A brilliant and fair video. This label and their parent company now need to get back consumer trust, because I don't think I will buy another product from Music Direct/MoFi until that happens in a meaningful way.
The owner Jim Davis hoards copies #001 to #100 of every single MOFI release. That is why is is rare to come across LOW numbers. Items are not as rare as claimed. I worked there for many years.
@poetryonplastic Hey, Michael. FYI, I was your 40th like…lol 🥳 Seriously though, I’m totally with you regarding the Music Direct / MoFi thing, but I think it’ll take some time until they’re able to gain back the trust of their customers.
@mrsenk Yes they jack up the prices on Discogs /secondary markets with copies that they purposely hoarded for decades. Really silly for the owner to hold onto 100 copies of each title. Why not keep two or three for yourself?
Hello Miichael . Don't even listen to negative comments . You are very knowledgeable and ahould be respected as a not only an enbassador of vynil. Congrats
I just played my original 80s pressing of "Thriller" and It does sound freakin' good. I wonder how much better can the one step be? I'd rather get 3 "Tone Poets" for the same $$.
Thriller is the easiest record to find on the planet, but the new remastering could be even more thrilling. So, being an MFSL, I would expect that it would be.
MOFI only had to state back when the dsd source came into play that they will have to start using more analog to dsd mastering and that would have been transparent enough ...
I thank you for your videos about the MOFI issue. The MOFI case is a mirror faced in front of the Audiophile community that reveals the replacement of the main goal of a common audiophile which is the desire for a maximum/best sound quality reproduction with a race after the isosteric hard to get more expensive all analogue process. This has occurred without us the community stop to ask ourself or even worse, when a digital step added to an audio process is ruled automatically to be bad for the whole cutting process even it enables a (no doubt about it) superior one step pressing. no one is evaluating the whole chain. the word digital has blocked the thinking process of the total result. The question have to be asked why MOFI who undouble achieved a higher sound quality (as reported for the Abraxas release for example) had to be vague on the fact they are using a digital process in their updated sound reproduction process? is it because they want to hide a fact they are selling a much easy to produce and inferior "CD on Vinyl" product (the statement is just for the sake of discussion) and continue collecting money with higher profit from the audiophile "suckers"? or maybe is it because Audiophiles community, who their moto is judging a product sonic quality with their own ears will be too shocked to hear (Double meaning... 🙂 ) that digital process exists and add an advantage to the sound quality, in conflict with the community conception which automatically detach a "made from original master" when a step of a super high resolution digital copy is involved? If MOFI would have used a 2nd generation analogue copy, done by MOFI from original master, and not a DSD process, would the Vinyl community have accepted this step because the All analogue purity has been maintained? we have to remember that MOFI have replace the "Father + Mother" steps with a 2nd generation copy so there is an important improvement added to the process together with that 2nd generation added step. Why nobody talks about the total results? why focus only on one (important) added step? why nobody evaluate the 2 choice between a DSD vs a 2nd generation Analogue copy which MOFI has done already for us? So the vinyl community has to first identify if the latest MOFI "one step" process has a total improvement of sound or not, comparing to any process MOFI has presented over the years, and comparing with other companies audiophile releases, of course also with price tag comparison. Last, I present you with the most shocking "Elephant in the room" which no one yet on all the MOFI videos so far has neglected to talk about: In case MOFI "one step" process is found to be actually the best audio quality and efficient way to cut a vinyl from an original master then it means that within the chain of cutting process, The DSD step has the maximum and better sound quality source for the vinyl cut process, better than the vinyl product itself. This has a huge impact on the vinyl industry, because the DSD (or other high res digital file format) can be sold and streamed with even a better quality than that of the best vinyl pressing there is. This means that audiophile vinyl format becomes to be in the third place of the highest audio quality possible (the second place belongs to an exotic, expensive and very limited in quantities direct Reel to Reel studio quality copy of the original master Tape) and 1st audio quality possible to obtain at home would become to be a digital file. This removes the carpet under the whole vinyl industry, or at least the audiophile vinyl industry, and this is in my opinion the real reason for MOFI ambiguity on the cutting process.
As a non-audiophile who is interested more in the consumer advocacy angle of this, I was wondering why a company might cut its own throat this way. Your comments have clarified that for me. It seems to have a bit of a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” rationale behind it, and they miscalculated which outcome would be worse-being fully transparent, or ceding a perceived competitive advantage. I suppose they calculated that they couldn’t have it both ways, so decided to hide certain things, which seems a remarkably common (albeit shady) practice in the business world today. They do need a “crisis management” response to this, but that must embrace transparency going forward. It seems to me they could still operate effectively in both the digital and analog audiophile realms in the future as long as they are transparent, because regardless of what “objectively” sounds best-to which there will never be an answer that satisfies all listeners-no one really wants to think they are being bullshitted.
Why they have to lie .t? If they Convert the analog master to DSD and then, from the DSD copy ;they can make vinyl with high resolution as the analogo . In my opinion ; Is very practical because you have to protect the original master for future generation . Daaaaa
I'm shocked that people are shocked that the Masters are DSD. Most masters done from like 1982 on were probably done on Digital Tape anyway. Too that, if there are any Magnetic Master Tapes that can still be played, they've already been copied to a digital master. Even if the Master is transferred to a DSD file, it's still the ORIGINAL MASTER. It's an exact copy of the analog tape but will allow Mo-Fi to be able to make many copies over and over, something they couldn't do with a dying role of decaying magnetic tape that's already half-past dead. To that, wasn't it Mo-Fi that damaged the Original Master Tape for TDSOTM back in the late 70's when they accidentally taped over it with their NEW master... Is this really that big of a deal? Was Mo-Fi really deceitful or did the consumer have an unrealistic expectation in the 21st century? I love SACD and Mo-Fi makes some killer SACD's, from the same source as their LP's but without the anomalies of Vinyl Records.
Sorry but much of what you’ve posted is simply not true. Digital recording did not become dominant for a decade after 1982. While most analog tapes have been digitized the tapes mostly still exist and most are playable.
the email from Mofi Customer service was sent to me. It was posted from the Steve Hoffman forum, but it's interesting that i've seen it posted a few places now on social media, but not a single person reached out to me to confirm it's real.
I agree with the comments made in this video. Funnily a few minutes in I thought this debacle reminded me of the series "Gaslit". So more agreement there Michael. Thanks.
Well I am not a psychic, but I suspect there will be a class action, probably already is one ready to be filed ATM. And like it or not, you may end up as an expert witness again. I can easily imagine the mobile fidelity response team is putting the brakes on the needed response to anticipate the suit(s) that are almost certain to follow.
Thank Gawd for Michael - I'm stunned at the criticisms he receives - he's one of the few beacons in the darkness of our hobby that we can rely on - - on the brighter side, "your speakers sound different with different cables, sorry to tell ya" - that one brought a grin to my face, too funny - - and it's funny because it's beyond ridiculous true, no matter what ASR tells everyone and regardless that I truly respect Amir and his measurements - - my love for Stereo is burning bright after my leaving it for dead back in the dark ages of having CDs jammed down my throat - which I enjoy, but that period did bring on a loss of interest to me personally - so my opinion which isn't humble here is that we all have this man to thank for that.
Because 4xDSD has such incredibly exponentially greater & deeper resolution than 30ips analog tape, MoFi appears to be referring to the 4xDSD as “The Original Master”.
@@trackingangle929 Very true as that would be tantamount to 110% efficiency or better. But carefully transferring 30ips to 4xDSD could be analogous to carefully transferring liquid from a pint sized container to a really high quality quart sized container. MoFi has standardized on 4xDSD, effectively telling us that is the best most transparent format available today for *their* Masters.
@@DelmarToad It cannot excede the resolution of the source & furthermore analogue represents infinity (as in nature) which can never be achieved in the digital realm.
It would be like very carefully transferring liquid from a pint sized container into a really fancy high quality quart sized container. You would expect to be able to fully contain & retain everything that was in the original source container.
Their wording is that they performed the transfer and tape alignment from the master tapes themselves, on their machines, but to DSD, and not straight to the cutting lathe. Their SACD releases are correct when they say it is mastered from the original tape, but the vinyl is cut from those same files.
EPIC!!!! (love the tidbit of info. re. Michael 45rpm) So glad you made such a forceful point about the major labels no longer releasing master tapes.( I consider myself to have lived through the golden age of reissue vinyl from Classic Records, AP, Impex etc.) Life is going to seem so empty without all these dramatic revelations and ensuing videos..... Seriously though, the silence from the top brass at MoFi has been deafening.
@@trackingangle929 Thanks for responding Michael. True, but we should be able to buy all editions at hi end quality. Most people running a turntable these days are hi-fi buffs and Audiophiles. People that want quality. It's only a small minority that are running Crowley cruisers and tube suitcase gramophone players. Previously, the industry toned down the fidelity to suit these people as they were the majority (i.e Led ZepII / Bob Ludwing story). But in todays world, the masses are on Spotify using their smart phones and ear buds or at best streaming with a PC and a DAC. The industry can no longer say "we don't want to make um too good because our customers don't have good kit". All re-releases should be as good, if not better than the first pressing. After all, technology is supposed to move forward. If they want to run mono's and gatefold's and coloured vinyls for collectors, fine. But give the grass roots the very best as they are the ones loyal to the game and arguably are the customer base. Making a two tear sales system means EVERYONE is just being played and it will result in turning people away from vinyl. What happened to the customer is always right?
Thank you making this video. Transparency is the key issue here. I remember when cd’s first came out they would say AAD, ADD etc. I remember people complaining about not having pure digital recording but at least we knew. MOFI should come clean and list how the recordings were made and in all future records have those details printed clearly on every record. The worst thing that MOFI can do is bury their head in the sand and not come clean to those who purchase their records.
Great video. I am learning so much as always. Will Mobile Fidelity Vinyl price in the future change? I'm guessing it was easier to provide maximum prices when the public was under the belief that these recordings were processed a certain way, but now that the public knows better and as part of Mobile Fidelity possible image cleaan up, I was just curious as to what their price points will be in the future.
Great videos Mike, as always. Best sounding record in my collection = Mofi's Miles In The Sky. Worst sounding record in my collection = Bundles by Soft Machine, an all-analogue recording pressed in 1975. Too much prejudice against digital audio, which is probably why Mofi haven't been transparent about what they're doing.
Great video Michael! I was never a big fan of Mofi I like seeking out older copy’s that’s just me. But yes they need to be truthful about there source of master tapes or DSD that’s it!
More About Mobile Fidelity UltraDisc One-Step and Why It Is Superior 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 record-manufacturing process. MFSL engineers begin with the original master tapes and meticulously cut a set of lacquers. These lacquers are 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 replica 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.
Customers were willing to pay the significant premium - of one-step releases especially - not only for the expected sound quality but also on the assumption that working with analog only is a greater challenge and more costly. MF need not only to come clean but to cut prices in the process of regaining goodwill.
Michael, you rock man. I even think I met you in 1972 when you and a couple of others from WBCN 104.1, always my favorite station then, came to Brookline HIgh School during our Seminar Day, and when someone from the station asked us, "so you're all seniors?", I said, "well I'm a freshman, ha!" Keep doing what you're doing. Again my favorite places were Music City in Kenmore and the Harvard and Children's Hospital COOPs. Later a great store in Coolidge Corner that had Friday night 11 pm sales. Great prices and selection. Anyway thanks for shedding light on this deceptive practice by MoFi. I have some of their pressings too, not all sound better than my originals.
Good vids, and you've called them out well. As I've pointed out elsewhere, when Blue Note did the 75th anniversary vinyl releases, and Apple the 2009 stereo LP releases, they told us up front that they were cut from digital. It matters to us, and if people want to debate our foolishness about that, fine. But if you know that about vinyl purists and then mislead us...well, let's see what happens.
I dare them to hire Michael Ludwig and Michael Fremer on a consultant basis to fix this customer relations problem. They won't do it, of course they're afraid of any hint of admission of guilt, but they would be very, very wise to do so.
Hey Mikey, your Watergate comment reminds me of anther: "Oh what a tangled web we weave, when we practice to deceive..." I believe they have released a list of provenance for the albums...
The tricky thing is that MoFi uses quad DSD and plangent is a PCM process. To use it they have to convert to 24/96 or 24/192 and incur further loss of transparency from the original tape. Maybe it worth it because of the Plangent Process, but I'm sure they would rather manage on their end with playback deck and keep it DSD, which IMO sounds pretty close to the source.
It would make for an interesting experiment. But if they are applying EQ (which they do rather poorly in many cases) they can't do that in DSD. I'm trying to get the process...
Abbey Road were open from the start about their half-speed master LPs being from digital. Audiophiles bought them anyway, people loved the John Martyn 'Solid Air'. Pointless deception from MoFi, I believe that audiophiles who love the sound not the process are the silent majority.
It's amazing that some people think there could be lawsuits over this. BAILIFF: Do you swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth? MOFI: Uhh. Yes. We brought some records JUDGE: Play the one with the red cover. 4 minutes later... JUDGE: I didn't realize they still made records; and they sound way way better than I remember too. I don't hear any problem. Case dismissed...Bang.
Thank you. Of all the participants in the high end audio realm, I have the highest respect for you and your work; I’ve been following to one degree or another for decades. I am old enough (just a couple of years younger than you ;) ) to remember Watergate “in real time”/as it happened and completely agree that the cover up is worse than the crime. In the audio *entertainment* world, this is hardly a blip, at least if one cares more about musical enjoyment than process. What happened in US politics in the recent past (and the cover-up is still ongoing) makes this kerfuffle a playground dispute. As Steven Rochlin says, *Enjoy the Music*
Today picked up an US pressing on mercury records from 1950's Its "Buck Ram & his Orchestra" Manager of the Platters , case in point, 1/2 the back of the Lp describes the recording equipment even down to the Type of Resistors used in the Mixing console ! I laughed at the detail , guess they were Honest.
Hi Michel, thanks so much for all your efforts. Mofi must be transparent, and do things the Kevin Gray, Bernie Grundman and all the others are doing this. Be honest is really what we need, and not dirty capitalism. Thanks
If it sounds good, it is good. I hope there aren't any class action lawsuits. That would result in lawyers becoming rich and consumers getting a $10 discount and bankrupt MoFi due to legal fees.
@@borisspantic1333 I don't want people to lose their livelihoods over this. If they go bankrupt, it just means less choices for consumers and less records.
Thank you for your video. I would like to focus on the old vs the new Mofi cut processes and its impact on vinyl comunity. We all agree that a Mofi "original master recording" is and should be a process where MOFI gets its hands on the original master, not on an unknown copy of that master. The DSD MOFI which is using is an added, new step, within the MOFI cutting process of Original Master Tape system. The DSD copy is then becomes a (ultra hi res digital) second generation source within the Mofi cutting process. should that be the only modification for Mofi cutting process than yes, it would be a degraded Vinyl cut process comparing with MOFI original Legacy cutting system. However, Mofi takes advantage on this added step to actually reduce the total number of degradating copying steps from the whole cutting process as per the following: 1) Original Mofi ( and other companies) AAA Process steps are: Step 1: master tape to lacquer (a 2nd generation analogue mechanical copy of the master is generated into the laquer) Step 2: lacquer to Father stamper (a 3rd Generation analoge mechanical copy is generated ) Step 3: Father Stamper is copied to be Mother mold (a 4th generation analoge copy is generated) Step 4: a Stamper is copied from mother (a 5th Generation mechanical analoge) Step 5: Vinyl Stamping (a 6th generation final analoge copy is pressed on vinyl) to summarize AAA process: A vinyl recording is the 6th analoge generation copy of the original master tape 2) MOFI "1 step process" comprise of the following steps: Step 1: Master Tape to DSD (a 2nd generation Dsd version of original master is created) Step 2: DSD to Lacquer (a 3rd mechanical analoge Generation) Step 3: Lacquer to Stamper (a 4th analoge Generation) Step 4: Vinyl Stamping (a final 5th generation which contains only 4th analoge generations copy of the master ) To summarize: MOFI single step process results in a 5 generation copy of original master recording rwhere 2 analogue mechanical copies of the sound are replaced by a single DSD copy . DSD copy of original master is to my understanding a much closer to original master quality (if not identical) than to any 2nd generation analogue copy alternatives availabe. 1) This is to my opinion a significant over all advantage to the cutting process 2) The Elephant in the room: The DSD step which contains a 2nd generation copy of original master is by definition a supirior version in compare witg the vinyl outcome which is a 5th ( practically 4th) generation copy of the original master tape. This means that the best posible reproduction quality can be obtain by a direct use of the DSD via streaming or a SACD platformd. Thanks and best regards
@@mikepapas9395 You are correct, this is what I am reffering to as "the elephant in the room". However, I am not sure to how much the rights owners of original masters are willing to let a 1÷1 copy of their master to circulate freely within the internet. On my point of view I would be happy to have a 96/24 resolution of original master than any vinyl copy of that master. But I would prefer a proven great vinyl press copy of that master rather than any best quality cd copy of that master.
Really enjoyed your videos and explanations. Makes total sense. I don't own any MoFi releases. They're just too expensive but I'm glad you made this two part video.
SONY probably records their DSD archive of their original master tape assets (Columbia Records, RCA, EMI, Epic, etc.) from "Pyramix" through a n analog board (like a Neve 88RS) onto NEW 1/2-inch 2-track magnetic tape reels (SM900) for distribution to companies like MoFi...I would do it that way.
That's the problem, people spending lots of money 💰 thinking their getting all analogue chain! Sometimes digital is necessary , I get it! And it can sound really good (although still not as good as tape imho), but when your charging a premium it's best to be upfront! And please put the blame where it belongs, to the guys in the front office (PR ect.)!
No. That's not fair. Most of the time I can tell especially if a PCM file. Here, we are talking about DSD and 4X DSD. Far higher resolution and a smoother sound. I trusted Mo-Fi about using analog so when I heard something I didn't like i assumed it was something else other than analog vs. digital. If you can, compare the One-Step "Couldn't Stand the Weather" (SRV) with the one Analogue Productions released from the original master tape cut at Sterling Sound. You'd hear "it".
@@trackingangle929 in one of steve guttenberg vlogs he stated that you find a way to take your music on the go by recording your vinyl's on an dsd portable recorder; but one day you realized how much do you loose from music that way. if you realized that, why you can't realized the way around? and by the way, on another topic, dsd allegedly can't be mastered as digital file, what you record as file stays that way...but, paul from psaudio said about transfering dsd to dxd (which by the way is a pcm file, which every audiophile hates :), mastered the dxd file and than reconverting to dsd-sacd...so: is dsd so pure? (i can't show you now, but i made some calculations and dsd files starting with 2.8mhz fits poerfectly into 32bit at 88.2khz pcm, so ultimattly dsd is pcm at high rates)...a little snake oil here? ...excuse my enghlish but i'm not a native speaker
Thank you masking this video. Transparency is the key issue here. I remember when cd’s first came out they would say AAD, ADD etc. I remember people complaining about not having pure digital recording but at least we knew. MOFI should come clean and list how the recordings were made and in all future records have those details printed clearly on every record. The worst thing that MOFI can do is bury their head in the sand and not come clean to those who purchase their records.
Thanks Michael. You may know that MoFi has been making digital backup copies of master tapes for a very long time. They did so in 1982, making digital half-speed copies of the stereo Beatles box set tapes, using a large Sony BVH-1000 1' type C video recorder, and a Sony A-D / D-A converter. The early digital setup did not sound very good when used at normal 1:1 recording and playback speeds, but at half speed the sample rate was effectively doubled, and musical signal content was kept far away from the early dreadful brick-wall anti-aliasing filters surrounding the A/D/A process. That helped a lot.~~~ Also, the stereo tapes, in their metal boxes, were in the safe at MoFi for much longer than two days, no matter what Herb said - it took quite a while to carefully and delicately transfer them at half speed to the 1" machine for backup. Some of the early lacquers were cut with the master tapes, but once the tapes were returned, follow-on lacquers were cut from the backups. This is where the 'rumor' about the early box sets being more desirable came from, since there was no digital conversion, and a very large layer of complexity was naturally cut out of the signal path. ~~~ Stan was quite funny during the cutting process for the early recordings. The band was presented in ridiculous hard stereo, voices on the left and instruments on the right (or vice versa), a very gimmicky early stereo arrangement possibly imposed by a hostile recording engineer somewhere in the process. He would mute the half speed vocal signal feed to the loudspeakers, and we'd just listen to the half speed instruments over the Meyer monitors. Kept our sanity that way. There's more fun details surrounding these events as well. Best Regards!
Thank you Michael for great reporting on this issue so important to us audiophiles. I hope they do come clean so we can all move on and just talk about the music
Every time there's some type of debacle in the world, a name is assigned to it. It's usually something that ends in "gate" (referring to Watergate). What is this controversy called? Digigate? Dacgate? Mofigate? With all the Michaels involved, maybe Mikegate?
I am not, and never have been, an audiophile. I do appreciate great-sounding records, and I know what sounds good to me personally. I’m interested in this discussion more from a business/marketing/corporate transparency/consumer advocacy angle in general, and I think you and others are right to characterize it as a “disaster,” not just for MoFi’s image and reputation, but for the ripple effects that will carry through this portion of the industry, including with record retailers and resellers. It’s always infuriating to know that you’ve been lied to. From what I’ve heard from this video and a few other voices on UA-cam, I think Mr. Fremer laid out the history and facts in a fair and understandable way, even for someone like me who’s not super knowledgeable about the audiophile community.
The thing I don't relate to with audiophiles is I think it's a little crazy to have the desire to pay to hear, as Fremer suggests at the end, the difference between using a DSD step and not using it. I will concede that on a very high-quality system you *might* hear a *small* difference, but I could really care less (this is all assuming I'm not paying over say $40 for either product at the end of the day btw).
I love vinyl. I loved Mofi. Most of the time I can't afford to spend so much money for a single album, so I limit my buying to what I "must" have. I loved the idea of owning one of those limited editions. These "limited" edition are limited for quality reasons, so Mofi states. And sure, if one believes it's all analogue and sourced from the original master tapes, it's easy to understand why. But now knowing it's often a high quality digital transfer, I don't buy this no longer. They limited the release not for quality but for financial benefit reasons. What they do with "Thriller" (40 000 copies) they can do it for every other release that was done from DxD "master copies". Most of the Mofis I own sound really good, and I always thought it's a shame that not ALL records had that same quality of sound and vinyl. It bothered me, that the "real sound" of those fabulous recordings is limited to those having * the time to spend hours on the internet to be one of the few being able to obtain one of the 5000 or 10 000 copies made available, and *the money to pay over 100 $ for these records. I really hope this MOfIGATE will lead to absolute transparency on one hand and additional copies of all past limited editions from DxD files, for a far more reasonable price, on the other hand. This will have a second advantage of cutting the wings of all those buying Mofi/AP and other audiophile labels, not for listening but for speculation and resell on the "second" hand market. Thanks to you, Mr Fremer ( @TrackingAngle ), and all those involved in getting the truth finally out ! Now we need to move on and turn this scam into an opportunity to get MORE high quality records on the market for less money and help to prevent that financial speculation on the second hand market, ruins the game for those actually listening and enjoying good sounding records.
that ac/dc snippet was incredible
I'll try to put the track up from my turntable and see if AC/DC publisher leaves it up!
A brilliant and fair video. This label and their parent company now need to get back consumer trust, because I don't think I will buy another product from Music Direct/MoFi until that happens in a meaningful way.
Could not agree more
The owner Jim Davis hoards copies #001 to #100 of every single MOFI release. That is why is is rare to come across LOW numbers. Items are not as rare as claimed. I worked there for many years.
@poetryonplastic Hey, Michael. FYI, I was your 40th like…lol 🥳 Seriously though, I’m totally with you regarding the Music Direct / MoFi thing, but I think it’ll take some time until they’re able to gain back the trust of their customers.
@mrsenk Yes they jack up the prices on Discogs /secondary markets with copies that they purposely hoarded for decades. Really silly for the owner to hold onto 100 copies of each title. Why not keep two or three for yourself?
@@adamlinder4939 honestly, I’d be more Pissed about that than the DSD-gate.
Even an 8-track cartridge bought from a spinner rack at a Flying J truck stop in 1978 was ultimately "sourced from the original master tape".
I was critical of you over the interview with 45rpm, but I really appreciated this one. Very helpful information - thank you!
I note a considerable collection of long playing recordings forming a backdrop to this you tube video.
Glad this video wasn’t about how Michael Esposito wasn’t the right guy to interview MoFi guys. Fremer strengthened his ego overnight. Well done!
Hello Miichael . Don't even listen to negative comments . You are very knowledgeable and ahould be respected as a not only an enbassador of vynil. Congrats
I just played my original 80s pressing of "Thriller" and It does sound freakin' good.
I wonder how much better can the one step be? I'd rather get 3 "Tone Poets" for the same $$.
Mike said it’s amazing. 2 ‘ forward vocals
Thriller is the easiest record to find on the planet, but the new remastering could be even more thrilling. So, being an MFSL, I would expect that it would be.
Said no audiophile ever...
It will be better but the original is still quite impressive
I'd rather get 3 hot dogs than buy a mofi release.
MOFI only had to state back when the dsd source came into play that they will have to start using more analog to dsd mastering and that would have been transparent enough ...
ooof would’ve loved to have heard that ac/dc
I thank you for your videos about the MOFI issue.
The MOFI case is a mirror faced in front of the Audiophile community that reveals the replacement of the main goal of a common audiophile which is the desire for a maximum/best sound quality reproduction with a race after the isosteric hard to get more expensive all analogue process. This has occurred without us the community stop to ask ourself or even worse, when a digital step added to an audio process is ruled automatically to be bad for the whole cutting process even it enables a (no doubt about it) superior one step pressing. no one is evaluating the whole chain. the word digital has blocked the thinking process of the total result.
The question have to be asked why MOFI who undouble achieved a higher sound quality (as reported for the Abraxas release for example) had to be vague on the fact they are using a digital process in their updated sound reproduction process?
is it because they want to hide a fact they are selling a much easy to produce and inferior "CD on Vinyl" product (the statement is just for the sake of discussion) and continue collecting money with higher profit from the audiophile "suckers"?
or maybe is it because Audiophiles community, who their moto is judging a product sonic quality with their own ears will be too shocked to hear (Double meaning... 🙂 ) that digital process exists and add an advantage to the sound quality, in conflict with the community conception which automatically detach a "made from original master" when a step of a super high resolution digital copy is involved?
If MOFI would have used a 2nd generation analogue copy, done by MOFI from original master, and not a DSD process, would the Vinyl community have accepted this step because the All analogue purity has been maintained? we have to remember that MOFI have replace the "Father + Mother" steps with a 2nd generation copy so there is an important improvement added to the process together with that 2nd generation added step. Why nobody talks about the total results? why focus only on one (important) added step? why nobody evaluate the 2 choice between a DSD vs a 2nd generation Analogue copy which MOFI has done already for us?
So the vinyl community has to first identify if the latest MOFI "one step" process has a total improvement of sound or not, comparing to any process MOFI has presented over the years, and comparing with other companies audiophile releases, of course also with price tag comparison.
Last, I present you with the most shocking "Elephant in the room" which no one yet on all the MOFI videos so far has neglected to talk about:
In case MOFI "one step" process is found to be actually the best audio quality and efficient way to cut a vinyl from an original master then it means that within the chain of cutting process, The DSD step has the maximum and better sound quality source for the vinyl cut process, better than the vinyl product itself.
This has a huge impact on the vinyl industry, because the DSD (or other high res digital file format) can be sold and streamed with even a better quality than that of the best vinyl pressing there is.
This means that audiophile vinyl format becomes to be in the third place of the highest audio quality possible (the second place belongs to an exotic, expensive and very limited in quantities direct Reel to Reel studio quality copy of the original master Tape) and 1st audio quality possible to obtain at home would become to be a digital file.
This removes the carpet under the whole vinyl industry, or at least the audiophile vinyl industry, and this is in my opinion the real reason for MOFI ambiguity on the cutting process.
As a non-audiophile who is interested more in the consumer advocacy angle of this, I was wondering why a company might cut its own throat this way. Your comments have clarified that for me. It seems to have a bit of a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” rationale behind it, and they miscalculated which outcome would be worse-being fully transparent, or ceding a perceived competitive advantage. I suppose they calculated that they couldn’t have it both ways, so decided to hide certain things, which seems a remarkably common (albeit shady) practice in the business world today. They do need a “crisis management” response to this, but that must embrace transparency going forward. It seems to me they could still operate effectively in both the digital and analog audiophile realms in the future as long as they are transparent, because regardless of what “objectively” sounds best-to which there will never be an answer that satisfies all listeners-no one really wants to think they are being bullshitted.
Thank you for clarifying your stance and back story.
Most manufacturers regard honesty as a liability rather than an asset. In many cases, that is to their advantage.
This topic is better than tv. Great job Fremer!
MoFi used our passion for analog sound vinyl and took advantage of that to get our money.
I'm shocked! Shocked to find out gambling has been going on in this casino! Round up the usual suspects!
Apparently, next week they will start giving out all the processes for every album going back to the 80's.
Why they have to lie .t? If they Convert the analog master to DSD and then, from the DSD copy ;they can make vinyl with high resolution as the analogo . In my opinion ; Is very practical because you have to protect the original master for future generation . Daaaaa
I fainted when I heard that. My wife had to throw a bucket of water in my face and kicked me in the ribs to revive me.
I'm shocked that people are shocked that the Masters are DSD. Most masters done from like 1982 on were probably done on Digital Tape anyway. Too that, if there are any Magnetic Master Tapes that can still be played, they've already been copied to a digital master. Even if the Master is transferred to a DSD file, it's still the ORIGINAL MASTER. It's an exact copy of the analog tape but will allow Mo-Fi to be able to make many copies over and over, something they couldn't do with a dying role of decaying magnetic tape that's already half-past dead. To that, wasn't it Mo-Fi that damaged the Original Master Tape for TDSOTM back in the late 70's when they accidentally taped over it with their NEW master... Is this really that big of a deal? Was Mo-Fi really deceitful or did the consumer have an unrealistic expectation in the 21st century? I love SACD and Mo-Fi makes some killer SACD's, from the same source as their LP's but without the anomalies of Vinyl Records.
Sorry but much of what you’ve posted is simply not true. Digital recording did not become dominant for a decade after 1982. While most analog tapes have been digitized the tapes mostly still exist and most are playable.
And digitization is not transparent to the source. The best is close but…
If they were upfront about what they did none of this would have happened
“The Cover Up is Always Worse Than The Crime” is 100% true!
the email from Mofi Customer service was sent to me. It was posted from the Steve Hoffman forum, but it's interesting that i've seen it posted a few places now on social media, but not a single person reached out to me to confirm it's real.
It came to me from someone I trust. Did anyone on SHF claim it was fake?
@@trackingangle929 we just believe everything we read on the internet now? How pro journalist! Someone i trust told me Mofi records were AAA.
That sound you hear in the distance is Mofi lp prices crashing on discogs.
I agree with the comments made in this video. Funnily a few minutes in I thought this debacle reminded me of the series "Gaslit". So more agreement there Michael. Thanks.
The Michael Ludwig Chad Kassem video stream was FANTASTIC!! 45RPM Mike is really becoming a fantastic resource for analog/vinyl info.
Well I am not a psychic, but I suspect there will be a class action, probably already is one ready to be filed ATM. And like it or not, you may end up as an expert witness again. I can easily imagine the mobile fidelity response team is putting the brakes on the needed response to anticipate the suit(s) that are almost certain to follow.
Thank Gawd for Michael - I'm stunned at the criticisms he receives - he's one of the few beacons in the darkness of our hobby that we can rely on - - on the brighter side, "your speakers sound different with different cables, sorry to tell ya" - that one brought a grin to my face, too funny - - and it's funny because it's beyond ridiculous true, no matter what ASR tells everyone and regardless that I truly respect Amir and his measurements - - my love for Stereo is burning bright after my leaving it for dead back in the dark ages of having CDs jammed down my throat - which I enjoy, but that period did bring on a loss of interest to me personally - so my opinion which isn't humble here is that we all have this man to thank for that.
Well, no matter what you think about this guy, at least he didn't return from Munich declaring "peace for our time".
Because 4xDSD has such incredibly exponentially greater & deeper resolution than 30ips analog tape, MoFi appears to be referring to the 4xDSD as “The Original Master”.
Well, by definition the transfer can't yield higher resolution than the source.
@@trackingangle929 Very true as that would be tantamount to 110% efficiency or better. But carefully transferring 30ips to 4xDSD could be analogous to carefully transferring liquid from a pint sized container to a really high quality quart sized container. MoFi has standardized on 4xDSD, effectively telling us that is the best most transparent format available today for *their* Masters.
@@DelmarToad It cannot excede the resolution of the source & furthermore analogue represents infinity (as in nature) which can never be achieved in the digital realm.
It would be like very carefully transferring liquid from a pint sized container into a really fancy high quality quart sized container. You would expect to be able to fully contain & retain everything that was in the original source container.
Their wording is that they performed the transfer and tape alignment from the master tapes themselves, on their machines, but to DSD, and not straight to the cutting lathe. Their SACD releases are correct when they say it is mastered from the original tape, but the vinyl is cut from those same files.
Love your work Michael. Screw the haters! This was extremely interesting and I'd love more videos like this with the history of labels.
Hearing this brought me back to MQA brou-ha-ha.
Ha, I didn't know Michael Ludwigs was involved in helping deflect VWgate! I'm sure that was a healthy contract to secure! LOL. Good video Michael.
As always, great vid, great insight. Keep ‘em coming.
EPIC!!!! (love the tidbit of info. re. Michael 45rpm) So glad you made such a forceful point about the major labels no longer releasing master tapes.( I consider myself to have lived through the golden age of reissue vinyl from Classic Records, AP, Impex etc.) Life is going to seem so empty without all these dramatic revelations and ensuing videos..... Seriously though, the silence from the top brass at MoFi has been deafening.
The formats that sound closest to the master tapes are: 1. Digital, 2. Digital, 3. Digital. Thank you MoFi !
1. DSD 2. Second generation tape 3. 24/192 PCM
We need a new version of the spars codes
Audiophiles will still buy it.... Because they are COLLECTORS! They have to have it! They have to have everything... even if it sounds bad!
So freaking true!
Well, collectors will buy it. Not all audiophiles are collectors!
@@trackingangle929 i think there’s a fine line. Considering which ever the prioritize. Music over collectibility and Vice verse.
@@trackingangle929 Thanks for responding Michael. True, but we should be able to buy all editions at hi end quality. Most people running a turntable these days are hi-fi buffs and Audiophiles. People that want quality. It's only a small minority that are running Crowley cruisers and tube suitcase gramophone players. Previously, the industry toned down the fidelity to suit these people as they were the majority (i.e Led ZepII / Bob Ludwing story). But in todays world, the masses are on Spotify using their smart phones and ear buds or at best streaming with a PC and a DAC. The industry can no longer say "we don't want to make um too good because our customers don't have good kit".
All re-releases should be as good, if not better than the first pressing. After all, technology is supposed to move forward. If they want to run mono's and gatefold's and coloured vinyls for collectors, fine. But give the grass roots the very best as they are the ones loyal to the game and arguably are the customer base. Making a two tear sales system means EVERYONE is just being played and it will result in turning people away from vinyl.
What happened to the customer is always right?
Thank you making this video. Transparency is the key issue here. I remember when cd’s first came out they would say AAD, ADD etc. I remember people complaining about not having pure digital recording but at least we knew. MOFI should come clean and list how the recordings were made and in all future records have those details printed clearly on every record. The worst thing that MOFI can do is bury their head in the sand and not come clean to those who purchase their records.
Excellent video, Michael 👍
That were impressive and best founded arguments and statements for the theme of the year. Congratulation Michael
Great video. I am learning so much as always. Will Mobile Fidelity Vinyl price in the future change? I'm guessing it was easier to provide maximum prices when the public was under the belief that these recordings were processed a certain way, but now that the public knows better and as part of Mobile Fidelity possible image cleaan up, I was just curious as to what their price points will be in the future.
I'm a vinyl nerd, but will be considering more SACD products.
Great videos Mike, as always.
Best sounding record in my collection = Mofi's Miles In The Sky.
Worst sounding record in my collection = Bundles by Soft Machine, an all-analogue recording pressed in 1975.
Too much prejudice against digital audio, which is probably why Mofi haven't been transparent about what they're doing.
Great video Michael! I was never a big fan of Mofi I like seeking out older copy’s that’s just me. But yes they need to be truthful about there source of master tapes or DSD that’s it!
Charging exhorbitant analog prices for audio version of photoshop...nice. It'd be fine if they just said this is REALLY good digital capture.
It’s Subway tuna all over again.
More About Mobile Fidelity UltraDisc One-Step and Why It Is Superior
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 record-manufacturing process. MFSL engineers begin with the original master tapes and meticulously cut a set of lacquers. These lacquers are 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 replica 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.
Not sure why you are posting advertising here but feel free.
19:50 exactly! Can you imagine the fun to be had in comparing the Mofi AAA Bitches Brew to a Mofi One-Step Bitches Brew!!
Customers were willing to pay the significant premium - of one-step releases especially - not only for the expected sound quality but also on the assumption that working with analog only is a greater challenge and more costly. MF need not only to come clean but to cut prices in the process of regaining goodwill.
Michael, I have always admired your honesty and integrity. Has any progress been made regarding the DSD vs. master tape comparison you spoke of?
Excellent conclusion to the first video.
Michael, you rock man. I even think I met you in 1972 when you and a couple of others from WBCN 104.1, always my favorite station then, came to Brookline HIgh School during our Seminar Day, and when someone from the station asked us, "so you're all seniors?", I said, "well I'm a freshman, ha!" Keep doing what you're doing. Again my favorite places were Music City in Kenmore and the Harvard and Children's Hospital COOPs. Later a great store in Coolidge Corner that had Friday night 11 pm sales. Great prices and selection. Anyway thanks for shedding light on this deceptive practice by MoFi. I have some of their pressings too, not all sound better than my originals.
So we're all listening to digital on vinyl! How do you like them apples? I'll be no good dadgummed!
Good vids, and you've called them out well. As I've pointed out elsewhere, when Blue Note did the 75th anniversary vinyl releases, and Apple the 2009 stereo LP releases, they told us up front that they were cut from digital. It matters to us, and if people want to debate our foolishness about that, fine. But if you know that about vinyl purists and then mislead us...well, let's see what happens.
Great final thought and an amazing idea!!! Go Fund Me for the two lacquers and we all get each record!!! Im all in!!!
I dare them to hire Michael Ludwig and Michael Fremer on a consultant basis to fix this customer relations problem. They won't do it, of course they're afraid of any hint of admission of guilt, but they would be very, very wise to do so.
Hey Mikey, your Watergate comment reminds me of anther: "Oh what a tangled web we weave, when we practice to deceive..." I believe they have released a list of provenance for the albums...
I saw the MoFi ad / headline with Bernie Grundman
It lasted under 10 minutes, immediately seen, possibly tagged/ copied on Steve Hoffman Forums
Man if there’s a screen grab I’d love to have it!!!
The tricky thing is that MoFi uses quad DSD and plangent is a PCM process. To use it they have to convert to 24/96 or 24/192 and incur further loss of transparency from the original tape. Maybe it worth it because of the Plangent Process, but I'm sure they would rather manage on their end with playback deck and keep it DSD, which IMO sounds pretty close to the source.
It would make for an interesting experiment. But if they are applying EQ (which they do rather poorly in many cases) they can't do that in DSD. I'm trying to get the process...
Abbey Road were open from the start about their half-speed master LPs being from digital. Audiophiles bought them anyway, people loved the John Martyn 'Solid Air'. Pointless deception from MoFi, I believe that audiophiles who love the sound not the process are the silent majority.
I got the impression they do have data on how they did the older stuff. I'm thinking it's just not in computer data base.
It's amazing that some people think there could be lawsuits over this.
BAILIFF: Do you swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
MOFI: Uhh. Yes. We brought some records
JUDGE: Play the one with the red cover.
4 minutes later...
JUDGE: I didn't realize they still made records; and they sound way way better than I remember too. I don't hear any problem. Case dismissed...Bang.
u just gotta ❤️ this!
✌️❤️🇩🇰
Very good and fair video, Michael.
Thank you. Of all the participants in the high end audio realm, I have the highest respect for you and your work; I’ve been following to one degree or another for decades.
I am old enough (just a couple of years younger than you ;) ) to remember Watergate “in real time”/as it happened and completely agree that the cover up is worse than the crime. In the audio *entertainment* world, this is hardly a blip, at least if one cares more about musical enjoyment than process. What happened in US politics in the recent past (and the cover-up is still ongoing) makes this kerfuffle a playground dispute. As Steven Rochlin says, *Enjoy the Music*
Today picked up an US pressing on mercury records from 1950's Its "Buck Ram & his Orchestra" Manager of the Platters , case in point, 1/2 the back of the Lp describes the recording equipment even down to the Type of Resistors used in the Mixing console ! I laughed at the detail , guess they were Honest.
Can’t believe they don’t have records of what was done for each pressing. If not that says a lot about how they runs things.
You’re the best Michael 👍
Harry Pearson from the other Magazine told us CDS were bad and We said oh yah it was true and Now You have Put MOFI to Task Thank You.
Hi Michel, thanks so much for all your efforts. Mofi must be transparent, and do things the Kevin Gray, Bernie Grundman and all the others are doing this. Be honest is really what we need, and not dirty capitalism. Thanks
20,000 copies of Miles Davis “Kind of Blue” UHQR ALL ANALOG???
I have QUESTIONS!
Michael a great informative video & finally the last one I need to see from anyone regarding this mofi debacle. Your last sentence "quote" nailed it !
Thanks man now let’s get back to music
What you are getting is a 4xDSD sound. Whatever that is.
thank you
If it sounds good, it is good. I hope there aren't any class action lawsuits. That would result in lawyers becoming rich and consumers getting a $10 discount and bankrupt MoFi due to legal fees.
Class action suits are among the biggest scams ever. Started out with a purpose but then….bottom dwellers took over.
They need to go bankrupt.
@@borisspantic1333 They are nowhere near bankrupt, not by a long shot.
@@borisspantic1333 I don't want people to lose their livelihoods over this. If they go bankrupt, it just means less choices for consumers and less records.
So is the mono Dylan box from digital files? Thought that set was cut from analog.
GET'M Mikey-go for the throat- Grrrr
The cover up is worse than the crime !! Absolutely. Great vid Michael 👍
Michael, what year did you DJ at WBCN? 😅
Thank you for your video. I would like to focus on the old vs the new Mofi cut processes and its impact on vinyl comunity.
We all agree that a Mofi "original master recording" is and should be a process where MOFI gets its hands on the original master, not on an unknown copy of that master. The DSD MOFI which is using is an added, new step, within the MOFI cutting process of Original Master Tape system. The DSD copy is then becomes a (ultra hi res digital) second generation source within the Mofi cutting process. should that be the only modification for Mofi cutting process than yes, it would be a degraded Vinyl cut process comparing with MOFI original Legacy cutting system.
However, Mofi takes advantage on this added step to actually reduce the total number of degradating copying steps from the whole cutting process as per the following:
1) Original Mofi ( and other companies) AAA Process steps are:
Step 1: master tape to lacquer (a 2nd generation analogue mechanical copy of the master is generated into the laquer)
Step 2: lacquer to Father stamper (a 3rd Generation analoge mechanical copy is generated )
Step 3: Father Stamper is copied to be Mother mold (a 4th generation analoge copy is generated)
Step 4: a Stamper is copied from mother (a 5th Generation mechanical analoge)
Step 5: Vinyl Stamping (a 6th generation final analoge copy is pressed on vinyl)
to summarize AAA process: A vinyl recording is the 6th analoge generation copy of the original master tape
2) MOFI "1 step process" comprise of the following steps:
Step 1: Master Tape to DSD (a 2nd generation Dsd version of original master is created)
Step 2: DSD to Lacquer (a 3rd mechanical analoge Generation)
Step 3: Lacquer to Stamper (a 4th analoge Generation)
Step 4: Vinyl Stamping (a final 5th generation which contains only 4th analoge generations copy of the master )
To summarize: MOFI single step process results in a 5 generation copy of original master recording rwhere 2 analogue mechanical copies of the sound are replaced by a single DSD copy . DSD copy of original master is to my understanding a much closer to original master quality (if not identical) than to any 2nd generation analogue copy alternatives availabe.
1) This is to my opinion a significant over all advantage to the cutting process
2) The Elephant in the room: The DSD step which contains a 2nd generation copy of original master is by definition a supirior version in compare witg the vinyl outcome which is a 5th ( practically 4th) generation copy of the original master tape.
This means that the best posible reproduction quality can be obtain by a direct use of the DSD via streaming or a SACD platformd.
Thanks and best regards
No, the EITR is, not informing people when you’re not using Analog, but instead digital.
Yes but…. If it’s DSD then it’s best to just sell DSD files and not degrade the audio with the record making process you described.
@@mikepapas9395
You are correct, this is what I am reffering to as "the elephant in the room".
However, I am not sure to how much the rights owners of original masters are willing to let a 1÷1 copy of their master to circulate freely within the internet.
On my point of view I would be happy to have a 96/24 resolution of original master than any vinyl copy of that master. But I would prefer a proven great vinyl press copy of that master rather than any best quality cd copy of that master.
Sticking it to the MAN .
Thank you, but now.... i got a headache
Me too! Trust me…
I reckon they should transfer the analog tape to DSD and then copy it to cassette then put it on cd and then onto MP3 and cut from that
Really enjoyed your videos and explanations. Makes total sense. I don't own any MoFi releases. They're just too expensive but I'm glad you made this two part video.
SONY probably records their DSD archive of their original master tape assets (Columbia Records, RCA, EMI, Epic, etc.) from "Pyramix" through a n analog board (like a Neve 88RS) onto NEW 1/2-inch 2-track magnetic tape reels (SM900) for distribution to companies like MoFi...I would do it that way.
This was a fair video Michael. I see now why you did what you did. You're not the culprit here. MoFi is.
That's the problem, people spending lots of money 💰 thinking their getting all analogue chain! Sometimes digital is necessary , I get it! And it can sound really good (although still not as good as tape imho), but when your charging a premium it's best to be upfront! And please put the blame where it belongs, to the guys in the front office (PR ect.)!
So that is mr fremer excusing for not been able to tell the dif between analog and digital
No. That's not fair. Most of the time I can tell especially if a PCM file. Here, we are talking about DSD and 4X DSD. Far higher resolution and a smoother sound. I trusted Mo-Fi about using analog so when I heard something I didn't like i assumed it was something else other than analog vs. digital. If you can, compare the One-Step "Couldn't Stand the Weather" (SRV) with the one Analogue Productions released from the original master tape cut at Sterling Sound. You'd hear "it".
@@trackingangle929 in one of steve guttenberg vlogs he stated that you find a way to take your music on the go by recording your vinyl's on an dsd portable recorder; but one day you realized how much do you loose from music that way. if you realized that, why you can't realized the way around? and by the way, on another topic, dsd allegedly can't be mastered as digital file, what you record as file stays that way...but, paul from psaudio said about transfering dsd to dxd (which by the way is a pcm file, which every audiophile hates :), mastered the dxd file and than reconverting to dsd-sacd...so: is dsd so pure? (i can't show you now, but i made some calculations and dsd files starting with 2.8mhz fits poerfectly into 32bit at 88.2khz pcm, so ultimattly dsd is pcm at high rates)...a little snake oil here?
...excuse my enghlish but i'm not a native speaker
@@cataclem28 Was Steve Guttenberg talking about me? Because that's not true about me at all. I digitize my vinyl for portable use at 96/24.
@@trackingangle929 i will search the video...but it was old about 2-3 years perhaps
Mike Esposito is a legend!!!
Thank you masking this video. Transparency is the key issue here. I remember when cd’s first came out they would say AAD, ADD etc. I remember people complaining about not having pure digital recording but at least we knew. MOFI should come clean and list how the recordings were made and in all future records have those details printed clearly on every record. The worst thing that MOFI can do is bury their head in the sand and not come clean to those who purchase their records.
Thanks Michael. You may know that MoFi has been making digital backup copies of master tapes for a very long time. They did so in 1982, making digital half-speed copies of the stereo Beatles box set tapes, using a large Sony BVH-1000 1' type C video recorder, and a Sony A-D / D-A converter. The early digital setup did not sound very good when used at normal 1:1 recording and playback speeds, but at half speed the sample rate was effectively doubled, and musical signal content was kept far away from the early dreadful brick-wall anti-aliasing filters surrounding the A/D/A process. That helped a lot.~~~ Also, the stereo tapes, in their metal boxes, were in the safe at MoFi for much longer than two days, no matter what Herb
said - it took quite a while to carefully and delicately transfer them at half speed to the 1" machine for backup. Some of the early lacquers were cut with the master tapes, but once the tapes were returned, follow-on lacquers were cut from the backups. This is where the 'rumor' about the early box sets being more desirable came from, since there was no digital conversion, and a very large layer of complexity was naturally cut out of the signal path. ~~~ Stan was quite funny during the cutting process for the early recordings. The band was presented in ridiculous hard stereo, voices on the left and instruments on the right (or vice versa), a very gimmicky early stereo arrangement possibly imposed by a hostile recording engineer somewhere in the process. He would mute the half speed vocal signal feed to the loudspeakers, and we'd just listen to the half speed instruments over the Meyer monitors. Kept our sanity that way. There's more fun details surrounding these events as well. Best Regards!
Unbelievable windbag. Am I going to be like this when I'm 75?
Excellent video 👍🏻👍🏻
There's gotta be a class action lawsuit. They lied and got over on a lot of people. No way they get out clean from this.
Thank you Michael for great reporting on this issue so important to us audiophiles. I hope they do come clean so we can all move on and just talk about the music
Every time there's some type of debacle in the world, a name is assigned to it. It's usually something that ends in "gate" (referring to Watergate). What is this controversy called? Digigate? Dacgate? Mofigate? With all the Michaels involved, maybe Mikegate?
I am not, and never have been, an audiophile. I do appreciate great-sounding records, and I know what sounds good to me personally. I’m interested in this discussion more from a business/marketing/corporate transparency/consumer advocacy angle in general, and I think you and others are right to characterize it as a “disaster,” not just for MoFi’s image and reputation, but for the ripple effects that will carry through this portion of the industry, including with record retailers and resellers. It’s always infuriating to know that you’ve been lied to. From what I’ve heard from this video and a few other voices on UA-cam, I think Mr. Fremer laid out the history and facts in a fair and understandable way, even for someone like me who’s not super knowledgeable about the audiophile community.
The thing I don't relate to with audiophiles is I think it's a little crazy to have the desire to pay to hear, as Fremer suggests at the end, the difference between using a DSD step and not using it. I will concede that on a very high-quality system you *might* hear a *small* difference, but I could really care less (this is all assuming I'm not paying over say $40 for either product at the end of the day btw).
Michael you are the best…..😊We want transparentsy 😅
Have a good day 👍
-Thomas
I love vinyl. I loved Mofi. Most of the time I can't afford to spend so much money for a single album, so I limit my buying to what I "must" have. I loved the idea of owning one of those limited editions.
These "limited" edition are limited for quality reasons, so Mofi states. And sure, if one believes it's all analogue and sourced from the original master tapes, it's easy to understand why. But now knowing it's often a high quality digital transfer, I don't buy this no longer. They limited the release not for quality but for financial benefit reasons. What they do with "Thriller" (40 000 copies) they can do it for every other release that was done from DxD "master copies".
Most of the Mofis I own sound really good, and I always thought it's a shame that not ALL records had that same quality of sound and vinyl.
It bothered me, that the "real sound" of those fabulous recordings is limited to those having
* the time to spend hours on the internet to be one of the few being able to obtain one of the 5000 or 10 000 copies made available, and
*the money to pay over 100 $ for these records.
I really hope this MOfIGATE will lead to absolute transparency on one hand and additional copies of all past limited editions from DxD files, for a far more reasonable price, on the other hand.
This will have a second advantage of cutting the wings of all those buying Mofi/AP and other audiophile labels, not for listening but for speculation and resell on the "second" hand market.
Thanks to you, Mr Fremer ( @TrackingAngle ), and all those involved in getting the truth finally out !
Now we need to move on and turn this scam into an opportunity to get MORE high quality records on the market for less money and help to prevent that financial speculation on the second hand market, ruins the game for those actually listening and enjoying good sounding records.
I thought it was Lou Reed in the thumbnail..