[jsaliga]

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

[FullRangeMan]

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.

[Elizabeth]

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)

[Early B.]

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.   

[jsaliga]

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.Greyhound Fan]

I see a class action suit in their future unless they offer some compensation.

[jsaliga]

I had precisely the same thought.  MoFi could very well find itself in a legal battle for its very survival.

--Jerome

[Letitroll98]

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.

[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. 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

[jsaliga]

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

[jsaliga]

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

[rbbert]

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 

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.

[jsaliga]

Why speculate about something of which you admit you have no real knowledge? 

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

[Digi-G]

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.

[Letitroll98]

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!

[jsaliga]

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

[jsaliga]

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

[dpatters]

Yawning. Who cares as long as the SQ is top notch. I think all of my MFSL vinyl pressings sound great.

Don P.

[Bioman65]

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.

[jsaliga]

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