Vinyl Circle, so I will leave
-
Somewhat back to topic: Is the MFSL one step basically what Teldec has done for decades with their Direct Metal Master (DMM) process?
To answer my own question for anyone who cares, it looks like the MFSL "one step" is simply a DMM. I bought quite a few French Blue Notes DMM's because I liked the sound and collectors turned up their noses at them.
I guess MFSL gave it a new name and pushed it as something new. The technology actually grew out of laser disc from the 70's.
-
In their reply on Instagram, MOFI begins:
"We at Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab are aware of customer complaints regarding use of digital technology in our mastering chain."
This is only half the story. The more important half is that they intentionally misled customers regarding the use of digital files in creating analogue recordings (e.g., expensive LPs). When they switched to digital, they hid the information from customers. If you pay for a banana and get an orange, it doesn't matter how tasty the orange is. You were deceived.
The biggest complaint is that people were lied to.
"We apologize for using vague language, "
The language was not vague, unless someone is, perhaps, a lawyer working for MOFI. Then, of course, all language is vague and they can blame their customers for misunderstanding things.
"allowing false narratives to propagate, "
They propagated the false narrative; it didn't just spring up out of the vacuum of space, or appear in the sky through a wormhole.
"and for taking for granted the goodwill and trust our customers place in the Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab brand."
This can be fixed: "…and for taking for granted exploiting the goodwill and trust of our customers."
-
Any idea how far back the questionable pressings go back?
From the Washington Post
"By the end of 2011, 60 percent of its vinyl releases incorporated DSD. All but one of the reissues as part of its One-Step series, which include $125 box set editions of Santana, Carole King and the Eagles, have used that technology. Going forward, all MoFi cutting will incorporate DSD."
-
"... MFSL engineers begin with the original master tapes and meticulously cut a set of lacquers. ..."
"... every UD1S pressing serves as an immaculate replica of the lacquer sourced directly from the original master tape. ..."
"... First and foremost, we only utilize first generation original master recordings as source material for our releases. ..."
At best, this is reckless; at worst it is disingenuous.
Technically if they employed a master tape to DSD conversion, then all of the above is still true.
Begin with a master tape (convert to DSD) and meticulously cut out a set of lacquers.
So they would still "source" from a master tape. Then they could use the DSD copy to create multiple lacquers.
Looks to me like they were very careful to not specifically state that the lacquers were cut directly from the master tape. They were "sourced" from the master tape.
-
Yes, devious liars often choose their words carefully so that they can feign innocence when they are caught out. This behavior underscores that MFSL was well aware that they were duping their customers to sustain their exorbitant prices, profiting from a reputation now in tatters.
-
If you used a Napster MP3 to cut, you could still claim "sourced from the analogue master tape" for anything before the digital age. There was no digital mastering when Miles Davis was recording.
-
Technically if they employed a master tape to DSD conversion, then all of the above is still true.
A "half-truth" is defined as statements that deliberately and deceptively convey only part of the truth.
-
There's a WaPo article about this. Google "Phoenix record store owner set the audiophile world on fire."
-
Frankly, I’m more surprised than appalled. Never have I once thought that the high-end audiophile industry would be less than 100% honest. That goes for companies and magazines. I believe every word written by audio journalists. I believe every spec published by designers and builders. EVERYTHING!
When I feel cynicism creeping in, I turn to an audiophile magazine to set me straight. Works every time. And when I buy an audiophile LP, I just know that it’s been mastered in the analog domain, like it should be. Why should I question the company’s integrity? I know they have the customer’s best interests in mind.
-
There's a WaPo article about this. Google "Phoenix record store owner set the audiophile world on fire."
The article says "…MoFi’s engineers confirmed, with a kind of awkward casualness, that Esposito was correct with his claims. The company that made its name on authenticity had been deceptive about its practices."
The article is here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/music/2022/08/05/mofi-records-analog-digital-scandal/
The article also states that the 45 rpm pressing of Bill Evans - Sunday at The Village Vanguard did not use a digital file. MoFi was using the same language to market a real analogue process and processes involving digital files.
The article also says "Marketing has been a key element of the MoFi model." More accurately "Marketing Lying has been a key element of the MoFi model."
-
Years a go with import artists was common to record two masters at the same time, one analog and one digital, in MoFi's case they are using a digital master, since the original reverse laquers made from the analogue masters were worn out by the record company that released the album and even the original master tape are worn out as one might expect.
So donot need to be an Einstein to know that these big record companies under No Circumstances will lend, rent or sell the original analogue master tape, Its a matter of obvious common sense, but some people who believe everything the media says have deluded themselves into believing that these LPs used the original analogue master tapes of recorded many decades ago.
Birth of the Cool and Miles Ahead were released in 1957 it is 65 years old, but some people seem to believe that these vintage analogue master tapes still exist :duh:
Another revealing fact is that these Golden-Ears Audiophiles have listened these records for dozens or hundreds of times and never realized that the master was digital.
This case reveals a lack of elementary knowledge of the public in question.
Digital Master yet is a master, there is no scandal.
Point to MoFi for made a good transfer job.
-
"There is no scandal." Give me a break.
Here is the graphic included in every MoFi Ultradisc. See any digital files there? [As noted in the accompanying text below, the "convert" is the intermediate pressing--nothing to do with digital files.]
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=243544)
-
And here is the lengthy, hyper-detailed description of the Ultradisc process that was also inserted into each Ultradisc sleeve with the above graphic. See any mention of digital files? No, because MoFi has been lying to its customers.
Ultradisc One-Step
Instead of utilizing the industry-standard three-step lacquer process, Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab's new ULTRADISC ONE-STEP (UD1S) uses only one step, bypassing two processes of generational loss. While three-step processing Is designed for optimum yield and efficiency, UD1S is created for the ultimate in sound quality. Just as Mobile Fidelity pioneered the UHQR (Ultra High-Quality Record) with JVC in the 1980s, UD1S again represents another state-of-the-art advance in the recording process. MFSL engineers begin with the original master tapes and meticulously cut a set of lacquers. These lacquers used to create a very fragile, pristine UD1S stamper called a "convert.” Delicate “converts” are then formed into the actual record stampers, producing a final product that literally and figuratively brings you closer to the music. By skipping the additional steps of pulling another positive and an additional negative, as done in the three-step process used in standard pressings, UD1S produces a final LP with the lowest noise floor possible today. The removal of the additional two steps of generational loss in the plating process reveals tremendous amounts of extra musical detail and dynamics which are otherwise lost due to the standard copying process. The exclusive nature of these very limited pressings guarantees that every UD1S pressing serves as an immaculate of the lacquer sourced directly from the original master tape. Every conceivable aspect of vinyl production is optimized to produce the most perfect record album available today.
Ultradisc One-Step: The Future of Hi-Fi
Everything begins with the meticulous cutting of a set of lacquers for a strict number of records to be pressed. After being cleaned with a proprietary chemical, the lacquers are rinsed in de-ionized water and dipped in stannous chloride, enabling pure silver to adhere to the surface. This leaves a pristine, extremely intricate silver layer. The lacquer is then mounted onto a conductive copper bar and immersed into a tank with nickel anodes 98 degrees. As electricity is applied to the silvered lacquer, the nickel begins to deposit onto the lacquer, while preserving the integrity of the grooves. The nickel-plated silvered lacquer then placed into a high-speed rotary tank at 120 degrees and spun at 88RPM to ensure the even application of a nickel layer. Once the desired thickness of .012" is achieved the disc is removed from the plating tank and the nickel convert is separated from the lacquer. At this point, the convert is formed into a single-use record stamper. This first-generation convert used to make the pinnacle of audiophile vinyl that literally and figuratively brings listeners closer to the music.
-
Years a go with import artists was common to record two masters at the same time, one analog and one digital, in MoFi's case they are using a digital master, since the original reverse laquers made from the analogue masters were worn out by the record company that released the album and even the original master tape are worn out as one might expect.
So donot need to be an Einstein to know that these big record companies under No Circumstances will lend, rent or sell the original analogue master tape, Its a matter of obvious common sense, but some people who believe everything the media says have deluded themselves into believing that these LPs used the original analogue master tapes of recorded many decades ago.
Birth of the Cool and Miles Ahead were released in 1957 it is 65 years old, but some people seem to believe that these vintage analogue master tapes still exist :duh:
Another revealing fact is that these Golden-Ears Audiophiles have listened these records for dozens or hundreds of times and never realized that the master was digital.
This case reveals a lack of elementary knowledge of the public in question.
Digital Master yet is a master, there is no scandal.
Point to MoFi for made a good transfer job.
This may be correct, but it's mostly speculation. Analogue Productions swears they use original master tapes in the vast majority of their releases. And they are very open in documenting their process. MoFi led their customers to believe the same thing, but they were intentionally misleading.
-
This may be correct, but it's mostly speculation. Analogue Productions swears they use original master tapes in the vast majority of their releases. And they are very open in documenting their process. MoFi led their customers to believe the same thing, but they were intentionally misleading.
Yes I believe AP use a digital master tape or file.
I would not believe they use the original analog master tape.
If they are using a analogue master tape it could be a second gen copy.
-
Starts at about
Yes I believe AP use a digital master tape or file.
I would not believe they use the original analog master tape.
If they are using a analogue master tape it could be a second gen copy.
I don't think they use digital masters. What do you think. Starting at around 6:50.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2LdW3zUsvg
-
Yes I believe AP use a digital master tape or file.
I would not believe they use the original analog master tape.
If they are using a analogue master tape it could be a second gen copy.
You might reconsider that statement.
Chad Kassem has many videos showing the process at his company. The one provided by DoubleJ is just one.
-
Personally I find DSD256 to be of exceptional quality. It is quite common for recording studios to transfer analog master tapes to DSD256, as many find this to be essentially a perfect copy and preserves the tape.
Note that many MoFi LPs which employed this DSD step were listed upon multiple best-sounding LP lists, such as by Michael Fremer. Who knows how many other studios have done the same thing.
Here's an article from Positive Feedback about DSD256 sound quality
https://positive-feedback.com/audio-discourse/dsd256/
-
The article is here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/music/2022/08/05/mofi-records-analog-digital-scandal/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/music/2022/08/05/mofi-records-analog-digital-scandal/)
The reason I said to google it was because it's a pay-for site and everyone can get around it by searching for it and then clicking on the link.
-
There's an interview in Absolute Sound here with Jim Davis where he says they've been using DSD to record master tapes remotely since 2011. He also gives some excuses about limiting the number of releases.
https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/mofi-president-jim-davis-on-the-companys-mastering-process?mc_cid=f372767bfe&mc_eid=d2d5b4a642
-
That interview felt less like an interview and more like a PR trip to me. Emailed questions. Emailed responses. Total damage control without even caring how much it felt like PR.
-
YAWN!
gary
-
What I find strange is that Michael Fremer appears to have never asked Mobile Fidelity to explain to him the details of the process fo how they make their records. This has been going on for more than a decade and this discovery seems to have caught him by surprise.
-
This was not convenient to the client.
-
I knew that. I talked to an MFSL employee years ago at "The Show" in Las Vegas during CES years ago. I told him the cymbals were too loud on MFSL early isssue of The Allman Brothers, "Live At The Fillmore East". The guy must have listened and few years later they reissued the LP, the cymbals didn't get in the way like All previously released Digital CD's. During the conversation, I was informed, the record companies would not give MFSL's any master tapes only "Digital Backups".
-
Those 'harmed' by Mobile's 'claims' instigating a class action suit is like asking someone who kicked you in the nuts to aim for the other one this time.
If getting a legal team involved sounds like a good idea maybe you should read the book Alice In Legal Land or check out The Quash podcast.
The lawyers are taking all of your money whether you win or lose and you will lose.
If Mobile's customers weren't satisfied with the results of their purchase they would have returned said product for a refund. Anyone else made the de facto claim that they got what they paid for. If it cost more money than what they had originally figured was reasonable for the level of sound quality they received then their opinion on any subject is suspect when that opinion can be swayed so easily by a factor having no relation to those expectations.
Were people actually paying $125 for a single album? If you were doing this of your own volition an outlay this outrageous proves to sensible people that it was no burden on you and to us that frivolous, impressionable people love to be swindled. Will you ever learn?
BTW, if you want premium sound on LP it says recorded direct to disc on the sleeve.
The next thing you know people with a Roon subscription will be sueing because now they have to be connected to the internet to use it.(I hope no lawyers read that).
-
Whydontumarryit I might suggest that the issue isn't the quality of the recordings, no one, to my knowledge, is making that claim. And if would be near impossible to prove that unless there were gross errors in production. Can you imagine telling a judge that the soundstage wasn't as ephemeral we you expected? Rather the issue is that the monitary value has fallen because false claims by the manufacturer have been publicly revealed. Their legal claim says they paid a premium price for something that wasn't as described, and therefore suffered financial damages. Now I haven't a clue if that's true or not, I'm not in the high end lp market, but at least it's something that could be reasonably argued in court.
-
I haven't read the case filing but it seems to be a matter of consumer fraud. They induced people to buy their records under false pretenses. Some people don't care because the records sound good even if its from a digital master. Others do care since they paid big bucks believing they had an all analog recording - taken from the original analog master. Pretty straight forward class action.
-
There is no scandal. just a bunch of assumptions. And those assumption are incorrect.
-
+ 1. this is what Elizabeth and I said in post 1 and 2, digital master still is a master tape(or file LOL), The guys are too naive and have no notion of what professional audio is like, pro-audio bussines is as raw and violent as the army, the only thing that matters is profit.
Once I did a freelance service because the sound mix guy went on a trip, then 2 weeks later the sound company wanted to pay me with a third party check that had already bounced for lack of funds.
-
There is no scandal. just a bunch of assumptions. And those assumption are incorrect.
Oh, really?
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=245247)