BREAKING NEWS: ALL Mobile Fidelity titles since 2015 Are digital? My thoughts.
Вставка
- Опубліковано 13 лип 2022
- Join us on Whatnot with the link below.
whatnot.com/invite/theingroove
Check us out online at - theingroove.com
eBay Store - www.ebay.com/str/theingroove
Discogs - www.discogs.com/seller/theing...
Selling a Record Collection? Hit us up on our contact page found here. www.theingroove.com/contact-us
______________________________________________________________
Once again Michael Ludwig has covered this first. Both when Thriller was announced and just recently brought it up again in regards to how unlikely any studio would allow endless uses of the OG tapes. Just saying, Mike needs to thank 45 RPM for these takes. Ha!
This has been percolating well before his video but I'm not going to come on youtube and start randomly suggesting things based on rumor. I need real info and facts. I could of did this video weeks ago with a lot less info than I have now. Everything Mike said on his video was already said 100x over.
@@TheInGroove still a friendly nod wouldn’t hurt. Would it? I mean you did just admit your attempt at humor at his expense didn’t come off well. He did mention it twice well before now and you also admit your “info” may be wrong. Are we vinyl community or vinyl feuds?
☮️ (just busting you balls a bit Mike, as you did with Ludwig)
@@DC-xx4kv I agree
Totally agree, D C! Mike Ludwig (45 RPM) deserves some credit for bringing this matter up for discussion BEFORE ANY other large subscription base youtubers in the vinyl community.
@@DC-xx4kv In defense of Mike@IG and for some insight to newer viewers Ludwigs started the beef between these two by posting a video on Christmas Day dedicated to personally attacking Mike@IG for his views and motives on ERC. That video crossed the line of an opinion and was an unprovoked character assassination. Ludwig’s Christmas video was also largely slammed by members of the VC and he never apologized or referenced it again for whatever reason. I can completely understand why Mike@IG would not feel a need to give credit to someone who sucker punched him. Anyway glad everyone is talking about holding MoFI accountable, because that’s the important part.
This only proves one thing to me. That all of the audiophiles that claim they can hear the difference between digitized music and analog music are full of it, because they have been telling all of us how wonderful the MOFI records sound. I agree with them those records sound great.
I have tested this in my system a few times and for the most part, agree with you. The recording, engineering, and master matter far more than the format.
He is talking about potential digital they could be using which isn't even available for the general public. Most digital vinyls I hear are 96/24, 192/24 or maybe 384/24. I can spot these easily because they sound flat. MOFI might be using way more advanced digital.
@@booom4849 it’s just funny, I too can hear a difference between an mp3 and flac, yes there is a difference between digital media, my point remains. Everyone who sells analog only and has been telling us how wonderful some of the recent ,what was believed to be AAA mofi titles are, clearly can not tell the difference between a well mastered and digitized ADA record and a AAA record. In the next few months we will see all types of excuses as to why this is and how a 50k cable can fix the issue
@@fernandoplata9785 That would be AAD(A) though. I'm pretty skeptical about the current generation digital mixing capabilities.
Most every comparison I have made when listening to the Raw DSD file of a vinyl album pressed from it sounds incredibly different and nearly always no ....always to me sounds better on vinyl. Nobody has yet worked out why but its no less true. Its perplexing fir DSD champion Paul McGowan as he knows it to be true even on the octive records label stuff. It may well be how the human auditory system works , I am not clever enough to comment on the psycho acoustics but I have CD copies and great vinyl copies of the same albums and when people listen they without exception ask if they can listen more to vinyl. There has to be something at work here. You can't make those statements unless you can A/B two vinyl onsteps one from a diflgital copy and the other from the master tape. I think I would be able to diffetentiate. As far as the MOFI one step stuff is concerned, they just need to set the record straight. If the have deceived customers it could seriously damage their credibility.
So basically, MOFI just proved that all these guys who swore they could tell analog from digital were just full of crap!! 🤣🤣🤣 Thanks MoFi for settling that tired old debate!
Aaahh...but young one....a true Jedi Master record collector knew all along that those post 2015 Mofi records had a digital step. The Force that dwells in their ears told them so.
That was my thinking lol. It isn't digital that is the problem. It's how digital is often mastered and compressed. If you make a needle-drop recording of an analog-made vinyl record, then put that recording onto a CD, and play the CD copy and the original vinyl side-by-side, you cannot hear the difference. If digital were a format inherently incapable of capturing the warmth and dynamic range of analog, then even a digital copy of an original record would not be able to reproduce that same sound. But it can. Studies have demonstrated that again and again.
I love vinyl, and I love the compression and mastering process that gets music onto vinyl and brings out the warmth and depth that we often hear on vinyl pressings. But if companies can flawlessly reproduce that sound through digital means, and therefore have an infinite number of copies possible to produce, then I see nothing wrong with that. In fact, it makes the release of Mo-Fi sets less elitist and more affordable because we know they'll be able to put them back in print even after the initial runs.
@@Progger11 SPOT! W#$@$ing ON!
That is actually a really good point. There are a lot of snake oil salesmen in the audio world.
As an all-digital systems user, I’ve never laughed so hard at this hobby as I’m laughing now
Hi there. My father, Stan Ricker, passed away in 2015. He wasn’t able to do any masters after that point so I would assume anything past august of 2015 it was digital. I love my dad. He was an amazing talent. We miss him
Ephinany moment, it’s taken a vinyl record to show how good digital can sound.
🤣
True
This is not about the sound quality. Is about transparency. If I want to buy chicken I want them to sell me chicken, not some other meat because if it takes like chicken, what gives in what they really sell me.
My first thought is, “wow”! My second thought is, “Digital isn’t bad, Compression is bad”. It’s certainly possible to utilize DSD files to recreate ambiance and dynamics. Interesting….
DSD is actually superior to tape...its all in the gear...
Yes, compression is bad but once you get to cd quality, human ears cannot tell the difference between cd and any higher res file. Vinyl, meanwhile, suffers from distortion, dynamic range compression and frequency response compression on the inner tracks. The vinyl is causing way more imperfection than MOFI's very well done digital step. They should have been transparent but covered it up to please and sell to the analog purists.
Absolutely, COMPRESSION is the true enemy. I feel this ignores the real problem.
Sounds like they are doing digital right. That Monk record is phenomenal. Maybe the manufacturing process is a bigger factor than we assumed
As someone that uses digital and vinyl, I really would love to see Mobile Fidelity offer the DSD source of these records for sale.
They kind of do! They sell Super Audio CDs that contain a DSD layer and a PCM layer
@@vadermstarr5435 No, they actually don't, because Krieg Wunderlich masters the vinyl versions, and Rob LoVerde remasters the SACDs. They EQ quite differently, so the SACDs and the vinyl versions often sound dramatically different.
@@mcnyregrus so neither of them are true to the source.. lol
@@andrewcook4072 That's not the point of a remaster. A remaster is supposed to be EQ'ed differently to make it sound better than the original master/source (although some remasters sound worse). If you just release the original master/source again it's not a remaster but a reissue.
@@mcnyregrus I have a feeling everyone is getting off the point. A vinyl print has to be remastered differently to any other source because of a records lack of dynamics and sound characteristics. Tape can be just a pure copy off the original master or EQd if they wish, that's if the original is on tape anyway. Digital is copied on to digital format and then EQd to suit whatever format it finished on. A sound engineer will always play with setting to suit themselves, whatever medium it is finally finished with.
Point being. The buyer doesn't know what the hell is what any more. And to a certain extent didn't need to know, all they need to know is do they like the sound and is this the best that can be made from the original source, and hopefully you have the same tastes as the engineer..
I guarantee if you had the ability to mix it to your tastes it would sound a touch different.
My thoughts on MoFi are unchanged, honestly. Like you Mike, the One Steps I’ve purchased over the past couple of years, they are and remain, some of the best sounding records in my entire collection, and I’m not a newbie. Like almost all Gen Xers, we’re old enough to have experienced the peak of vinyl, the format’s slow descent into obscurity, and finally, what many thought would be the death of vinyl. Fortunately, it didn’t die, and has now become arguably, the number one physical format. The LP is here to stay.
I laughed so hard, when I read the title of this video. I really hope this is true. Because it proves, that nobody can hear the difference between a high quality digital and analog version of the same recording. So, now we can finally leave that 'audiophile' nonsense behind us. Go buy and enjoy the records you like, because it has great music on it.
btw. I think MoFi should be honest about what sources they do use. A good quality product will sell, no matter what the source or mastering is.
No that doesn't show nobody can hear the difference. Only comparing the same pressing process, one from analog, one from digital can show that. Plus you need a very high end system to reveal the subtleties. Bottom line is If I want to listen to DSD files, I have a dac that can play them. If I'm going to the trouble and expense of listening to LP's, I want it to be analog, or at least be informed of what I am paying for. It's like saying, go you can't taste the difference between a free range egg and a factory farm egg. It doesn't matter. We're paying for an experience, and lying about your farm is pure deception and Illegal.
@@johnnycashlesscomedy8616 Bingo.
@@johnnycashlesscomedy8616 Just let it go man
@@johnnycashlesscomedy8616 Totally agree.
Uh no. There is a difference you are just being lied to about what that difference is. I can play with an EQ and mess with any digital song to make it sound different and some would say "better" but it's not original. It's someone elses interpretation. Some are confusing "better" with different. These people that bought these MoFi albums say it sounds better. they may assume that different sound is better when in fact it's different.
I too have collected Mobile Fidelity since I was a teen in the late '70s. Their Records, cassettes and reel-to-reels have always held a special place in my heart and ears. To hear that theres a digital step involved us not a surprise to me because like yourself I've lied to myself, and/or shut down trains of thought by consoling myself with the very real fact that nothing sounds better. Its an unavoidable fact that digital will be a part of vinyl record manufacturing. Amd as long as they continue to make records sound better as my ears continue to age, I really don't care. Quieter vinyl, reduction in recording/pressing vibrations, etc, will play a part. Whether I like it of not.
Great vid. A lot to unpack here. Love as a peak vinyl collector you’re still asking questions and seeking the best. I’d still pay $49 for a Mofi pressing but not much more with this info. This could have ripple effects on the whole market. I can see the vinyl market imploding or exploding with info like this, inflation, additional plants, more product, aging artists selling their music rights, etc
I would have a much higher opinion of MSFL if they would just be 100% transparent with each and every album they release. I would ask MFSL if they would rather have a reputation built on total honesty and trust, or constantly have the cloud of suspicion hovering over every release.
So if they came out and said "guys sorry but yes every mofi lp since ____ that youve purchased is digitally sourced and these are the new ones that are" Why would that make a difference? Would it change your mind about how it sounds?
I mean you see where Im going with this?
How much of this "Oh its aaa, thank goodness!" is placebo affect?
@@FleagleSangria then why the apparent deception? Hmmm?
@@FleagleSangria only placebo if you have a shitty system
Because people will pay more for analog plain and simple. Regardless if the digital version can sound as good or possibly better vinyl collectors have been conditioned to turn their noses up at digital pressings.
@@vcp93 Because they know their illogical customers? lol
First of all Mike….I can see the disappointment in your eyes and can hear it in your voice. I agree with you Mike. As a consumer, we deserve transparency on the products we purchase. If these are 100% true statements of how One Steps are being manufactured, I feel cheated as I own all One Steps with the exception of Abraxis, for obvious reasons. I’m with you Mike!
He is speculating. He does not have a first hand source for his claim. It may or may not turn out to be true but that's a different issue.
I have two Abraxis One Steps. One unopened. Believe it is number 8. I got onboard early.
Abraxas, but an approximation of the title is kind of fitting.
This information definitely tarnishes the brand for me but if the Thriller One Step sounds better than any other version, I'm still going to be a happy customer. I will still buy their records as long as they still sound incredible. I just feel a little hoodwinked right now. Thank you for the video Mike.
I share your sentiment.
If Mofi was selling records at the 25-30 dollar range, I don't think we'd have much to say. It's the fact that they sell records for $60-$125, use hype statements "Mastered from the Original Master Tapes" which has caused me to believe that those records were "AAA". I do want to go on record and say that "if" Mofi has a digital step that helps increase production, I'm okay with it. The results speak for themself, and I too will continue buying Mofi records. I have Thriller, and all the Van Halen one-steps on order. That said, it would be nice to have transparency. Come on Mofi, do the right thing please......
As you know Melinda, I do not like MoFi, and I haven't bought one of their vinyl records since the Miles Davis Kind of Blue 45 rpm box set came out. Old MoFi yes. New MoFi no. Now we find out that it's very likely that they have been BS'ing people on at least some of their releases. I will stick with serious audiophile companies like AP/QRP. That digitally manipulated Thriller One Step will never sound as good as an audiophile all analogue cut vinyl record.
@@audiophileman7047 if the Thriller album is a disappointment, I may reconsider some of my purchases that I intend to make. The Cars, Bob Dylan, Eagles and Miles Davis releases have all been home runs for me. This is disappointing but it would also be disappointing to miss out on great titles because they can't press enough of them. This digital step is probably how they are able to press 40,000 Thriller One Steps. I have been a happy customer for a long time so I'm not jumping ship just yet. I agree with you on Analog Productions. They are a wonderful company that does everything the right way. Take care.
@@audiophileman7047 Funny you mentioned Miles Davis, Kind of Blue, 45 rpm. I just purchased it from the ‘In’ Groove before I saw this video. I still like my MoFi records. They sound incredible, but no doubt, like Melinda, I am disappointed to hear this latest news. And yes, AP/AS is the best and my favorite.
I think this introduces a new concept, that there is a difference between an “Audiophile” and an “Audiopurist”. The audiophile chases the best sound quality, whereas the audiopurist requires the media to be of a specific origin, and with no deviation, which can be digital or analog. I think the marriage of digital in the analog format works fantastic, and can produce results that are synergistic.
I sort of play into both tbh. Would I rather have AAA? Yes most definitely, But I do care about sound quality as well. After all it’s all about the music for me first and foremost.
It is about good business practice first and foremost, and pricing for something you are not getting. Again, I still hope this is not the case but I fear the worst.
@@puttyputty123 what are you not getting? MFSL goal is to produce a very high quality product and they deliver. Just because someone gets all buggy because they made assumptions doesn’t make it MFSL’s fault. It’s getting tiresome hearing all of this endless “is it all analog???!!” stuff and it takes away from the enjoyment of the music.
Honestly these videos remind me of Crazy Eddie in NYC in the 70’s. 😂
its like solid state amps w/ tube pre's works well in synergy
@@nybravado4123 dombo, als je graag rotzooi koopt die verkeerd geadverteerd wordt doe je dat toch lekker
Who cares. If it sounds good then it sounds good. Moving forward we should demand they be more forthcoming about their sources and cutting practices.
MOFI is a company that generally makes records that sound fantastic. But the implication has always been that, if they bear the slogan “Original Master Recording,” it’s cut from tape, an AAA product. Too many labels throw out claims about being sourced from tape, yet it’s known that most are digitized in the chain; your expectations are diminished and, in a way, realistic. But labels like MOFI/Analogue Productions/Intervention/ERC/Impex/etc. justify their costs and reputations by promoting their analogue sourcing. This doesn’t diminish the fact that most of their products sound great. But if they’re digitized along the way, they should be transparent about it. It all feels a bit like a ruse. Would love to hear comments from the usual suspects - Kassem, Fremer, Gray, Smith, et al. Thanks for posting this, it’s a bit of a mind-blower.
The IMPLICATION. It's something they never STATED.
@@VideoArchiveGuy What is your problem?
I don’t think it was implied. Mobile fidelity made CDs for years.
@@777jones so true. I think they sold about twelve of them.
You hit the nail on the head...
MIKE.. brave post. Never stop, never change. Credibility... you got it in barrels full. You approached this topic cautiously, and handled it with great care. NEVER STOP. This is why we love your videos, and keep you as a preferred retailer.
Best audiophile real life blind test ever.
Thank you for always sharing the facts, and your opinions, Mike! The math to help us realize this has been there for a while now, but it took glaring numbers hitting us on the head with a hammer for us to notice the elephant in the room. With a new pressing plant on the way, MoFi needs to get out in front of this and have a spokesperson clear some things up for us. Trust is much easier lost, than regained, and some people will be reluctant to pay top dollar for products from a company that has been less than transparent, no matter the quality of the product.
There are a lot of wonderfully mastered lps mastered from high-res files. People should listen with their ears and enjoy the music
I am a chef, and sometimes I use food analogies to put things in perspective, so here it goes…
If someone purchases a food item based on a label that reads “organic”, therefore ALL the ingredients need to be organic, especially at a higher price point.
If not, the label should read “made with some organic ingredients”. At that point, it’s up to the consumer to make a educated decision to purchase an item based on their expectations and/or dietary needs.
That said, I have always purchased MoFi records because I was told they were “all organic”, and even if it tastes good, I demand to know what the ingredients are especially at that price point. If MoFi has nothing to hide, they at least need to inform the consumer of what they are “eating” IMHO
Exceptional analogy
Well put
I think in this case it is like calling a food "natural". The natural label can be used to describe something that is natural in flavor, or natural in texture. Or sourced from natural ingredients, even if they are further processed. So there are ways to cheat or be deceptive. I don't think MOFI is technically lying about anything, but they are being misleading if this is true.
Absolutely
Exactly! This BS about "audiophile or audiphools" or whatever can't hear the difference that some people manage to spew out already is missing the point completely.
Not sure what to say. I used to wonder what it mattered if a record was cut from a digital source. But I became impressed with the sound of MOFI records based on the “understanding” that they were analogue. If they are actually digital, I am less impressed and feel kind of stupid for raving about them to my friends. It definitely changes my opinion on the company based on principle alone. I’ve paid a fortune the past two years collecting their titles and the supposed analogue sourcing is part of how I justified the expense. I will have to keep an eye on this and decide if I wasted my money and wether I will continue buying their records. And if it’s true, I think they’ve done some false advertising and should remove that stupid banner from the top of the records.
Sue them.
I don’t know what it changes but thank you for putting it out there. I don’t feel differently but with the hiking prices of mofis lately, I may double think some purchases.
I emailed MOFI about their process of mastering about a year and a half ago, specifically asking if they were AAA, and was there any digital step, and they said no. I've always wondered why the MOFI website still says the "gain 2" system is Half Speed Mastered, which i don't think is still the case. So ultimately, the issue is transparency. Why is this a question in 2022 that customers don't know the MOFI process like other with all the other audiophile companies.
You save that email?
@@FleagleSangria no, i dumped a ton of old emails just recently. The discussion came about from a debate on the SHF, and i had a whole bunch of DM's with someone there, is where i remember posting it. But i got bored of that person, and deleted the chat.
Is it me or is calling them "One Step" false advertising since making a digital copy of the master would be a second step.
Thanks Mike, I await further news. Keep us posted!
Audio engineer here! A lot of labels are not allowing original master tapes to be used for obvious reasons so they just transfer them digitally in at least 24/96 for archiving purposes and remasters. MoFi just needs to be more transparent about the actual process on their records.
24/96 is not anywhere in this process. They use DSD.
@@ian_5184 same as SACD
I'm a professional studio and touring musician virtually my whole life. Started collecting vinyl in the mid 60's and still am. I have a large vinyl and cd collection and THE most important thing that I've learned, which I believe is a good philosophy to follow: "If it sounds good it IS good"! Whether it's from a digital or an analogue source does not matter to me in the least. I have CD counterparts that sound better than my original vinyl and vis versa. Your prime focus should be the SOUND that the musicians have created and not the SOURCE from which it comes to think otherwise is pure folly! Thus it allows one to enjoy their music and system and feel totally comfortable with that - NO WORRIES over the source be it digital or analogue.
Enjoy your music,
Greg. 🙂
point missed.
Agree with you 100% Same with an audio equipment. No need to see graphs and measurements if you can just listen and let your ears decide.
For $129 (stores here mark up to $169), I want to know the origin of the source material. If digital, that is fine...just tell us. For me, if digital, you are not paying for anything really special one step or not. If the source is digital, wouldn't the SACD version be a TRUE one step? One does not need to pay over $100 + for Bernie/Kevin/Ryan mastering,. The big guys master plenty of $29 titles.
Hey Mike, thanks for getting this out to us. I am not an audio file per say but have been following your lead for years now and the music you have turned me on to has always been great and sorry for you on all this.
Good work. I'm not an audiophile. Have maybe a dozen MFSL albums that I bought second-hand. But thank you for having the balls to tell us what you really think.
This video was quite a revelation. We definitely need a industry wide shift to absolute clarity on sourcing and methods. The MOFI records I love still sound the same regardless. But for any product, I want to know and pay for what goes into it. If this is revealed to be true, a big disappointment. I've stated several times I'm not opposed to digital sourced vinyl, but it's the blatant dishonesty that is most troubling here. Thanks for an eye opening video Mike. Not an easy one to do.
"We definitely need a industry wide shift to absolute clarity on sourcing and methods." I'm no audiophile, but I like reading about it. So, for all these decades none of you nerds has demanded total transparency? That's amazing to me.
There is one factor in this discussion I've not seen mentioned: what if, since MoFi wants to preserve the master tape to make more One Steps, they made all analogue records for the first thousand, and used digital copies for the rest? That would be biggest ball of confusion yet, since people would be comparing the two out the wazoo. I have to wonder how forthcoming MoFi will be about this, if at all.
I love AAA titles - but not everything I own that has been cut from analogue masters - sounds amazing. Most of it comes down to mastering for vinyl. I have a lot of outstanding sounding MoFi titles that I love - along with other quality records from Analogue Productions, etc. I always thought part of MoFi's magic was the mastering, the pressing process and not necessarily the master source.
Bottom line, I'm not going to stop buying from any company that's putting out quality releases. I don't feel mislead in the least. Cheers.
Mike, let me say this, my entire collection of music is in a digital format. MFSL and SACD formats started showing up for digital downloads around 2016 for place I visit on the internet but the problem was the file was so large I never downloaded them back in 2016. Since I retired about two years ago I did a software update on my receiver and now I can play Flac files through my USB drive. I decided to get all those MFSL because now I could hear them in the original format I downloaded them in and just loved the sound. That is why I always posed the question as to how could the vinyl sound that much better. I have been able to get UHQR, Tone Poets and Blue Note Classic all in a Flac format and I have no complaints about the sound, so to hear you say this kind of comes at no surprise.
Great video. I knew all of this but it's great that someone did a video explaining for others. Now you need to go back to the 80's and see how far back they started using digital....
I agree clarity is needed on their process but it won’t change my desire for their product.
My thoughts exactly.
I love vinyl and SACD. DSD can sound amazing, so not super surprised if that is the case. MFSL has always used/pushed some new technology to reissue titles - both digital and analog.
I have mix feelings about this. True, their product sounds amazing, no doubt about it. But to have the masses going around promoting (believing) MOFI records being all analogue when they're not, it just as bad as MOFI telling us they're all analogue when they're not. Cosumers are spending quite a bit of money for their records. I think we, the consumer, deserve to know what we're buying.
The issue for me is not whether or not MOFI is using Digital per se. However, there is a big issue with the pricing and what I am paying for. Buying my first One Step was a big decision $125.00 is alot of money to spend on one record. Especially if that one record is one you already have bought 8 times over in every format! It has been obvious for a awhile that the monicur of "One Step" has not meant that you are buying the definitive or best version available of a certain title. It may be the best vinyl cut of the album and it may not. The Big Issue is COST. The AP Sirius album recently released is a great example of this. It is by far the best sounding version available. So, kudos to MOFI. With that said, it needs to be noted that this version is not a One Step but a regular 45rpm catalogue offering. Yes, some of the One Steps are fantastic i.e. Bill Evans, Dylan and Mingus to name a few. But there are many that are not superior to the $20 dollar remaster or the originals i.e. Pearl, Carole King and Stevie Ray.
So, for me this issue is about the dollars- paying for a product that may or may not be superior in every way. I doubt highly that putting out a Dire Straits One Step would add anything to the 45rpm version already released. The dynamics on the Dire Straits records are already on the borderline of needle jump with a properly set up table and arm. I will not support paying double for a record that is not a true One Step if the less expensive one is just as good or better.
125$ mate? Sorry that you didn't get what you've paid for
Interesting topic. I heard Michael from 45 RPM Audiophile in Germany post a similar video the other day regarding the MJ Thriller 1Step. Not understanding the process, I was intrigued. Part of me feels that as long as I think they sound great, who cares. On the other hand, I do kind of feel mislead buying potentially 'audiophile grade' vinyl. Looking forward to other comments. Love what you do. Keep the great info coming.
It says that done right, you can't tell the difference between an AAA cut and a partial AAA/Digital cut. We should all stop being AAA snobs and appreciate the quality of end product that can be made having a digital step in the process.
It doesn't say that. If these accusations are true, we don't know what an all analog one step sounds like. It could be better. We thought we were paying for an analog experience, warts and all. If I want a digital experience I'll play my excellent PS Audio DS DAC.
I used to worry about this topic. But I don't anymore.
Analog mastered vinyl, Great turntable. All Tube components. The sound of Angels singing out of my speakers.
But over the years I;ve determined that there are so many ways to reproduce great sound at home that it's best to chase what is best for you and not be a Luddite.
No sweat. You the man. I'm still digging it
"If this is digital what does it change?"...
Nothing as far as sound quality. It either sounds the best or not.
What it would comfirm for me is what Ive always suspected:
The idea that folks can "hear" the difference between digital and analogue in most cases and when the mastering is great is overblown. They simply cant.
And if this is true, then what difference does it make whether a company places a designtation hype sticker on the album or not?
If one cant hear the difference.
This also confirms another issue. That mastering is what counts the most.
I was told by a retired recording engineer that if people knew how many records we think are analogue but are really digitally sourced, we would be very surprised. This is most likely why we dont and wont see analogue hype stickers on every reissue. Its not a puzzle. Its because they arent aaa.
Im not one to care as long as the album sounds great. That is all that matters.
As matter of fact this "we will stick only to aaa mastertapes" is why we have reissues that have issues most likely. I wont name companies or titles.
But some of these issues could have been remedied and tweaked with the plangent process.
But due to the stubborness or whatever, we have reissues that could have digitally been repaired and are not.
The later imo is due to this absolute aaa mindset in those particuliar cases.
I agree with this.
Yes, I think these are the main takeaways really. The fetishizing of AAA has gotten a bit out of hand.
Yeah, because everyone wants a digital vinyl record. Audiophiles are mostly deaf. This is why OP are so valuable.
Excellent points
@@UberPilot Not always. But Im like Mike, what exactly is making the Abraxas sound so much better. And it does. Ill give it that much. As does the Nightfly (and we know its digitally sourced)
Deaf? I can speak for everyone, but my hearing is fine the last time I had it tested two years back.
Honestly as long as it sounds good, I don't really care if it's digital or not
I personally attribute the magic of vinyl, regardless of the source the vinyl was made from, is the mechanical to electric conversion that occurs in the cartridge. It's differently nuanced then how a DAC converts its signal. I think that's why vinyl kills digital in terms of soundstage, and imaging.
Exactly! Why does everyone accept that music can go from analog to digital, but somehow digital to analog is unacceptable?
Vinyl has worst soundstage and imaging than digital, the magic of vinyl is just a fantasy, they have to do different mastering in the studio to comprehend all these vinyl flaws, and that's the supposed magic you talk about. it was great in the 50s and necessary till 40 years ago, now vinyl is just gimmick, a trend for those who like seeing it spin! a problematic medium with lossy quality compared to master tapes and today's digital masters.
AMEN Mike!!!! The paying customer deserves honesty and transparency. Love the knowledge and passion. Appreciate your commitment to the VC.
it would be nice to know what you're paying for, but the sound quality is what matters to me. All companies should state the source(s) for the finished product just for good business practice and the buyer can decide to purchase or not.
This “issue” is an issue because it blows assumptions and folk legends out of the water re: analog being inherently better than digital. The bottom line should always be: How does it sound? Should it matter the origins? Should you avoid a great sounding record because the dreaded “D” word is found in the chain? Some will hold tight to the purity and goodness of analog, and I DO think they would avoid a fantastic sounding record if digital is involved. Crazy!
Thanks for this video.
Transparency from a "premium" manufacturer is not an unreasonable request. I won't be buying any MoFi vinyl until I'm confident that I know what it is.
Man, at least listen some DSD recordings. It's a totally different thing from PCM and it actual sounds like the analog source audio. Don't conflate the two.
THANK YOU Mike for stepping up and into the breach and leading the charge on this important issue. I have a feeling that you have enough clout to get some momentum going to ultimately realize effective change. And I totally agree with your comment in regard to the standard that Intervention Records has put in place with respect to their issues. Great idea. I will wager that some other forums will pick up your comments as well (I certainly hope so) . . . . . and that you have lit the fuse. Once again thank you for speaking up in such a forthright manner - and stating your beliefs (and those shared by so many of us) so clearly, succinctly and in no uncertain terms. . . . Thank you.
Bottom line is MoFi Inc. 100% knows their audiofile end consumers BELIEVED it was an all analog process, and are/were willing to PAY more money for that. Through very careful word smithing, MFSL maintained that illusion. That is until the last week or so, when the illusion was shattered. Shame on them for not being transparent.
I, personally, am not willing to pay $125 per LP, no matter how good it might sound. It doesn't bring me 5x more joy than the $25 version I can buy at my local record store.
If I only cared about the sound, I'd listen to streaming over a high-end DAC. Vinyl's value is in the whole vinyl experience. High end vinyl better deliver a high end experience. (I'm looking at you, Alan Parson's crap jacket.)
This is 100% what I was thinking. They were for sure riding on the vagueness of the situation.
(I'm looking at you, Alan Parson's crap jacket.)" Can you briefly explain that comment and the term "crap jacket"? Thanks
@@Frip36 See 45 RPM Audiophile's video titled: "MoFi Might Die Sooner Than Later Unless They Make Some Significant Changes". The point being that the quality of the jacket is an important part of the overall vinyl experience.
If the one steps are in fact cut digitally, MOFI has found a way to make digital cutting sound great. I can't point to another digital cutting that sounds that good. Abby road just lost any excuse for crappy sounding records. Actually, I am excited that the technology has progressed to this level. Good for them, good for us. The fact that I can put on a one step and not be disappointed by the soundstage is a big win for technology. One (Small) Step For Man......
Could be the start of more digital era MoFi releases
To be honest digital cutting has always sounded great. It's one of the reason's engineers jumped on Digital Delay systems for cutting in the late 70's, they simply sounded better than all analogue delay systems. Even the initial 12-bit and 14-bit systems were deemed superior.
@@jat13 that has certainly not been my experience with my ears on my system. 99% of the time I can identify a digital cut within seconds of putting a record on my TT. Way smaller images and less open sounding. I get it, ears and systems vary.
@@billa5289 You are kidding yourself if you can tell a digital cut. The majority of vinyl cut since 1980 has had a digital step in for the reason I mentioned above. Even Michael Fremer concedes some of his favorite records were cut from 16-bit digital intermediates. Unless it's a terribly poor pre-mastered digital source, that digital step is entirely transparent and any good cutting engineer can tell you that.
@@jat13 this is exactly the reason 90+% of the vinyl I own and seek out was cut prior to 1980. No kidding there sir.
Remember how the first CDs all had the AAD/ADD/DDD label that told you how it was recorded/mixed/mastered? Maybe something like that for records. But I'd like additional details on the mastering - who did it and when. I know it's in the deadwax for a lot of things, but I want to see it on the jacket so I know before I buy.
In an age of transparency it would be great to have some sort of notification on the packaging (not hype sticker as you said). Would be interesting to hear Chad's thoughts on this too. awesome video Mike.I think you may have opened a can of worms with this one well done!! I thought your Parsons eye in the sky video was excellent and funny as hell.
A little shocking to say the least.
The “language” used for their SuperVinyl releases seem about as transparent as we’d want MFSL to be:
“MASTERED FROM THE ORIGINAL MASTER TAPES, PRESSED ON MOFI SUPERVINYL, AND LIMITED TO 3,000 NUMBERED COPIES”
The answer you got from them was, as you said, disappointing but it also diminished a lot of trust I have in the company until proven otherwise.
Thank you for posting this!!?
From a listener perspective, if a record is the best sounding record of that particular recording, i don't really care too much if it was cut from a digital file or the master tape. If it sounds good, it sounds good. Pretty much what you said about the Santana One - Step. However, as a customer, if your advertising something as being cut from the original master tape and its actually a digital file then we have a problem as thats just straight up lying. In Mo-Fi's case, yes, they may never have actually straight up said that these were cut from the original master tape, but as far as I'm concerned they pretty much have implied that for years. Did they lie? No. Disingenuous? Absolutely.
I agree with buying records that are well mastered. The only thing I care about are the dynamics. Modern CDs and streaming have squashed dynamic range. I’ll buy digital/analog records if they sound 💯.
"Some" modern cds have squashed dynamic range
@@crazyprayingmantis5596 Many*
If I had a dollar for every time an audiophile told me they can instantly recognise a digital recording.
If you have a revealing system, you can easily tell the difference, when you compare apples to apples. When I bought the Beatles catalog stereo release (not knowing it was not an AAA issue) my body immediately stiffened. Something was wrong. The sound was dead and lifeless. Then a few years later, Parlophone released the mono catalog. From the first song, I could tell I was listening to an analog recording. The music was liquid, rich, organic, and engaging. BTW, to this audiophile that's what it's all about- an emotional connection to the music. Plain and simple.
@@greencraig8570 apparently not with MoFi records. Even Michael "The Digital Whisperer" Fremer couldn't.
Pretty irrelevant comments as DSD sounds leaps and bounds closer to the analog source than a garden variant PCM cutting.
audiophiles are untrained astronauts who tell us what space is like and want us to believe it
@@chipsnmydip but they generally make a point how "digital" sounds sterile and lifeless and analogue is the only way, just like a typical cult.
To answer your question, Mike, I'm disappointed about this news for two reasons: 1) we're paying premium prices for what turns out NOT to be all analog recordings, and 2) Mofi seems to be happy to allow that incorrect perception to linger in the market without clarification on their side. It doesn't feel right to me. Do I like the sound of their LP's? Yes. Do I knowingly like paying $60, $100, $125 for a recording with digital steps in the production when I thought I was getting an all analog recording (which their marketing pretty much implies)? Nope. Will I continue to buy Mofi pressings with this info in hand? Not saying I won't, but I'm definitely far less likely at this point.
😂😂😂
So people would rather pay more for an inferior sounding record over a superior sounding one because of (1) digital step at the beginning???? That seems, well, stupid to me. After all it's end result (the record) we all like the sound of.
@@bradt.3555 the audiophile mantra is that digital is terrible and analog is great. The revelation that a bunch of supposed audiophile analog LPs have been revealed to have digital step is causing an existential crisis for audiophiles...because they were unable to hear that digital step. They were fooled. Even with their obscenely expensive audio systems.
@@peskypesky So much for "golden ears" & being a "trained" listener. At that level of digital and that early in the chain of record making NOBODY can tell. I believe at the end user level a difference can be heard in dig vs analog.
@@bradt.3555 nah. that's why everyone was fooled.
When Santana Abraxas was first released, I took a shot and ordered 2 copies. Glad I did because it’s fantastic. When Yes Fragile was released I thought it sounded better than the Analogue Production pressing.
I also agree, the end result is what matters most. I seem to remember old promotional material from them that talked about cutting from master tapes, but that might be the Mandela effect. I wish they would be more upfront, they have always been the most "secretive" of the audiophile labels. Chad has always been very transparent, even sometimes filming the mastering engineers cutting the records, same goes for Music Matters. Typically with premium products, the buyer wants to understand the process and what goes into it, whether that be well made goodyear welted shoes, or bespoke instruments, or vinyl records. The secrecy is weird, they make good sounding records and they should be open with their process.
This opens up the most important question again. Is what most of audiophiles consider best sounding just a very heavy seasoned and tasty flavor, or as close as possible to the original?
Perfect mastering = master chef
Hey Mike, you’ve never steered me wrong with sound quality. Music choices vary with consumer but sound quality is hearable. Wouldn’t matter to me as long as it sounds the best it can.
The eye in the sky was funny! I got it right away. I’m with ya Mike.
DSD was invented specifically to replace master tapes, I am not surprised if digital DSD masters are being used in vinyl pressing. I would prefer that to a pcm step, but that gets complicated. I agree with you 100% that I want the label to be clear and honest about it.
I'm an audiophile and a music lover. I like both analogue and digital - I don't favor one over the other just as long as it sounds great to my ears. If it's all analogue and it sounds great then I'm in. If it's all digital and it sounds great then I'm in. If it's a combo-platter of analogue and digital and it sounds great then I'm in. This is not a religion to me. I purchase Mo-Fi vinyl - including the One-Steps and I purchase Mo-Fi SACDs, and I have no intention of stopping. So, my reaction to the news that it's possible there might be a small digital step somewhere along the line in the manufacturing of Mo-Fi vinyl? Well, isn't that interesting...they sure sound great, so keep 'em coming! My two-cents.
This isn't a matter of digital sounding as good as analog, it's a matter of a company selling premium audiophile products yet not fully disclosing details of how the product is made, consumers deserve to know.
If your ok with there being a digital step involved or the entire chain being digital that's fine, as long as you're informed before you make the decision to purchase.
If a company selling audiophile products does not release a good sounding product then I care. If it sounds great, I don't care if they've digitized the master tape or run it through a cheese grater
Almost two years later and this remains the ultimate explanation of not just the MoFi DSD scandal, but any digital step in any record pressing from any company/label/band in the industry.
My thoughts. "Audiophiles" didn't notice which shatters this idea that that analog "sounds better".
Wow. Speechless.
I think I would still buy the records. If they sound fantastic, and the Mofi's do, I feel that I will continue as-is and not let a little digital step in the process bother me.
Still, they should have been forthcoming about this. This might make them look pretty bad to some people...
It’s a bit disappointing if it’s true, we buy these for the ‘all analog’ nature. But in another way, it’s kind of amazing, if they can make them sound that amazing, then a digital copy of a master tape, mastered well is obviously good enough, and as a result, hopefully other people could produce this level of sound with these sources.
Interesting information, thanks Mike!
A lot you guys think if it is all analog, it contains no loudness but recording companies have been adding loudness to albums since the 40s there is a lot you guys don't know.
Digital doesn't always equal bad quality. DSD is a fantastic format. Analog doesn't always equal good quality. From what I understand if the person engineers the mix well, you'll have a good product regardless of the format.
👍👍👍
I buy vinyl because I like to watch the disk spin and I like handling the actual disk. I have no illusions that the sound is better (its not and never has been) than digital all else equal. Mastering is more important than format. That's a given. I dont care if they master off digital or analog.
The only thing is important is the music itself not if it's digital or analog.
….perfectly sums up my feelings. This is the best response here. I will continue to make individual decisions on every vinyl purchase, MoFi or any other.
What's next... we're going to find out the 10,000 dollar cables are made of the same materials that a the 500 dollar cables are made of ? I need a Xanex
@6:20 if done correctly I can understand how they can acheive this resolution on Vinyl format. That would be the goal..but as we know many reissues are rushed or not really tended to carefully.
I’m still going to enjoy the MFSL albums I have that sound great and I will continue to buy editions that I think are the best sounding available editions (excluding extremely high-priced originals or out-of-print editions that might sound better). It will make me think twice about buying some of them though. I bought a MFSL today that I might not have considering the price if I knew earlier today what I know now.
I absolutely agree that there needs to be or at least I want there to be something like the SPARS code on audiophile releases.
As long as it is sufficiently high-resolution digital, done carefully surely no problem. Surely you have to do that to not degrade the original master tape, unless it is a super-limited edition. Now if MoFi has been somewhat misleading about their process, then I agree that is not cool considering the price premium you pay.
Uncompressed DSD Files sound absolutely superb. Probably far better, when fully balanced than a 50 year old Analogue Magnetic could ever hope to sound.
It was always naive to think THE MASTER TAPES were the Source of all these Pressings. They are to precious to be played regularly.
Once DSD technology had got to a certain spec, it is a godsend
Uncompressed sound waves…
I still listen to vinyl records, its a hobby and love to have those sleeves and artwork to look at. But i totally agree that DSD files are absolutely fantastic.
Do you listen to the standard DSD or DSD128 or DSD256 or even maybe DSD512?
I have Something else and Sketches of Spain pre-ordered. I enjoy playing vinyl on my turntable. I still want them. I have found it extremely frustrating that we don’t have a clear listing on the sourcing. I would love to see the labeling Mike is suggesting.
I agree that all audiophile labels should include all important sourcing, recording, mastering and manufacturing information on the outside of the cover or a sticker.
I'd be fine paying an extra dollar on every record I bought if it came with a hype sticker containing the info mentioned above.
@@beamer64 I don't charge any extra for this info!
If there is, in fact, a digital step in the creation of the One Steps, and the One Steps are, in fact, as good as you claim, maybe the digital process should be more highly regarded.
Indeed
That’s the thing. Digital can sound FANTASTIC but it’s used as an excuse to rush junk out into the market. I don’t think that’s the case here.
I appreciate you fighting the good fight and doing what you do Mike! This is definitely a big topic and deal and bringing this to light, no matter what the final outcome is, is something I respect and admire.
I try to buy LP's that are cut from the master analog tapes. Have I bought digitally sourced LPs knowing it before? Yes, but I knew it too. It's the whole concept of whether or not Mobile Fidelity has been honest or if they are pulling the wool over our eyes that makes a huge difference to me.
I'm legally blind and I don't have a lot of money. So I haven't been able to make these Mo-FI purchases I would love to make regularly. I almost purchased a Mo-FI LP on eBay recently, and at a high price but lower than expected, that was used. But at this point I'm glad I didn't. I was a little suspicious of the pricing being so low and just held off knowing I could find it again later if I needed to. It would have come out after 2015. I've been considering some of the Mo-FI new Van Halen releases but now that's on hold.
In reference to one of your questions, if Mobile Fidelity honestly described the source and process I would still buy from them since their reputation and sound is so great. But if it turns out being where they have been selling, and knowing better, and they know that people are buying because they are believing it is 100% analog on the LP, then my respect and future purchases would stop. If they change their ways, then it would probably start back up again.
It's not so much that they did or didn't do something as it is that the possibility is out there they haven't been honest. I was asking the same question you mentioned thinking back on have they claimed various releases are cut from the master analog tapes or is that just something I was assuming they were doing? I'm curious to find out what the answer is on that.
I'm also 100% with you in that I think any and every label should clearly identify what they are selling. If we, as customers, quit buying unless they did, well I guarantee you they would start.
If all that Mo-FI was able to access was something that wasn't 100% analog, and if they honestly had it on the album for us to see, I'd likely buy from them still but I would also expect it to be slightly lower in cost. They are expensive because of the quality and the sound but also because of the perceived idea anyway that it is an analog sourced item.
Thank you for the video and this is a topic I will be following. Especially since they have their new pressing plant that is being built. Honesty, lineage, and full disclosure is a must!
As long they keep putting out great sounding recordings I will keep on buying them.
My initial thought is that well done digital could be as good as analog , based on the fact we all praised one steps , putting them as the end all be all versions and turned out to be digital .
As a collector who does not even own a single MOFI record....I would like to but they are so hard to find and expensive - which brings me to my beef here....I think they charge a premium and manufacture FOMO by making it seem like there HAS to be a limited quantity. The fact that this shines a light on their ability to make 40,000 copies of that Santana record as well as the MJ means they are just manufacturing "limited" quantities. I dont like that. I dont care that they use digital in the process - if the record sounds great who cares - I would like to KNOW this though, and it would mean they need to charge less for these records and make more.
I don't have any either. I always assumed they make as many as they think they can sell quickly at their high price point, which will vary by title. They could easily make more, but this is the business model they have chosen
Thanks Mike, I had a suspicion of this for a while! People need to hear this as on one big music forum people would get shouted down when they mentioned this.
as someone who works in professional recording studios and on analog tape for tracking and mixing as well as hi res digital (+ audiophile), it is absolutely possible to get a hi res transfer of a tape and with the right cutting system, cut a lacquer that is on par with or more consistent than running a master tape direct to lathe for cutting. i have heard it
cutting engineers can preview the cut and levels to ensure signal to noise ratio is as good as can be plus the biggest thing to remember is that analog does not equal better.
recently, i have been able to work with bernie grundman and chris bellman cutting lacquers from digital masters and the quality is stunning.
the recording and mixing matters 100x more than the simple fact tape was used.
obviously transparency is important and that’s the issue here but at the same time, music is meant to be listened to and the techniques used to capture it are there to enhance it
tape is a storage medium and is tricky. playing a master tape back on a different machine than what cut the original lacquers is a different sound - the heads, electronics, cabling all effect playback and in the analog realm, nothing is “transparent” if electricity runs through it, there is color even if it’s 2% different, it’s different.
Thank you for sharing your interesting and valuable information with the rest of us.
I wish your comment was pinned at the top of the comments section here.
Thanks. That sounds correct to me.
Very true indeed. But the dilemma here is the way reputation was built…
@@Rawhphonicz i agree, lack of transparency sucks. i truly wish there was more talk about the quality of the transfer, plating and pressing formulas of the pvc that goes into the sonics of why these mofi releases sound so spectacular.
@@MJEvermore853 always happy to chat audio - it is a massive part of my life.
i also wish people would talk more about importance of listening environments over equipment as well
Would definitely keep buying their records, they do an amazing job. But, I’d appreciate them being totally honest with us.
I always searched for copies made in the analog era, trying to avoid digital sources for vinyl. I have some more recent vinyl, not Mo-Fi, and I find them to sound not so good, more close to CDs than tape. But if there are companies that can make really good sounding vinyl from digital sources I can only be happy - so this is actually good news for me.
I understand your concern Mike but I’m not sure it really matters. I still have the SACD and vinyl of several recent Mofi titles and they’re each a unique listening experience to me. I enjoy both but they do sound different to me and on my system.
It matters, it may not matter to you but it matters.
It would be like saying your car drives just fine and you can't tell the difference between the suspension in your car and the suspension in the exact same car, they're both great.
Even though the manufacturer of the suspension in your car used child labour in the process of making the springs.
It still drives and feels the same to you so in that sense "it doesn't matter".
But it matters that the manufacturer hasn't disclosed information as to how their product is made.
Now, I'm not saying mofi is using child labour but it matters that they're not disclosing details about how their product is made, because in the world of high end audiophile premium products details matter
@@crazyprayingmantis5596 I understand your point but ultimately audiophiles are paying for the best possible sounding product. If say, the Mofi Love Over Gold 45rpm isn’t a fully analog product (and Mofi has never claimed that it was), does it really matter to your ears? I understand it matters from the standpoint of analog purity, but that album sounds absolutely stunning. That it may not be fully analog is secondary from the standpoint of audio quality. Look at the Mofi Japanese release of Santana’s Lotus album. It’s clearly stated as being digitally sourced but are you telling it doesn’t sound fucking amazing?
@@chrismckee4154
It doesn't matter if there's s digital step involved or if they're completely digital, what matters is these companies not disclosing the information to the consumer.
I don't care if it's a record or a cake, I want to know what I'm paying for.
@@crazyprayingmantis5596 so that’s more important to you than how iit sounds?
I've only been into vinyl for a year or so. Been watching lots of video's and reading about it, it's a fun hobby. I kind of get lost in the hype about, wanting the best copy, it must be all analog etc, because I do like quality products in general. But if I am really honest, I probably couldn't tell if it wasn't all analog. I don't listen to multiple copies side by side nor do I train my ears to be very precise and picky. But I do enjoy owning a very good copy (even if it's sometimes only for the sake of having it) and I agree the process should be transparent so that the customers knows what they are buying. But in that, maybe some stigma will also be taken away that it's not necessarily crap if it's not all analog processed. Maybe even that in some cases the best copy is not all analog. Purists would always disagree. But the general listener might be more open minded.
I very much agree, but if you are going to charge $120 for a record then your process needs to be dramatically superior to the competition.
@@arize84 not really , MoFi is a brand and they know they can charge whatever by stamping the MoFi logo to a release. Specially since a lot of the people that buy these releases are only doing so because they are from MoFi, heck some of these "audiophiles" decide these releases sound better even before listening to them...
Just enjoy the music mate, fuck what others think, especially those that jerk off and have an existential crisis like the guy in this vid.
I don't have enough experience, as I've only been collecting vinyl for about 3 years now, but as a consumer, if I see "Original Master Recording" on a pre-CD era release on vinyl, I would assume that it was cut from the analog master. Thanks for all the info!
Thanks for your video. I hope it's not how it is. Really hope it's been done all analog, but as you say it should be info on the jacket on what and how it's been pressed.
Digital or analog, it really does not matter. What matters is a great recording, mastering, and engineering. One of the best-sounding albums of all time in my opinion is Dire Straits Brothers In Arms. All DDD but it sounds amazing.
Donald Fagen Nightfly as well, unless they went back and worked from analog mixes
But it matters that they're not fully disclosing details about how their premium audiophile products are made.
@@audiotomb no analog tape was used in the creation of that album.
Totally agree Jerald Quist.
Having a digital step in the MFSL process isn't that big of a deal, ultimately it's the mastering judgement calls that make or break a good album. Not admitting that there is a digital step is problematic. Lots of great albums are cut from digital sources...the recent Mothers Fillmore East LP is a good example. The first five sides are all analog, then side 6 is digitally sourced, yet it sounds just as good as the analog sides. For this we can thanks Bernie Grundman's mastering.
Well said. Of course another one would be Donald Fagen's The Nightfly. It's not analog vs digital that matters the most, but is the audio sourced from the very original master and then who masters it
Don’t tell that to the purists who insist on all-analog. They’re still in denial.
@@De_La_Soto they are waking up this morning and finding out Santa Clause isn't real. This is going to a real shock to many vinyl "purists" and a total disruption to their "reality." Cognitive dissonance shall be the order of the day. As I mentioned in another post. It aint just Mofi....
I think it's important to qualify "sounds just as good" here, because "sound" is a completely subjective thing. What "sounds" good to one person may not "sound" good to another - and that's fine. Personally, the reason I collect and listen to vinyl is not necessarily because it "sounds" the best to me, it's because I want to experience the all-analog pathway from performance to playback. Of course this doesn't always result in the best "sound", but in this case that's not always what I'm after. If it "sounds" amazing, so much the better. Recent case in point - the UHQR "Are You Experienced" - mastered with the original tape hiss in place. It doesn't bother me, and I think everyone would agree that tape hiss doesn't "sound" good, but personally I'm not bothered because it's as close to the original performance as possible. That's why that vinyl is worth $125 to me. Yes, I'm aware that there is still mixing and mastering in there that adjusts the parameters of the original analog source but those adjustments are attenuations of the original analog masters. And to the "high-bit digital is just another analog format" crowd, the analog->digital process is a re-recording of the original analog source - it's not a direct representation of the analog signal on the tape. That is, you can't just take the original analog signal and "print" the digital version of it. Rather, the ADC samples the original recording and the sampler has all the same gain/balance/dynamic range problems that an analog transducer would have, and this absolutely depends on a good engineer to manage. Worth noting too that the same thing happens on the DAC end of things. It's this "re-recording" that I object to. Don't charge me $125 for a "re-recording". I want the original master recording as advertised, not the original master re-recording.
not really a good excuse to not to reveal that information, I may cancel all my mofi orders
Thank you Mike for the informative video and questions you raised. I think it's a big problem, regarding transparency and the trust. Also if all there is any digital process somewhere and they are not AAA pressings, which means there is still room for better pressings in the future. Might be better sounding AAA pressings or better sounding Digital pressings because digital technology evolving dramatically. This can reduce the collection value of current pressings, meaning they are not unique and can be pressed once again from same digital remasters or someone can press much better with newer technology.
I admire you for doing this video. On one hand it will shatter many peoples ideals about their audiophile records and may even cause a lot of anger because people hate feeling like fools, ie. that they have been duped in a way. On the other hand, it really is important that these companies become fully transparent, so that people can make informed decisions on what they want to buy. It's time for the whole industry to grow up and stop playing games.
Original Master Files lol