Very calm & level-headed commentary being made here, which contrasts w/some UA-camrs who sound shrill & work themselves into hysteria w/their own speculations. Kudos for that, David. Definitely earned my respect.
@@SafeAndSoundTXAudioExcursion Where in TX are you? I'm in a small club of guys in Houston. We have monthly meetings at each other's houses for vinyl listening. If you're anywhere nearby I would be happy to invite you along.
I'm not sure if you know about them but Ron from a channel called New Record Day and another guy called Cheap Audio Man live up there. There's also a guy who has a channel for NTX record store.
@@jasonsmith2032 I will check out the first two. I know GI Sanders from NTX and I did an interview with him :). ua-cam.com/video/rF_gsso-QR4/v-deo.html
I had previously watched the other channels on this topic. I have to say that your historical lesson on MOFI was extremely interesting. Much appreciated! Keep up the great work!
Thank you David! When I heard this rumbling on Wednesday and Thursday it hit me that I had all this history "on the shelf" and I started to compare materials over time. And the history shows that when they change, they don't overtly say so. They actually spoke more about the vinyl compound that the sourcing process. So one might assume, it didn't change; but we know the half-speed change fiasco shows us they are coy (to say the least). Well now we're here again very possibly. Come clean and the truth will set you free. Thanks for your comments and watching :)
I'm a mostly retired musician who grew up more than half a century ago loving vinyl as the best available affordable audio medium. But technology advanced with the advent of CDs, which I happily agreed to be the all round preferable Audio format. But only when carefully mastered for optimum audio quality... Sadly, too many CDs suffered from inept and lazy recording and mastering. Sounding ice pick brittle, and damaging the reputation of the newly developing format..The negative stigma remains to this day.. Which undermined the potential for CDs to be definitively accepted as remedying the indisputable frustrating deficiencies of vinyl.... My considered opinion now is that [ in an ideal world ], music should be recorded to traditional analog tape, then mixed and mastered to HD digital files. I'd have no problems with these 'best of both worlds' mastered recordings being pressed to vinyl for that market of enthusiasts.. Though since the 1980s I personally no longer have any interest in buying new vinyl records.. I do believe TAPE was the critical factor for determining 'analog warmth', which has been mistakenly credited to vinyl. This myth of vinyl superiority being propagated as an uncritically accepted received wisdom by a new generation of young vinyl buyers and, stubborn old nostalgics [ often with vested interests ].... Unfortunately Tape technology was discarded too swiftly from the recording studio workplace. It's benefits now largely lost as the machinery was abandoned, and the expert tape technicians are all gradually passing away... At least Tape 'warmth' simulation software is constantly improving, to help digital recordings sound more convincing as 'authentic' analog source for whatever format they are eventually sold to music fans....
I agree with you fully. I will add that I do think the phono cartridge and Preamplifier can contribute to a certain warmth on the receiving end but it can never make right what was wrong in the mastering process. Like many business models, throughput, efficiency and time are the focuses of many businesses, even entities like MOFI. However, if a label (Sony in the case of Thriller) won’t release the analog master, then you have to decide whether to ditch their catalog or “go for it”. The decisions made should carry along transparency to the public which is really what this is all about.
@@SafeAndSoundTXAudioExcursion HI, it's surely positive for the community if 'elder' members can amicably agree on an objective honest consensus regarding the pros and cons of both analog and digital audio. After all we are the music enthusiasts who actually grew up experiencing the 1980s transition from old to new technologies..... Now speculating on 21st Century vinyl re-releases. Another factor which may need to be considered is the extent to which original analog Master Tape archives were lost forever, destroyed in the catastrophic mass storage warehouse fire of a few years ago ??? Which may have left only digital back up copies surviving for posterity... and not necessarily good quality digital transfers, depending on who did the backups, for what purpose, and if the A to D converter equipment was state of the art for it's day - or mediocre semi pro level recording gear.. Or at worst, digitally 'cleaned up' needle drops...??????????... The major music industry corporations may wish to remain silent on this issue......
Hello David. I would say of those who recently have made this a current topic your video has been the most cogent. We’ll done. The history in artifacts is helpful to make this presentation. It would behoove MoFi and all proveyers of audiophile records to be completely forthcoming and totally honest about their products and processes. Thx. ☮️
Thank you, your comments are encouraging. I hoped I had a perspective and information elements to pass along. I think consumers are much more engaged in what they buy when they pay a premium. Truth is part of the implied contract with a company and it seems like in this audiophile space there is a lot of snake oil and missing or misleading Info. That is why I say to beware of what isn’t overtly stated. It’s like “I didn’t lie if I didn’t choose to tell you about it.” Many marriages end that way :)
Nice video. So what does one get for a digitally sourced one step of Thriller vs The MoFi $30 SACD? A big box full of inserts and foam, surface noise ( even though mofi uses quieter vinyl vs normal releases) plus , imo, poor quality control ( vs Analogue Productions). The $30 SACD will be a true One Step direct from the digital copy without all the filler and noise.
I can see that perspective and the SACDs have been very strong. When I compared my Eagles SACD to the Eagles One-Step I found the LP had more distinct vocals and the best was a bit more pronounced. Again, that is what my ears told my brain :) thanks for watching
I think with you and Mike as well as others should hold MOFI's feet to the fire on giving us just what, where and when on getting the master recordings. All across the board on all their pressing processes.
Thanks for watching! That’s our goal as this has been a growing whisper. Part of me wonders if they’re expecting this given the Thriller announcement being so over the top with quantity exposing it.
Do you think that holding their feet to the fire will change anything? Lets say they start putting a new blurb in the packaging. Will that make it sound any better or worse? Will all of this suddenly force Mofi into getting rid of the digital step? Are folks looking to hit em where it hurts? If so, what do you see as positive repercussions from this? I understand the ethical issue here. But are people willing to stand on ethics and at the same time shoot themselves in their audiophile foot?
@@FleagleSangria I don't think they will say anything, and if they do, it might be something to the effect of "we use proprietary digital techniques to cleanse the sound and remove imperfections in the master recording" or something like that. Their focus is making great sounding records, so however they get the end product justifies the means, even if it involves additional technology.
@@ParallelUniversity Maybe. There is another that apparently spilled the beans as far as the source of the mastering. Which he says is a copy tape (not digital) of the master tape.
They should be forthcoming, honest and straight forward. Maybe it also shows digital through todays technology has arrived for stellar sound? Mike and you have real love in the Mofi products. So its palpable the strong feelings. Mofi should know the love people have and be straight
Thanks! Yes that’s all I am asking for. Michael Fremer said they told him they were going to address the Thriller issue many weeks ago but they didn’t….so they kind of brought these inquiries upon themselves. I think they’re torn whether their credibility and sales will be affected not realizing their silence could cause a similar response. Here’s that video ua-cam.com/video/a3oRLUcZCFE/v-deo.html
Thank you David a very clear and concise video on the subject and I agree with you like many others on transparency I too like to know the exact process. My question to you David is I can not tell if the source is digital or from the original analog master tape all I know is if it sounds great then I am happy . There are many audiophile experts out there and I respect Mike from the In Groove and love his videos but if it turns out quite a number of his top 100 albums cut from the original analog tapes turn out to be from a digital source I would be completely surprised he could not tell the difference . So David how can one tell if an expert like Mike and many others can not is it a case of modern technology is so good we have gone past the point of being able to notice the difference but I still would like to know the source cheers Carl Australia
Hey Carl. Great question. I think honestly this situation may, in fact, be the basis for the argument that the Hi-Res Digital sources, especially Sony’s DSD is SO good, we are now splitting hairs to tell the difference. It’s like the old blindfold taste tests. For me, it has gotten to be a distinction without a difference. As my Episode 23 explains, I’m stating to look at this as now being simply a data backup situation as the analog-to-digital conversion that moves that tape oxide into 1s and 0s had such a super high precision and sampling rate. Michael Fremer claims to be able to hear the difference and I don’t doubt there are times he gets in right, but even a blind squirrel can often find a nut! So for a purist this is a possible “rock my world” moment coming. However, if something “sounds great” yesterday, it doesn’t change because we find out digital was involved. But clearly if the criteria is his list can only be AAA, then he’s going to need a second ADA list! Thanks for watching!
Thanks for the reply David what you have to say on the subject makes complete sense I have 6 or 7 Mobile Fidelity records from Frank Sinatra Bobby Darrin Johnny Cash Elvis Presley and Hall and Oates and they all sound great and no matter what the source I will continue to buy their product because they are fantastic cheers Carl .
Great video , I am afraid if they don't give us any information people will go elsewhere. They sound amazing they just need to be clear on how they are making the records that's all. Cheers from El Paso Texas
Very well done video explaining. It’s in my opinion that eventually to preserve the original master analog tapes they will have to stop being played due to deterioration. It just seems as if there will be noway possible to be running master tapes 80 years old over and over, that there must be a definite means of archiving a perfect reproduction of the Original Master analog tape. We know that digitization can be an uncomfortable word to us vinyl enthusiasts. However digital archiving when done correctly at high sample rates, bit rates, and with very low compression, can yield a recording that can be bit for bit accurate. This recording then can be passed down over and over with little to absolutely no loss of any data bits or quality. So in my personal opinion, I feel given enough time into the future, most all shellacs with end up being cut from digital sources. Some people say they can hear the difference if blindfolded from a digitally sourced file vs analog tape. This very well may be true, I have yet to take the test myself. I myself like the idea of a all natural source as being the source for my vinyl pressings. However will it be possible to really keep running master tapes or even one off or two off analog copies? If so, for how long would this be.
You are correct. The analog tape gravy train will oxidize into infinity :) Making a backup copy using to best Analog-to-Digital method asap is the best insurance policy and should be done. Just like backing up data for IT it’s the same principle. As digital improves it becomes less of a quality gap and good mastering engineers can do magic. For this topic though it’s about integrity and MOFI managing their image and their brand. Thanks for watching!
@@SafeAndSoundTXAudioExcursion I agree with your statement agreeing that with time tape disintegration is inevitable. So I would say get all the pressings from a Master Analog tape or one off copy while you can still get them “if that matters to a person.” I agree that digital only gets better with smart people behind the technology. But yes as the purpose of the video being transparency of the source used for cutting the lacquers is an important one, I concur this should be made clear in advertising.
First time viewer of your videos. First I think you are spot on in your analysis of the situation and possible reasons as to why it is happening. Key points of course being transparency, and why MOFI may not be transparent from a marketing standpoint. I know in my limited experience with vinyl there is a lot more thought that goes into purchasing an album than I ever did with CD's (that has since changed).When comparing pressings I of course listen to differences subtle and overt to see which one provides the best experience. It is difficult to know why those differences exist when information is not readily available about the process taken to make the product. It can be mastering, source material used, or a number of other factors. Point is as consumers we want to know as much as we can to make informed choices. Excellent video, plus I appreciate Arm Chair Theatre in the background (Only missing Long Wave, and Zoom for Jeff Lynne/ELO)
Thank you so much for watching and your sharing your perspective. The mastering is SO important in the process whether to Vinyl or even an SACD. We flock to certain mastering geniuses and just know their stuff will sound great. Bob Ludwig and Kevin Gray for example. I am sure there are good reasons why MOFI is doing what they are doing for the good of the product outcome. As the years go by, these original analogue tapes are increasing in fragility. Every gravy train has to come to the end :) Regarding Jeff Lynne, I don't have Long Wave on Vinyl, but I DO have Zoom which is worth a bundle. My wife got it for me as a birthday gift years ago by ordering on Amazon - the white vinyl version no less. Really has shot up in value :). Thanks for watching and hope you will subscribe to keep up with my content. It means a lot to me as well as your taking time to comment. All the best...
@@trackingangle929 "what is happening" meaning the lack of transparency. I did not say that one way or the other that they were or were not using one source over another. However it is not explicitly stated which I suspect was intentional as it is with most labels. Some records very clearly state mastered from the master tapes, some say digitally remastered and alas many don't state it at all. That's the point though, with lack of information all people can do is assume, guess which leads to conjecture. If transparency exists that is much more difficult to do.
I has a question that may be a bit off topic, but: If you have your own lathe and want to gain better fidelity recording at 1/2 speed, would that not also significantly affect the RIAA curve you need to EQ the cutting driver stylus for? Surely it would be affected, similar to the bias frequency for recording to tape at higher speeds.
Thank you for such a calming presentation and common sense point of view David. Although I'm now in my 50's, I am just recently rediscovering my love for vinyl (was always there and my 1st preference honestly...just other life factors dictated I store many away for over 20 years until these past 2 - 3 years). My point is, I've seen far too many videos in these past few days boarding overreaction, and coming across as accusations without bases. Too sensational for my liking. Ultimately we will know the truth, but until then I will reserve opinion and wholeheartedly agree and appreciate the points you made. Great video. Subscribed and liked. Cheers! 🤘🎶🤘
Your comments are very humbling. I truly am trying to be very factual in my videos and not controversial. I had a point of view on the topic and wanted to share what my age and experience learned over time. I’m glad you found it reasonable and calming because I felt calm, yet passionate at the same time. I hope you will find some other videos of interest as well. I just want to help average folks like you enjoy this aspect of their life. Thanks for your support! :)
How many times can a lacquer be plated to make stampers? Just once? Explaining that will help the discussion. Maybe something else worth mentioning is that some of the records MoFi has released, like the one step Donald Fagen, and Brothers in Arms, come from digital recordings. I can't remember if they were transparent about that.
Just thinking out loud here: Since the actual stamper is a 'negative' of the lacquer, it must be removed from the lacquer before it can be used to make positives (pressing the records). So the original positive still exists in the lacquer. The question is: is the original lacquer now useless after being used once to create the stamper (or mother in the multi-step process), or can it be used again with the same quality? My guess is 'no' but I think I need to do some more Googling to find out. Sorry for rambling a bit.
Your videos are really good. I'm just a tourist in the vinyl community these days. My collection is small and I often gift my old records to fellow musicians (I'm not a good one but I know some really good ones including folks in the biz in that there Los Angeles, ill tell you what) buy I buy about a record a month. Sometimes off discogs and sometimes wherever I can find them locally. This is fascinating. I apologize if I sound silly in these comments. I'm very busy with work but I'm able to fit music into my leisure time. But I really enjoy your work. I'm on the guest list to see the Circle Jerks next month, so thank God cause I need a great punk show.
Thanks for writing Erik. Great you can catch a live show :). No you don’t sound silly, just a music lover doing what they can when they can. Just buying whatever speaks to you is what’s important. No rules, just love of music.
You're right. It's not about which version is best, digital or analog. It's about being lied to. It's about thinking about buying something analog but in the end it's digital. It's like Diesel-gate, you buy a car thinking has good fuel mileage but in reality it's not.
If MOFI buyers enjoy the product and think they sound great, and now they turn out to be digital, what does that say about those so-called "audiophiles" who insist analog is so superior to digital?
A very good question Roger if many of those great Mo-Fi albums since 2015 are from a digital source how is it the audiophile experts could not tell the difference. I can not tell I am just happy if it sounds great maybe with modern technology it is so good and the way it is used we can not tell the difference but I am not an expert . Cheers Carl
The most compromise between mofi and sony is Sony let mofi made a tape copy from original master tape to make ud1s. Another option is sony let mofi used digital master .
Good heavens, if Mofi used digital it is an advantage, removing one step of analog generation loss from the reproduction chain. The end result is a better sounding vinyl. Time to wake up.
That can be true of course. But regardless of outcome, methods should be provided. Whether digital is introduced or not, some outcomes are the product of some tweaking that is problematic. Like Carole King One-Step mucked up to have too much bass. Their 2x45RPM was perfect!
I was under the impression that MOFI was using 100% analog techniques when it came to the vinyl . If MOFI is using digital enhancements to make the vinyl sound better then yes, that should be on the site . Like Momma Melinda said "feels like we were hoodwinked" . MOFI knows their legacy of being known as the best analog record you could get on vinyl . Chad Kassem did do a "not comment" moment when it came to talking about this issue . I think Chad knew they used digital techniques . Chad's UHQR is more of the "REAL DEAL" .
Well the chickens always come home to roost and Thriller pushed them into “a bridge too far” for those who pay attention. Even if they’re not using “enhancements” but just taking the analog tape to a DSD “backup copy” it introduces digital into the process is some manner.
What's being sold here and elsewhere are rumors. Only rumors. You and Melinda have been "hoodwinked" because you accept as fact what for now is only rumor. It may prove to be true but trafficking in rumors is very, very dangerous and innocent people and businesses can get hurt.
@@trackingangle929 I wish it hadn’t come to this but I think you know, it’s been “out there” and this is what happens when a company says “no comment” to a legitimate question. MOFI can address it and move on. I certainly don’t want anything but their success. The overwhelming comments here and elsewhere sees this as a clarification we desire. The market shifts with competition and these other labels sell transparency as well as product.
To be fair on Chad’s end he used already existing stampers. KOB had the Classic Records stamper and I believe Are You Experienced? also used old stamps. However, at this point this makes me love AP more than MFSL
After this bomb, some analogue vinyl collectors says "its ok thats digital as long as it sounds best". Well they didnt Say such things before, digital for them was inferior
I agree I think he was the first to go public. After he had skewered them on packaging, I guess he figure to go whole hog! Truth is, there has been an increasing buzz since the Thriller announcement about the authenticity of the process. Before that, suspicions existed but I think the Thriller One-Step “math” broke the code. Thanks for watching!
And? It matters not. That same channel has been banging on about how great MOFI records are and their sensational sound. Like many other audiophiles. The reality is it really matters not who raised the issue, the reality is those who bang on about audiophiles versus digital really couldn’t tell the difference all along
Like I said before, Mobile Fidelity should take heed of Abe Lincoln's famous quote: You can fool all of the people some of time; You can fool some of the people all of the time, But you can't fool all the people all the time
@@trackingangle929 Oh I don't think I'm fooled at all, just taking a wait and see approach until the facts actually do come out. But I do admit to having a "trust no one, suspect everyone" attitude when in comes to big companies and their claims.
@@trackingangle929 it is interesting to note that you came out with a statement after the thriller announcement questioning the process, as others are now doing, which you quickly deleted. We are all of course wondering what you discovered to make you do that. Will be watching you with Mike on Sunday. I did read a comment saying that you had written an article a while back, that Tim P created a tape deck that is taken into the studio’s tape library and used to make a copy from the original tape. If that is indeed the case, maybe it is an analog deck and not digital.
I totally get it, transparency should be a given. However, as you stated yourself the One Steps sound outstanding so if digital processing has been employed you clearly couldn’t tell. My point is, I just want the best sound possible I don’t care how they do it. Yes I love vinyl but I do think it’s about ego too (not referring to you personally) as many collectors are all about the showy display and bragging rights, so now their bragging might be called into question they are making a big noise. I have MFSL pressings that are shockingly poor, I am not a fan boy by any means, which brings me right back to my earlier point,…give us the best sound reproduction possible 😉
I find it humorous how the records people loved and talked about how great they sound are suddenly ripoffs now that there's a possibility that digital was in the chain at some point. Audiophile nonsense at its finest. "This is the best pressing I've ever heard!" "You know it's made from hi-res digital." "This record is pure garbage, now I can hear that digital harshness!"
It is great for sure and can keep someone happy and be done with it. There are many original presses that I thought could not be improved. Eagles debut LP is an example as the MOFI One-Step blows it away. I think improved processes, materials and technology can often raise the bars. Is it worth the price difference? That’s for each person to decide. Thanks for watching!
Thanks! I often go too long and I’m working on that :) hope I can be less geeky! I can be geeky but I’m all about teaching the common man. Thanks for your comments.
The issue here is, what is a master tape ? It is not as simple as it sounds. In the earliest days of magnetic tape recordings, the master would point to the edited work parts. This is because tapes were either made in mono, or the various microphone feeds were mixed real time to stereo (Decca, EMI etc.) during the recording session. In the case of RCA and Mercury, the master would be the 3 track tape, which was then mixed down to stereo. Very little work was done post-production. Both the 3 channel session master and the stereo mix-down would be regarded as the master. Unless you want to do a new mix, the stereo mix-down tape would normally be used and loses very little in terms of sound quality, only 3dB in S/N ratio. By the 1980s when the Thriller album was made, the process was far more complicated, with overdubs, bounced tracks, etc. It really depends on where you want to start. Are you going to do a new mix, which I seriously doubt MFSL wants to do. There probably exists multiple copies of the original stereo mix downs, since unlike the original multi-track tape, they would have made many copies of the stereo tape in parallel. New mix downs were also done for subsequent reissues. Some of these would serve as production masters, and others as safety or protection copies. Even copies made from the production master would be regarded as a master, since these were the ones sent to the various mastering facilities around the world for cutting vinyl. For a platinum selling album such as this, there are probably thousands of these distribution masters. I don't have this particular one, but I do have this type of master tapes for many albums. I doubt you can detect any difference between the original stereo mix down and the distribution master, if the latter was professionally made by the studio. In fact, even 4th or 5th generation tapes lose very little, at least when compared to how much is lost during the whole LP production process. I occasionally make copies from my original session master tapes and if I can hear a difference, I will discard the copy and make another one. Therefore, it is possible that MFSL has a dozen or more copies made from one of the stereo mix downs, and it is entirely legitimate to call these master tapes. You can play these tapes dozens of times before noticing any deterioration. To make 40,000 LPs with the 1-step process, you will need 100 to 150 lacquers. You can do that easily with 4 or 5 tape copies. The edited session tape or even the first generation mix down were rarely used to directly cut vinyl, now or in the past. I doubt an untrained listener will be able to tell a third from a second generation copy. The greatest difference comes in eliminating the two electroplating steps used to produce the mother and the stampers.
You nailed it! Have been working on a video to explain this very thing! Thank you for the excellent perspective and details and for watching my channel!
I guess it's hard to tell, but do you think the pre 2015 early 2000s Original Master Recording releases were mastered and pressed like in the original method?
I appreciate your watching and commenting. I hope you will find other content helpful as well. If you have any topics you're interested in, please let me know: sound@safeandsoundtexas.com
Thing is though, even back in the old days, these werent all done without processing. Read about the Kenny Rogers mfsl. People would be surprised how many lp reissues have some sort of digital step.
Probably half the records I own were pressed in the 1970s so am not worrying about them being from digital sources. I know some of my newer records are not from analog sources after doing some research. I am kinda mad but not really because it's more about the artist and most digital sourced records aren't that bad after all. People's hearing gets worse with age so a trained eighteen year old might hear the slight differences but not me . I will probably be staying away from the new higher priced UHQR high fidelity mofi stuff but not entirely.
I think it is not clear for a lot of vinyl buyers that 97% of music production is recorded digitally since end of 90ties. So when you buy vinyl you get a copy from a 24bit file, which represents the original audio source. Seems that is also true for some audiophile vinyl products ! Quite of a marketing disaster.
@@trackingangle929 Hey there, Michael. Yes, “Michael 45” told a few of us about that this morning, and I then saw his channel announcement as well. I’m very much looking forward to it. 👍🎶 Btw, I’m glad you took Mazzy’s vid in stride as it was intended. The usual injustice collector keyboard warrior likely wouldn’t have. 😅 He’s a great guy. Thanks, Michael and good luck with the new channel! I’m sure it’ll do extremely well. 😊
@@trackingangle929 since he was the first to stir this pot publicly, I will be listening given your opinion on such “rumors” that contributed to my video questioning their process.
I am not interested if there is digital in the chain. I buy vinyl and open reel tapes to have a pure vinyl experience. Don't get me wrong, I have tons of digital and like it for what it brings to my listening experiences. However, to pass something off as analogue (even by omission in the description) and have it not be so, is fraud in my eyes. Likely will not buy anything post 2015 from MoFi just on principal. Thank goodness for Analogue Productions.
I love the Analog Productions as well, however the artists they offer are different and I love many of the artists that MoFi offer. I sure hope they come forward and set the record straight one way or the other.
@@KansasRocker agree with you on artists on MOFI vs. AP. Mike from the In Groove (his video triggered mine) is going to MOFI in California Tuesday morning to meet with the MOFI team and interview for answers. So this rumble may have had a positive effect for transparency. I certainly hope so. Thanks for watching and commenting!
I too have been buying MOFIs from 1978 like Totally Hot Olivia N John and Gino Vannelli Powerful People ect! Matter of fact I spoke, in my latest video,about how those were black but MOFI told us it was virgin vinyl and that’s why you could put them up to a light and see through them! Yes we want transparency! I also did a video about MOV and although sourced from digital but, I believe, are audiophile records! Of course I got flack from the pnut gallery but now with this new revelation I feel somewhat vindicated!😂
All this has given me tremendous pause on my desire to acquire mo MoFi titles post-2015, until the matter is cleared up. Paying top dollar for an all analog pressing of a title should mean something. If you’re charging people high dollar, and the truth is it’s a digital source the lacquers are cut from, that is a bit shady. For the record: I don’t believe every title since 2015 is cut from a digital source; I think the small batch items are most likely actually cut from the analog tape; but when you get to 40,000 copies, suspicion will rise.
I feel the same way. But I wonder if this is for everything or just the one-steps, like you said I feel the smaller batch titles are analogue. For example the David Crosby supervinyl, iron butterfly supervinyl, vanilla fudge, train and Jeff becks truth sound absolutely amazing. Like ridiculously so. The Crosby sounds alot better than the all analogue from a year before. However all these listed are extremely limited and are not one-steps meaning all they'd need is one lacquer. So I can't see the motive of making those digital and I really have a tough time believing that they possibly are. I can't see everything being digital. But I can see all the onesteps having a digital step. Maybe not the actual limited to 2500 ones but all the rest have to either have a digital step or be a copy of the master which honestly is just as deceptive since they are another step thus not being a onestep. In the onestep advertising they straight up show the process so there may be grounds for legal action. Their customer service is horrible so I can't see them doing anything to fix this. To have the audacity to straight up lie while charging such ridiculous prices is gross. This sucks because I have a bunch of mofis I need to sell. For the strictly limited and onesteps I really like I buy 2 copies because they never replace my seem splits so I decided might as well get 2 to avoid a damaged copy and worst that happens I get my money back selling one if not alot more. So if they crash im fucked. Im not a flipper, I only care about retail price but I feel this may destroy mofis credibility. Honestly they should allow people to collect refunds because they outwardly lied. Sure some of their marketing is ambiguous but some is not like the name one step, explaining that the only step is cutting from master tape to lacquer, and showing a picture of said process. Honestly they deserve to go under after all this cuz they've been coasting on their name, have terrible customer service, and gouged prices hard-core. Analogue productions is far better, shit I have 2 copies of strange days because one had a damaged disc and they sent me 2 disc's no questions asked. They replace sleeves and their customer service is awesome. And their product often far surpasses mofi their beach boys and doors albums are impeccable. But like I said the only thing that changed in 2015 is one-steps. I think the extra step is just for them. It doesn't make sense to cut the tape for digital if you're only making 1 lacquer anyway, ya know? Idk but we'll see what happens.
the nightfly and EC unplugged 1 step was cut from a digital master. brothers in arms and alan parsons ( eye in the sky) was also cut from digital 🙄🙄there could be more. the prob is artistes started recording in digital sometime in the 80s. listen to michael franks sleeping gypsy vs objects of desire. night and day difference.
If no analogue master tape existed then it has to start at best with the original tape process, whether digital or analogue. If there is an analogue first gen tape and it is not used, that should be clarified.
Been lots of cases where MOFI seems mediochre on sound, and straight out losing shoot outs to works done by Analogue Productions. Been relatively new back into vinyl past few years I hope this is not because a lot of them are digitally sourced, I rather thought the competition were just being better than them in those cases. I have bought a lot of MOFI the past few years because of name recognition, and a lot of them I have not listened to yet. I rather buy the SACD if this holds true.
There it is in a nutshell; and I'm sure MOFI has been trying to rationalize how they address this and it has bogged them down and now the chickens are coming home to roost. Michael of The In Groove in Phoenix is flying to MOFI in California Tuesday morning and interviewing them to get the story. Stay tuned :) Thanks for watching and commenting.
@@SafeAndSoundTXAudioExcursion Yes, should be interesting to watch that interview. I hope this is not true. I really like MOFI as a company, and they have great customer service which I cannot always say about every other company these days. Thank you for your content!
I don't care if a record is analog or digital. It's 2022, digital is no where near where it was in say the 80's/90's. Analog is great but digital can be great too. Anything after 1981 has been suspect for 40 years.
It's not just MOFI and it's not new. Everyone has been taking advantage of the resurgence in vinyl to make money. Manufacturers could easily apply the SPARS code to all records, but they prefer to be coy and opaque about the process, showing utter contempt for their customers.
Actually my video had more content than either previous one as a historical aspect vs just restating their case. A high majority of feedback shows it added value for most. Sorry if you don’t see it that way. It was a hot topic that I had something to say about. I kind of think that’s the way social media and UA-cam work. Thanks for watching.
I personally have thought they sound to clean to be analogue having no tape hiss. Also the recordindings have a far to clean run between tracks, usally you would hear fade in & out yes but actully do not! This has been going on for lonher then most listeners realise....
They became too greedy. They could have continue making few thousand copies per title and sell them for top dollars and people would not question their process. But no, they had to make 30K records, which exposed them.
I got pressing 22,360 of Brothers In Arms the other day (for the 2x45RPM). Luckily, we all know on Brother in Arms, the Original Master Tape is digital as it was recorded all digital.
Thanks for the video and your concerns. I'm not sure if you have considered this, but there is only ONE set of session master tapes and when they mix these down to quad or stereo, there can be multiple original master tapes made from these. If you look at almost any recording studio, they usually have multiple tape decks in the control rooms. Most have multiple control rooms with more multiple tape decks. These can usually be linked together and therefore can make multiple original master tapes at the same time. In the days when record companies like Capitol and the CBS group had multiple record mastering and pressing facilities, do you think that they passed the original master tape around among the different pressing plants? It would be hard for each region to simultaneously manufacture all the records the same day for a simultaneous release. Then there are the recording lathes. Most major studios have more than one record cutting lathe. Multiple lacquers can be cut simultaneously from the same master tape at the same time. The audio path can remain purely analog with the only digital involved is the pre-program the recording lathes receive so that groove spacing can be optimized through digital interpretation. Quality control shifts to the record pressing plants after the record company sends them the lacquer masters and/or metal parts. In the case of Mofi, their records are exclusively pressed by RTI. There, the QC can drop off. In these days where pressing plants are operating at capacity, they can get sloppy. The record companies typically never lay eyes on the finished products, so they aren't going to realize that something may be wrong unless they received feedback from the stores selling their records or the consumers. Many records are direct-shipped by warehousing distributors like AEC, so the record companies never see the final product. Even when I have bought direct from a record companies' stores, the shipment originates elsewhere. When dealing direct with Mofi or MD, the shipment originates in Nevada. I agree there may be a problem on the Record companies' end, because, with Mofi, something has changed. Unintentionally, over the years, I have become a collector of different pressings of Carole King's "Tapestry". For me the Mofi 2013 release is the best version of this album by far. The recent Mofi 'one-step' doesn't even come close and neither does the ORG 45 rpm set. Of the original issue of the album, the Cloumbia Santa Maria pressing is the best. I have pre-ordered the Mofi 'one-step' of Michael Jackson's "Thriller" album. This is another of my unintentional collections. I am having second thoughts about my order now and will ask Mofi. Mofi has obviously moved away from the company which Brad Miller originally started. Why did the original Mofi go out of business? Brad Miller died. The present owner stepped in and took over the reins. Their original studio is still in Sebastapol, CA where Brad Miller put it. I believe it was in Petaluma, CA before that.
Thank you for those details and I intend to release a video explaining this exact issue of original multitrack being mixed down to a 2 channel stereo or 4 channel media (usually tape prior to 1982). For me, the original means a first generation mix source from the multitrack that was used to cut the original album. Then it’s a matter of what elements in the food chain are Analogue or Digital. Michael Fremer in an interview today stated exactly the same about Tapestry. How the bottom end was boosted on the One-Step. They should have used the same source and levels from 2013 2x45RPM to let the one-step process shine and bring at 45RPM show off the value of that difference. But noooo, they had to muck with the mix. Di$appointed…
@@SafeAndSoundTXAudioExcursion Right, the original mix-down tape made to cut the albums. But there could have been multiples recorded at the same time. In the digital world, it's like multiple masters can be made from the original digital source, at any time, and be indistinguishable between all the copies. When recording multiple mix original masters simultaneously, there can be varying factors, like they are recording them simultaneously on different machines and might get different results. Then, when they were used to cut the lacquers, one original master disc may be different from the others. Then, of all the original pressings, it has to be determined which one is the best and then chase that back to the particular original master tape was used. But, there could have been maybe 10 master mixdown tapes recorded simultaneously, so there are 10 original masters. Taking a few steps back, when Miles at Abbey Road cuts a 1/2 speed lacquer master disc(s), he then probably does the metal plating, making mothers, fathers and/or stampers, then sends them to all the different pressing plants. This was done with the Beatles' "Stereo Box" master discs, then the difference ends up with who did the pressing. I prefer the U.S. Rainbo pressings, as a higher quality of vinyl mix was used than Optimal used. The less surface noise of the Rainbo discs is noticeably lower, which makes them superior. Yes, I compared the 2 different pressings back-to-back. With almost any Optimal pressing, I can identify them by the surface noise between tracks.
I laughed, I cried, it moved me Bob. What a joke audiophiles are. Still making excuses. Many will lie and say they could hear the difference all along. I wonder if any will consider that their system and certainly their ears are not as good as they think.
Since I've had bad experiences with them, I'm not a MoFi fan with the exception of older MoFi albums typically pressed in Japan with great QA/QC. It may be possible to produce a really excellent sounding digital recording. In the past the digital sampling rate for the sound curve was low. If you can sample more of the sound curve, you can produce a more faithful digital recording. I doubt it would surpass a quality all analogue pressing, but it could get close. This plus their digital manipulations of the audio spectrum may be why some recent MoFi albums sound so good. I'm open to being converted, but as of right now, I want all analogue vinyl records, and MoFi must be up front about how their vinyl is made. Unfortunately, it seems like MoFi is more interested in making money than producing true audiophile products. 👿
I get your point. I just saw an interview with Michael Fremer where he dissed some one-steps with the Carole King Tapestry example of have base boosted. Well whether from analogue tape or digital, manipulating the sound the make it sound different than previous releases, which Fremer sites as his guess why they do it, is another example of the label mucking around with the artists product. Modifying the EQ isn’t what I expect them to do. I can take an OG and an equalizer if I wanted to get that! Thanks for watching
@@SafeAndSoundTXAudioExcursion I have the MoFi Miles Davis Kind of Blue 45 rpm. It says "Mastered from the Original Master Tapes" on the "Gain 2 Ultra Analog System". Now I'm thinking that I got a dud for two reasons: (1) the vinyl had QA/QC problems and I got past the return date and (2) it's likely to have digital elements. I really feel like I got the gaff. 😒
I'm OK with that :) it's the titles NOT originally recorded digitally that are Analogue Master Tapes, those are what should be used for an "Original Master Recording" by their own definition as I showed from late 1970's inserts. If the OMR is digital, then it's a mute point: Brothers in Arms, The Nightfly are no problem
Mofi only claim is to use "original master recordings" on their vinyl cover. Its common knowledge that when CDs appeared the 4 track reel to reel tapes commonly used in the recording studio were transferred to digital, tapes degraded both due to age and transient degradation every time they were played they lost dynamics clarity and sharpness. Whilst the vinyl revival continues everyone in the music industry is exploiting the market and the opportunity to make "easy" money, that's business. Its the consumer who drives demand, if they are prepared to pay $$$ for something they want then its obvious the industry would only be to happy to supply. I do wonder why anyone would pay $$$ for new vinyl rather than just pick up a CD costing peanuts in comparison. If you want the original vinyl, BUY the original.
1s and 0s don’t degrade on tape, f they aren’t read fully or correctly that can cause error correction on the digital equipment which lessens the accuracy of the translation of the music and affects the sound. Analogue on tape causes dropouts that are audible losses of quality and reproduction.
Well if you should find out that MOFI IS using enhanced to sound like perfect analogue masters burned to a digital format to make their one-steps, just call Santa Claus and he'll straighten the whole thing out, okay Kids?
Unless you directly work for MOFI, that's the only way you're going to really know for sure what their processes are. lf they do put in a little of digital into the mix, l'm sure it's best digital out there, and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference anyway.
I’m sure many know within MOFI but the across the board “no comment” response given through Music Direct and MOFI is a clear indication to me they’re attempting to control the narrative. Which implies there is something going on other than what they want people to believe given their history. Again, I referred to objective information shared over the years and then diluted or removed over time. As in politics, what takes people and parties down is this truth: “it’s not the lie, it’s the cover up.”
I say if we have to ask this question, then either it doesn't matter or the people who claimed to hear the difference were proven by MoFi to be full of it. 😅😅
this suspicion and eyebrow raising situation has been going on for some time. I have had some audible indicators that made me wonder if it was pure analog from the Original Master Recording or not. But I didn't really have any objective basis to pursue it. However, the Thriller # of units pressed kind of pushed the logic that the chance of being able to use an Original Master Recording tape to make 40,000 units was questionable at best. We have to ask the question also because other labels are so overtly transparent and, by comparison, one realizes now how coy MOFI has been. Thanks for commenting and watching :)
The thing is... Mofi didnt hoodwink anyone. If they dont state - as every other label will - that a record is cut from analogue tapes then its consumers fault to assume it is. If they cut from a digital master made from the tapes and it sounds amazing.... then it sounds amazing! Theres countless digital recordings that sound amazing, on vinyl. This is where vinyl and analogue snobbery becomes a thing im glad i dont associate with. My real issue with Mofi is their prices and availability. It is inherently cheaper to master with software programs than without them, yet Mofi charges the most premium prices of any labels where in fact their products are actually revealed to be cheaper to put together than say a 20 quid/buck Blue Note classic which is all analogue. Like i say when AP, Blue Note or any other label cuts a record all analogue it damn sure gets mentioned by them in some way, usually hype sticker. Mofi doesnt do this which is fine so we shouldnt just assume they are. As a Mofi SACD collector im doubly not bothered by the method when its the mastering and sound that matters at the end. The other issue of availability is another matter but it looks like they are going to get better in the future there. I just hope they expand to produce more titles, more records/sacds, wonderfully mastered however they see best at prices that dont take the p1ss!
They are opening a pressing plant in California early next year to address the capacity and (hopefully) quality issues. Regarding not saying what the process is and consumers assuming, I must admit there is some truth to that reality. As I said in the video, given the half-speed master phase out without saying anything, they have a history of operating this way. I guess we gave them more credit than deserved over time. Their history is now why asking the question is the fair thing to do for the consumer. But some industry folks think it's OUR fault by asking which puts MOFI in a bad position. To that I can only say, I will send a mirror to MOFI so they can clearly see who is to blame.
Welcome to the VC. A hot topic right now.The last few years have seen a huge increase in Vinyl Community videos. Many focus on reviewing and comparing pressings and how they sound. My current pet peeve is that they never do a room/equipment tour. Your intro talking about Bose is not reassuring. I'm curious why you need a headset to talk to a camera ?
Or, at the least, what I call “sins of omission”. Like if you’re married and a girl at the bar says “I would never go out with a married guy” and you come on to her being married and just happen to not mention that you’re married, but she never asked you and you never volunteered….
Yeah, no way this is a one step from the original. The recording process alone negates that. Bruce Swedein (RIP) helped develop each track being recorded in stereo. Stereo kick, stereo snare, stereo guitar, etc. Because of this, more tracks were needed then what came on the regular 2 inch/24 track reels. So two studer 24 track machines had to be synced to play back everything. Add to that, he didn't want the drums to lose their punch with each playback they would have to do to track the other instruments, so the original drum tape was copied and then stored away until mixing/mastering. The copy tape was used during all the overdubbing parts. If that much care was taken not to have it played over and over just in recording it at Westlake Studios, do you really think they would let mofi run it 40,000 times?
Thanks for those details, interesting! I guess many of us may have been in a “hope springs eternal” mode about the clear analog path but of course as we get to 80s releases things were changing fast!
The stereo mixdown 1/2” tape has nothing to do with what Swedien did to preserve the 2” multi-tracks. Furthermore, to press 40,000 copies of a record does not mean the tape has to be run that many times. It only has to be run ONCE.
@@SPAZZOID100 then it is technically not a one off. It is a two off. Plus which half inch are you talking about? Did you know there were multiple half inch masters and mix downs made. Over 80 mixes of Billie Jean were done alone. It's a great story. My point is, even though i ordered one, I highly doubt it is a true one off from the actual master used for the original pressing. Maybe a copy of a copy of the original master?
Asking the question is not irresponsible. If people in the industry know and have kept it under wraps, that would be irresponsible. 45RPM Audiophile was first to raise the question, then a few others and finally a credible retailer. I gave MOFI’s product kudos and also said “does it even matter” as it relates to the finished product. I think I went out of my way to not besmirch them.
Playing the devils advocate here a bit. Why do you need to know? How does knowing change things in a real way? Is knowing going to change the sound for worse or better?
Right. No one could tell before, now they’re saying “oh these records just don’t sound good all of the sudden?” Kinda shows how pretentious and what a joke “analog only” is…
Hi John, nice seeing you at another site trafficking in rumors. P.S.: I've still forgotten more about this subject than you'll ever know. Quincy Jones hired me to be an expert witness in his suit against the estate of Michael Jackson. Did you know that before you insulted me with your bullshit about my hearing? What have you done?
Only in two ways. One: If they in fact said they were completely analogue and they are using a digital step, then people are not getting what they paid for. Two: It is freaking certain audiophiles out, because it would shatter some of what they claim about digital and is a blow to their aural egos.
Very calm & level-headed commentary being made here, which contrasts w/some UA-camrs who sound shrill & work themselves into hysteria w/their own speculations. Kudos for that, David. Definitely earned my respect.
This came up as a suggestion for me after watching In Groove's video. I agree 100%. Subscribed! Looking forward to more.
Thank you for watching and subscribing. I have another video on this topic coming this weekend.
@@SafeAndSoundTXAudioExcursion Where in TX are you? I'm in a small club of guys in Houston. We have monthly meetings at each other's houses for vinyl listening. If you're anywhere nearby I would be happy to invite you along.
@@jasonsmith2032 well that “sounds great” :) but unfortunately I’m in DFW area… if you know of a group here, let me know. Thanks for watching!
I'm not sure if you know about them but Ron from a channel called New Record Day and another guy called Cheap Audio Man live up there. There's also a guy who has a channel for NTX record store.
@@jasonsmith2032 I will check out the first two. I know GI Sanders from NTX and I did an interview with him :). ua-cam.com/video/rF_gsso-QR4/v-deo.html
I had previously watched the other channels on this topic. I have to say that your historical lesson on MOFI was extremely interesting. Much appreciated! Keep up the great work!
Thank you David! When I heard this rumbling on Wednesday and Thursday it hit me that I had all this history "on the shelf" and I started to compare materials over time. And the history shows that when they change, they don't overtly say so. They actually spoke more about the vinyl compound that the sourcing process. So one might assume, it didn't change; but we know the half-speed change fiasco shows us they are coy (to say the least). Well now we're here again very possibly. Come clean and the truth will set you free. Thanks for your comments and watching :)
I'm a mostly retired musician who grew up more than half a century ago loving vinyl as the best available affordable audio medium. But technology advanced with the advent of CDs, which I happily agreed to be the all round preferable Audio format. But only when carefully mastered for optimum audio quality... Sadly, too many CDs suffered from inept and lazy recording and mastering. Sounding ice pick brittle, and damaging the reputation of the newly developing format..The negative stigma remains to this day.. Which undermined the potential for CDs to be definitively accepted as remedying the indisputable frustrating deficiencies of vinyl.... My considered opinion now is that [ in an ideal world ], music should be recorded to traditional analog tape, then mixed and mastered to HD digital files. I'd have no problems with these 'best of both worlds' mastered recordings being pressed to vinyl for that market of enthusiasts.. Though since the 1980s I personally no longer have any interest in buying new vinyl records.. I do believe TAPE was the critical factor for determining 'analog warmth', which has been mistakenly credited to vinyl. This myth of vinyl superiority being propagated as an uncritically accepted received wisdom by a new generation of young vinyl buyers and, stubborn old nostalgics [ often with vested interests ].... Unfortunately Tape technology was discarded too swiftly from the recording studio workplace. It's benefits now largely lost as the machinery was abandoned, and the expert tape technicians are all gradually passing away... At least Tape 'warmth' simulation software is constantly improving, to help digital recordings sound more convincing as 'authentic' analog source for whatever format they are eventually sold to music fans....
I agree with you fully. I will add that I do think the phono cartridge and
Preamplifier can contribute to a certain warmth on the receiving end but it can never make right what was wrong in the mastering process.
Like many business models, throughput, efficiency and time are the focuses of many businesses, even entities like MOFI. However, if a label (Sony in the case of Thriller) won’t release the analog master, then you have to decide whether to ditch their catalog or “go for it”. The decisions made should carry along transparency to the public which is really what this is all about.
@@SafeAndSoundTXAudioExcursion HI, it's surely positive for the community if 'elder' members can amicably agree on an objective honest consensus regarding the pros and cons of both analog and digital audio. After all we are the music enthusiasts who actually grew up experiencing the 1980s transition from old to new technologies..... Now speculating on 21st Century vinyl re-releases. Another factor which may need to be considered is the extent to which original analog Master Tape archives were lost forever, destroyed in the catastrophic mass storage warehouse fire of a few years ago ??? Which may have left only digital back up copies surviving for posterity... and not necessarily good quality digital transfers, depending on who did the backups, for what purpose, and if the A to D converter equipment was state of the art for it's day - or mediocre semi pro level recording gear.. Or at worst, digitally 'cleaned up' needle drops...??????????... The major music industry corporations may wish to remain silent on this issue......
Hello David. I would say of those who recently have made this a current topic your video has been the most cogent. We’ll done. The history in artifacts is helpful to make this presentation. It would behoove MoFi and all proveyers of audiophile records to be completely forthcoming and totally honest about their products and processes. Thx. ☮️
Thank you, your comments are encouraging. I hoped I had a perspective and information elements to pass along. I think consumers are much more engaged in what they buy when they pay a premium. Truth is part of the implied contract with a company and it seems like in this audiophile space there is a lot of snake oil and missing or misleading Info. That is why I say to beware of what isn’t overtly stated. It’s like “I didn’t lie if I didn’t choose to tell you about it.” Many marriages end that way :)
Nice video. So what does one get for a digitally sourced one step of Thriller vs The MoFi $30 SACD? A big box full of inserts and foam, surface noise ( even though mofi uses quieter vinyl vs normal releases) plus , imo, poor quality control ( vs Analogue Productions). The $30 SACD will be a true One Step direct from the digital copy without all the filler and noise.
I can see that perspective and the SACDs have been very strong. When I compared my Eagles SACD to the Eagles One-Step I found the LP had more distinct vocals and the best was a bit more pronounced. Again, that is what my ears told my brain :) thanks for watching
Great video. Best of luck with the channel. You're very informed and express yourself clearly. I'll be watching more!
Thank you Evan! Will have #22 out at the top of the hour :)
I think with you and Mike as well as others should hold MOFI's feet to the fire on giving us just what, where and when on getting the master recordings. All across the board on all their pressing processes.
Thanks for watching! That’s our goal as this has been a growing whisper. Part of me wonders if they’re expecting this given the Thriller announcement being so over the top with quantity exposing it.
Do you think that holding their feet to the fire will change anything?
Lets say they start putting a new blurb in the packaging. Will that make it sound any better or worse?
Will all of this suddenly force Mofi into getting rid of the digital step?
Are folks looking to hit em where it hurts? If so, what do you see as positive repercussions from this?
I understand the ethical issue here.
But are people willing to stand on ethics and at the same time shoot themselves in their audiophile foot?
@@FleagleSangria I don't think they will say anything, and if they do, it might be something to the effect of "we use proprietary digital techniques to cleanse the sound and remove imperfections in the master recording" or something like that. Their focus is making great sounding records, so however they get the end product justifies the means, even if it involves additional technology.
@@ParallelUniversity Maybe. There is another that apparently spilled the beans as far as the source of the mastering. Which he says is a copy tape (not digital) of the master tape.
They should be forthcoming, honest and straight forward. Maybe it also shows digital through todays technology has arrived for stellar sound? Mike and you have real love in the Mofi products. So its palpable the strong feelings. Mofi should know the love people have and be straight
Thanks! Yes that’s all I am asking for. Michael Fremer said they told him they were going to address the Thriller issue many weeks ago but they didn’t….so they kind of brought these inquiries upon themselves. I think they’re torn whether their credibility and sales will be affected not realizing their silence could cause a similar response. Here’s that video
ua-cam.com/video/a3oRLUcZCFE/v-deo.html
Thank you David a very clear and concise video on the subject and I agree with you like many others on transparency I too like to know the exact process. My question to you David is I can not tell if the source is digital or from the original analog master tape all I know is if it sounds great then I am happy . There are many audiophile experts out there and I respect Mike from the In Groove and love his videos but if it turns out quite a number of his top 100 albums cut from the original analog tapes turn out to be from a digital source I would be completely surprised he could not tell the difference . So David how can one tell if an expert like Mike and many others can not is it a case of modern technology is so good we have gone past the point of being able to notice the difference but I still would like to know the source cheers Carl Australia
Hey Carl. Great question. I think honestly this situation may, in fact, be the basis for the argument that the Hi-Res Digital sources, especially Sony’s DSD is SO good, we are now splitting hairs to tell the difference. It’s like the old blindfold taste tests. For me, it has gotten to be a distinction without a difference. As my Episode 23 explains, I’m stating to look at this as now being simply a data backup situation as the analog-to-digital conversion that moves that tape oxide into 1s and 0s had such a super high precision and sampling rate. Michael Fremer claims to be able to hear the difference and I don’t doubt there are times he gets in right, but even a blind squirrel can often find a nut!
So for a purist this is a possible “rock my world” moment coming. However, if something “sounds great” yesterday, it doesn’t change because we find out digital was involved. But clearly if the criteria is his list can only be AAA, then he’s going to need a second ADA list! Thanks for watching!
Thanks for the reply David what you have to say on the subject makes complete sense I have 6 or 7 Mobile Fidelity records from Frank Sinatra Bobby Darrin Johnny Cash Elvis Presley and Hall and Oates and they all sound great and no matter what the source I will continue to buy their product because they are fantastic cheers Carl .
Great video , I am afraid if they don't give us any information people will go elsewhere. They sound amazing they just need to be clear on how they are making the records that's all. Cheers from El Paso Texas
Thanks and cheers from DFW Texas
Very well done video explaining. It’s in my opinion that eventually to preserve the original master analog tapes they will have to stop being played due to deterioration. It just seems as if there will be noway possible to be running master tapes 80 years old over and over, that there must be a definite means of archiving a perfect reproduction of the Original Master analog tape. We know that digitization can be an uncomfortable word to us vinyl enthusiasts. However digital archiving when done correctly at high sample rates, bit rates, and with very low compression, can yield a recording that can be bit for bit accurate. This recording then can be passed down over and over with little to absolutely no loss of any data bits or quality. So in my personal opinion, I feel given enough time into the future, most all shellacs with end up being cut from digital sources. Some people say they can hear the difference if blindfolded from a digitally sourced file vs analog tape. This very well may be true, I have yet to take the test myself. I myself like the idea of a all natural source as being the source for my vinyl pressings. However will it be possible to really keep running master tapes or even one off or two off analog copies? If so, for how long would this be.
You are correct. The analog tape gravy train will oxidize into infinity :)
Making a backup copy using to best Analog-to-Digital method asap is the best insurance policy and should be done. Just like backing up data for IT it’s the same principle. As digital improves it becomes less of a quality gap and good mastering engineers can do magic. For this topic though it’s about integrity and MOFI managing their image and their brand. Thanks for watching!
@@SafeAndSoundTXAudioExcursion
I agree with your statement agreeing that with time tape disintegration is inevitable. So I would say get all the pressings from a Master Analog tape or one off copy while you can still get them “if that matters to a person.” I agree that digital only gets better with smart people behind the technology. But yes as the purpose of the video being transparency of the source used for cutting the lacquers is an important one, I concur this should be made clear in advertising.
First time viewer of your videos. First I think you are spot on in your analysis of the situation and possible reasons as to why it is happening. Key points of course being transparency, and why MOFI may not be transparent from a marketing standpoint. I know in my limited experience with vinyl there is a lot more thought that goes into purchasing an album than I ever did with CD's (that has since changed).When comparing pressings I of course listen to differences subtle and overt to see which one provides the best experience. It is difficult to know why those differences exist when information is not readily available about the process taken to make the product. It can be mastering, source material used, or a number of other factors. Point is as consumers we want to know as much as we can to make informed choices. Excellent video, plus I appreciate Arm Chair Theatre in the background (Only missing Long Wave, and Zoom for Jeff Lynne/ELO)
Thank you so much for watching and your sharing your perspective. The mastering is SO important in the process whether to Vinyl or even an SACD. We flock to certain mastering geniuses and just know their stuff will sound great. Bob Ludwig and Kevin Gray for example. I am sure there are good reasons why MOFI is doing what they are doing for the good of the product outcome. As the years go by, these original analogue tapes are increasing in fragility. Every gravy train has to come to the end :) Regarding Jeff Lynne, I don't have Long Wave on Vinyl, but I DO have Zoom which is worth a bundle. My wife got it for me as a birthday gift years ago by ordering on Amazon - the white vinyl version no less. Really has shot up in value :). Thanks for watching and hope you will subscribe to keep up with my content. It means a lot to me as well as your taking time to comment. All the best...
Why WHAT is happening? What IS happening is rumor mongering and the spreading of conjecture.
@@trackingangle929 "what is happening" meaning the lack of transparency. I did not say that one way or the other that they were or were not using one source over another. However it is not explicitly stated which I suspect was intentional as it is with most labels. Some records very clearly state mastered from the master tapes, some say digitally remastered and alas many don't state it at all. That's the point though, with lack of information all people can do is assume, guess which leads to conjecture. If transparency exists that is much more difficult to do.
I has a question that may be a bit off topic, but:
If you have your own lathe and want to gain better fidelity recording at 1/2 speed,
would that not also significantly affect the RIAA curve you need to EQ the cutting driver stylus for?
Surely it would be affected, similar to the bias frequency for recording to tape at higher speeds.
Half speed has its drawbacks for sure. Mastering Engineer Kevin Gray gives some details here: ua-cam.com/video/VbVx-e9i1Uk/v-deo.html
Thank you for such a calming presentation and common sense point of view David. Although I'm now in my 50's, I am just recently rediscovering my love for vinyl (was always there and my 1st preference honestly...just other life factors dictated I store many away for over 20 years until these past 2 - 3 years). My point is, I've seen far too many videos in these past few days boarding overreaction, and coming across as accusations without bases. Too sensational for my liking. Ultimately we will know the truth, but until then I will reserve opinion and wholeheartedly agree and appreciate the points you made. Great video. Subscribed and liked. Cheers! 🤘🎶🤘
Your comments are very humbling. I truly am trying to be very factual in my videos and not controversial. I had a point of view on the topic and wanted to share what my age and experience learned over time. I’m glad you found it reasonable and calming because I felt calm, yet passionate at the same time. I hope you will find some other videos of interest as well. I just want to help average folks like you enjoy this aspect of their life. Thanks for your support! :)
How many times can a lacquer be plated to make stampers? Just once? Explaining that will help the discussion. Maybe something else worth mentioning is that some of the records MoFi has released, like the one step Donald Fagen, and Brothers in Arms, come from digital recordings. I can't remember if they were transparent about that.
Just thinking out loud here: Since the actual stamper is a 'negative' of the lacquer, it must be removed from the lacquer before it can be used to make positives (pressing the records). So the original positive still exists in the lacquer. The question is: is the original lacquer now useless after being used once to create the stamper (or mother in the multi-step process), or can it be used again with the same quality? My guess is 'no' but I think I need to do some more Googling to find out. Sorry for rambling a bit.
They are used one time, then destroyed.
Your videos are really good. I'm just a tourist in the vinyl community these days. My collection is small and I often gift my old records to fellow musicians (I'm not a good one but I know some really good ones including folks in the biz in that there Los Angeles, ill tell you what) buy I buy about a record a month. Sometimes off discogs and sometimes wherever I can find them locally. This is fascinating. I apologize if I sound silly in these comments. I'm very busy with work but I'm able to fit music into my leisure time. But I really enjoy your work. I'm on the guest list to see the Circle Jerks next month, so thank God cause I need a great punk show.
Thanks for writing Erik. Great you can catch a live show :). No you don’t sound silly, just a music lover doing what they can when they can. Just buying whatever speaks to you is what’s important. No rules, just love of music.
well done video!
Thanks for commenting and watching :)
Definitely a lot to unpack, good video.
Thanks, I appreciate your taking the time to watch and/or subscribe.
You're right. It's not about which version is best, digital or analog. It's about being lied to. It's about thinking about buying something analog but in the end it's digital. It's like Diesel-gate, you buy a car thinking has good fuel mileage but in reality it's not.
If MOFI buyers enjoy the product and think they sound great, and now they turn out to be digital, what does that say about those so-called "audiophiles" who insist analog is so superior to digital?
A very good question Roger if many of those great Mo-Fi albums since 2015 are from a digital source how is it the audiophile experts could not tell the difference. I can not tell I am just happy if it sounds great maybe with modern technology it is so good and the way it is used we can not tell the difference but I am not an expert . Cheers Carl
We know a few are from a digital source as there was never any analog source available Maybe you meant “digital copy from an analog source”?
It says their poorly set up turntable is compensating for other problems in their system
Excellent overview, subbed 👍🏻
Thank you, I love your channel as well :)
The most compromise between mofi and sony is Sony let mofi made a tape copy from original master tape to make ud1s. Another option is sony let mofi used digital master .
Correct. Can’t imagine any first gen analog (or any) tape being let out of Sony’s hands…
Good heavens, if Mofi used digital it is an advantage, removing one step of analog generation loss from the reproduction chain. The end result is a better sounding vinyl. Time to wake up.
That can be true of course. But regardless of outcome, methods should be provided. Whether digital is introduced or not, some outcomes are the product of some tweaking that is problematic. Like Carole King One-Step mucked up to have too much bass. Their 2x45RPM was perfect!
I was under the impression that MOFI was using 100% analog techniques when it came to the vinyl . If MOFI is using digital enhancements to make the vinyl sound better then yes, that should be on the site . Like Momma Melinda said "feels like we were hoodwinked" . MOFI knows their legacy of being known as the best analog record you could get on vinyl . Chad Kassem did do a "not comment" moment when it came to talking about this issue . I think Chad knew they used digital techniques . Chad's UHQR is more of the "REAL DEAL" .
Well the chickens always come home to roost and Thriller pushed them into “a bridge too far” for those who pay attention. Even if they’re not using “enhancements” but just taking the analog tape to a DSD “backup copy” it introduces digital into the process is some manner.
What's being sold here and elsewhere are rumors. Only rumors. You and Melinda have been "hoodwinked" because you accept as fact what for now is only rumor. It may prove to be true but trafficking in rumors is very, very dangerous and innocent people and businesses can get hurt.
@@trackingangle929 I wish it hadn’t come to this but I think you know, it’s been “out there” and this is what happens when a company says “no comment” to a legitimate question. MOFI can address it and move on. I certainly don’t want anything but their success. The overwhelming comments here and elsewhere sees this as a clarification we desire. The market shifts with competition and these other labels sell transparency as well as product.
To be fair on Chad’s end he used already existing stampers. KOB had the Classic Records stamper and I believe Are You Experienced? also used old stamps. However, at this point this makes me love AP more than MFSL
So audiophiles can't tell the difference between DIGITAL vs analog? 🤔 tell me more
After this bomb, some analogue vinyl collectors says "its ok thats digital as long as it sounds best". Well they didnt Say such things before, digital for them was inferior
I think they happily misled everyone, they knew what everyone thought (their pressings were 100% Analogue) and did nothing to correct it.
Key point. 100% thought .... Because digital can completely capture the analog
Michael Ludwig @45rpm audiophile broke the story.
I agree I think he was the first to go public. After he had skewered them on packaging, I guess he figure to go whole hog! Truth is, there has been an increasing buzz since the Thriller announcement about the authenticity of the process. Before that, suspicions existed but I think the Thriller One-Step “math” broke the code. Thanks for watching!
I have updated my video description to point out why I referenced only this latest video from Mike.
And? It matters not. That same channel has been banging on about how great MOFI records are and their sensational sound. Like many other audiophiles. The reality is it really matters not who raised the issue, the reality is those who bang on about audiophiles versus digital really couldn’t tell the difference all along
There is a spokesperson for Blue Note and for Analog Productions. Is there a spokesperson for Mofi? Just saying..who is the man behind the curtain?
Michael Fremer stated there is one he heard from in a video last night…
ua-cam.com/video/a3oRLUcZCFE/v-deo.html
its all about the dollar. profit. profit profit
these are the times ur very sincere honsty doesnt sell
Like I said before, Mobile Fidelity should take heed of Abe Lincoln's famous quote:
You can fool all of the people some of time;
You can fool some of the people all of the time,
But you can't fool all the people all the time
Ha! I would say “they’re lips are moving”, but in their case, they’re saying nothing. Who said Silence is Golden? :) thanks for watching
You are the one being fooled by rumors spread by people who have no facts.
@@trackingangle929 Oh I don't think I'm fooled at all, just taking a wait and see approach until the facts actually do come out. But I do admit to having a "trust no one, suspect everyone" attitude when in comes to big companies and their claims.
@@trackingangle929 it is interesting to note that you came out with a statement after the thriller announcement questioning the process, as others are now doing, which you quickly deleted. We are all of course wondering what you discovered to make you do that. Will be watching you with Mike on Sunday.
I did read a comment saying that you had written an article a while back, that Tim P created a tape deck that is taken into the studio’s tape library and used to make a copy from the original tape. If that is indeed the case, maybe it is an analog deck and not digital.
I totally get it, transparency should be a given. However, as you stated yourself the One Steps sound outstanding so if digital processing has been employed you clearly couldn’t tell. My point is, I just want the best sound possible I don’t care how they do it. Yes I love vinyl but I do think it’s about ego too (not referring to you personally) as many collectors are all about the showy display and bragging rights, so now their bragging might be called into question they are making a big noise.
I have MFSL pressings that are shockingly poor, I am not a fan boy by any means, which brings me right back to my earlier point,…give us the best sound reproduction possible 😉
I find it humorous how the records people loved and talked about how great they sound are suddenly ripoffs now that there's a possibility that digital was in the chain at some point. Audiophile nonsense at its finest. "This is the best pressing I've ever heard!" "You know it's made from hi-res digital." "This record is pure garbage, now I can hear that digital harshness!"
@@gordonshumway7465 Amen lol
“This audiophile” (me)!only wants to understand the process. There are some
The original Thriller pressing is mind-blowing you don't need a new pressing
It is great for sure and can keep someone happy and be done with it. There are many original presses that I thought could not be improved.
Eagles debut LP is an example as the MOFI One-Step blows it away. I think improved processes, materials and technology can often raise the bars. Is it worth the price difference? That’s for each person to decide. Thanks for watching!
Great video, informative and concise, thanks
Thanks! I often go too long and I’m working on that :) hope I can be less geeky! I can be geeky but I’m all about teaching the common man. Thanks for your comments.
The issue here is, what is a master tape ? It is not as simple as it sounds. In the earliest days of magnetic tape recordings, the master would point to the edited work parts. This is because tapes were either made in mono, or the various microphone feeds were mixed real time to stereo (Decca, EMI etc.) during the recording session. In the case of RCA and Mercury, the master would be the 3 track tape, which was then mixed down to stereo. Very little work was done post-production. Both the 3 channel session master and the stereo mix-down would be regarded as the master. Unless you want to do a new mix, the stereo mix-down tape would normally be used and loses very little in terms of sound quality, only 3dB in S/N ratio. By the 1980s when the Thriller album was made, the process was far more complicated, with overdubs, bounced tracks, etc. It really depends on where you want to start. Are you going to do a new mix, which I seriously doubt MFSL wants to do. There probably exists multiple copies of the original stereo mix downs, since unlike the original multi-track tape, they would have made many copies of the stereo tape in parallel. New mix downs were also done for subsequent reissues. Some of these would serve as production masters, and others as safety or protection copies. Even copies made from the production master would be regarded as a master, since these were the ones sent to the various mastering facilities around the world for cutting vinyl. For a platinum selling album such as this, there are probably thousands of these distribution masters. I don't have this particular one, but I do have this type of master tapes for many albums. I doubt you can detect any difference between the original stereo mix down and the distribution master, if the latter was professionally made by the studio. In fact, even 4th or 5th generation tapes lose very little, at least when compared to how much is lost during the whole LP production process. I occasionally make copies from my original session master tapes and if I can hear a difference, I will discard the copy and make another one. Therefore, it is possible that MFSL has a dozen or more copies made from one of the stereo mix downs, and it is entirely legitimate to call these master tapes. You can play these tapes dozens of times before noticing any deterioration. To make 40,000 LPs with the 1-step process, you will need 100 to 150 lacquers. You can do that easily with 4 or 5 tape copies. The edited session tape or even the first generation mix down were rarely used to directly cut vinyl, now or in the past. I doubt an untrained listener will be able to tell a third from a second generation copy. The greatest difference comes in eliminating the two electroplating steps used to produce the mother and the stampers.
You nailed it! Have been working on a video to explain this very thing! Thank you for the excellent perspective and details and for watching my channel!
very good! well said!
I guess it's hard to tell, but do you think the pre 2015 early 2000s Original Master Recording releases were mastered and pressed like in the original method?
I think it depends on when the LP was originally done how much chance the true analog master tape was used…
@@SafeAndSoundTXAudioExcursion like the 1950s early 60s?
Great information!
Very informative. Thank you
I appreciate your watching and commenting. I hope you will find other content helpful as well. If you have any topics you're interested in, please let me know: sound@safeandsoundtexas.com
Thing is though, even back in the old days, these werent all done without processing. Read about the Kenny Rogers mfsl.
People would be surprised how many lp reissues have some sort of digital step.
You cite one exception to the rule. I knew Stan Ricker. He was a friend of mine. You are no Stan Ricker.
@ Fremer Who the fuck are you talking to? Are you drunk again? I'm waiting.
Great video!
Thank you!
The consumer is not to blame.
Probably half the records I own were pressed in the 1970s so am not worrying about them being from digital sources. I know some of my newer records are not from analog sources after doing some research. I am kinda mad but not really because it's more about the artist and most digital sourced records aren't that bad after all. People's hearing gets worse with age so a trained eighteen year old might hear the slight differences but not me . I will probably be staying away from the new higher priced UHQR high fidelity mofi stuff but not entirely.
Thanks for commenting and watching :)
I think it is not clear for a lot of vinyl buyers that 97% of music production is recorded digitally since end of 90ties. So when you buy vinyl you get a copy from a 24bit file, which represents the original audio source. Seems that is also true for some audiophile vinyl products ! Quite of a marketing disaster.
Michael Ludwig from 45 RPM AUDIOPHILE deserves a large amount of credit as well, and had brought this up a while back
I'm doling a live stream with Ludwig Sunday 2 PM east coast time.
@@trackingangle929 Hey there, Michael. Yes, “Michael 45” told a few of us about that this morning, and I then saw his channel announcement as well. I’m very much looking forward to it. 👍🎶 Btw, I’m glad you took Mazzy’s vid in stride as it was intended. The usual injustice collector keyboard warrior likely wouldn’t have. 😅 He’s a great guy. Thanks, Michael and good luck with the new channel! I’m sure it’ll do extremely well. 😊
@@trackingangle929 since he was the first to stir this pot publicly, I will be listening given your opinion on such “rumors” that contributed to my video questioning their process.
@@trackingangle929 based on your listening sessions with these one steps, are they digital?
Where the half speed mastering are today? Well - as a Beatles fan - Abbey Road Studios and Miles Showell is great!
I am not interested if there is digital in the chain. I buy vinyl and open reel tapes to have a pure vinyl experience. Don't get me wrong, I have tons of digital and like it for what it brings to my listening experiences. However, to pass something off as analogue (even by omission in the description) and have it not be so, is fraud in my eyes. Likely will not buy anything post 2015 from MoFi just on principal. Thank goodness for Analogue Productions.
This is my point, to people like yourself this is critical information. But from their side, they might
not want to lose one sale to transparency.
I love the Analog Productions as well, however the artists they offer are different and I love many of the artists that MoFi offer. I sure hope they come forward and set the record straight one way or the other.
@@KansasRocker agree with you on artists on MOFI vs. AP. Mike from the In Groove (his video triggered mine) is going to MOFI in California Tuesday morning to meet with the MOFI team and interview for answers. So this rumble may have had a positive effect for transparency. I certainly hope so. Thanks for watching and commenting!
I too have been buying MOFIs from 1978 like Totally Hot Olivia N John and Gino Vannelli Powerful People ect! Matter of fact I spoke, in my latest video,about how those were black but MOFI told us it was virgin vinyl and that’s why you could put them up to a light and see through them! Yes we want transparency! I also did a video about MOV and although sourced from digital but, I believe, are audiophile records! Of course I got flack from the pnut gallery but now with this new revelation I feel somewhat vindicated!😂
All this has given me tremendous pause on my desire to acquire mo MoFi titles post-2015, until the matter is cleared up. Paying top dollar for an all analog pressing of a title should mean something. If you’re charging people high dollar, and the truth is it’s a digital source the lacquers are cut from, that is a bit shady. For the record: I don’t believe every title since 2015 is cut from a digital source; I think the small batch items are most likely actually cut from the analog tape; but when you get to 40,000 copies, suspicion will rise.
I feel the same way. But I wonder if this is for everything or just the one-steps, like you said I feel the smaller batch titles are analogue. For example the David Crosby supervinyl, iron butterfly supervinyl, vanilla fudge, train and Jeff becks truth sound absolutely amazing. Like ridiculously so. The Crosby sounds alot better than the all analogue from a year before. However all these listed are extremely limited and are not one-steps meaning all they'd need is one lacquer. So I can't see the motive of making those digital and I really have a tough time believing that they possibly are. I can't see everything being digital. But I can see all the onesteps having a digital step. Maybe not the actual limited to 2500 ones but all the rest have to either have a digital step or be a copy of the master which honestly is just as deceptive since they are another step thus not being a onestep. In the onestep advertising they straight up show the process so there may be grounds for legal action. Their customer service is horrible so I can't see them doing anything to fix this. To have the audacity to straight up lie while charging such ridiculous prices is gross.
This sucks because I have a bunch of mofis I need to sell. For the strictly limited and onesteps I really like I buy 2 copies because they never replace my seem splits so I decided might as well get 2 to avoid a damaged copy and worst that happens I get my money back selling one if not alot more. So if they crash im fucked. Im not a flipper, I only care about retail price but I feel this may destroy mofis credibility. Honestly they should allow people to collect refunds because they outwardly lied. Sure some of their marketing is ambiguous but some is not like the name one step, explaining that the only step is cutting from master tape to lacquer, and showing a picture of said process.
Honestly they deserve to go under after all this cuz they've been coasting on their name, have terrible customer service, and gouged prices hard-core. Analogue productions is far better, shit I have 2 copies of strange days because one had a damaged disc and they sent me 2 disc's no questions asked. They replace sleeves and their customer service is awesome. And their product often far surpasses mofi their beach boys and doors albums are impeccable.
But like I said the only thing that changed in 2015 is one-steps. I think the extra step is just for them. It doesn't make sense to cut the tape for digital if you're only making 1 lacquer anyway, ya know? Idk but we'll see what happens.
the nightfly and EC unplugged 1 step was cut from a digital master. brothers in arms and alan parsons ( eye in the sky) was also cut from digital 🙄🙄there could be more. the prob is artistes started recording in digital sometime in the 80s. listen to michael franks sleeping gypsy vs objects of desire. night and day difference.
If no analogue master tape existed then it has to start at best with the original tape process, whether digital or analogue. If there is an analogue first gen tape and it is not used, that should be clarified.
If there is any other step between the master and the lacquer, they need to abandon the "One Step" name and marketing, period!
Yup as that defies their own graphic!
Been lots of cases where MOFI seems mediochre on sound, and straight out losing shoot outs to works done by Analogue Productions. Been relatively new back into vinyl past few years I hope this is not because a lot of them are digitally sourced, I rather thought the competition were just being better than them in those cases. I have bought a lot of MOFI the past few years because of name recognition, and a lot of them I have not listened to yet. I rather buy the SACD if this holds true.
There it is in a nutshell; and I'm sure MOFI has been trying to rationalize how they address this and it has bogged them down and now the chickens are coming home to roost. Michael of The In Groove in Phoenix is flying to MOFI in California Tuesday morning and interviewing them to get the story. Stay tuned :) Thanks for watching and commenting.
@@SafeAndSoundTXAudioExcursion Yes, should be interesting to watch that interview. I hope this is not true. I really like MOFI as a company, and they have great customer service which I cannot always say about every other company these days. Thank you for your content!
MOFI just hired Jen Psaki to make a statement.
She will circle back with a response!
I don't care if a record is analog or digital.
It's 2022, digital is no where near where it was in say the 80's/90's.
Analog is great but digital can be great too. Anything after 1981 has been suspect for 40 years.
Well, if it is digital I rather get the digital version on CD/SACD or stream it rather something that pose as full analogue.
Probably a DSD Copy, then used for SACD and Vinyl.
That’s my bet…
It's not just MOFI and it's not new. Everyone has been taking advantage of the resurgence in vinyl to make money. Manufacturers could easily apply the SPARS code to all records, but they prefer to be coy and opaque about the process, showing utter contempt for their customers.
Yup SPARS would be the clean Standard to adopt. Intervention has their own and it makes it clear(er).
So, you just copy whatever the 'In' Groove makes videos about?
Actually my video had more content than either previous one as a historical aspect vs just restating their case. A high majority of feedback shows it added value for most. Sorry if you don’t see it that way. It was a hot topic that I had something to say about. I kind of think that’s the way social media and UA-cam work. Thanks for watching.
I love Arizona!
I personally have thought they sound to clean to be analogue having no tape hiss.
Also the recordindings have a far to clean run between tracks, usally you would hear fade in & out yes but actully do not!
This has been going on for lonher then most listeners realise....
Probably so…
You can hear tape hiss on vinyl?
@@FleagleSangria with older tape sources on super vinyl absolutely
@@FleagleSangria Yes, if done right.
They became too greedy. They could have continue making few thousand copies per title and sell them for top dollars and people would not question their process. But no, they had to make 30K records, which exposed them.
I got pressing 22,360 of Brothers In Arms the other day (for the 2x45RPM). Luckily, we all know on Brother in Arms, the Original Master Tape is digital as it was recorded all digital.
Thanks for the video and your concerns.
I'm not sure if you have considered this, but there is only ONE set of session master tapes and when they mix these down to quad or stereo, there can be multiple original master tapes made from these. If you look at almost any recording studio, they usually have multiple tape decks in the control rooms. Most have multiple control rooms with more multiple tape decks. These can usually be linked together and therefore can make multiple original master tapes at the same time. In the days when record companies like Capitol and the CBS group had multiple record mastering and pressing facilities, do you think that they passed the original master tape around among the different pressing plants? It would be hard for each region to simultaneously manufacture all the records the same day for a simultaneous release.
Then there are the recording lathes. Most major studios have more than one record cutting lathe. Multiple lacquers can be cut simultaneously from the same master tape at the same time. The audio path can remain purely analog with the only digital involved is the pre-program the recording lathes receive so that groove spacing can be optimized through digital interpretation.
Quality control shifts to the record pressing plants after the record company sends them the lacquer masters and/or metal parts. In the case of Mofi, their records are exclusively pressed by RTI. There, the QC can drop off. In these days where pressing plants are operating at capacity, they can get sloppy. The record companies typically never lay eyes on the finished products, so they aren't going to realize that something may be wrong unless they received feedback from the stores selling their records or the consumers. Many records are direct-shipped by warehousing distributors like AEC, so the record companies never see the final product. Even when I have bought direct from a record companies' stores, the shipment originates elsewhere. When dealing direct with Mofi or MD, the shipment originates in Nevada.
I agree there may be a problem on the Record companies' end, because, with Mofi, something has changed. Unintentionally, over the years, I have become a collector of different pressings of Carole King's "Tapestry". For me the Mofi 2013 release is the best version of this album by far. The recent Mofi 'one-step' doesn't even come close and neither does the ORG 45 rpm set. Of the original issue of the album, the Cloumbia Santa Maria pressing is the best.
I have pre-ordered the Mofi 'one-step' of Michael Jackson's "Thriller" album. This is another of my unintentional collections. I am having second thoughts about my order now and will ask Mofi. Mofi has obviously moved away from the company which Brad Miller originally started. Why did the original Mofi go out of business? Brad Miller died. The present owner stepped in and took over the reins. Their original studio is still in Sebastapol, CA where Brad Miller put it. I believe it was in Petaluma, CA before that.
Thank you for those details and I intend to release a video explaining this exact issue of original multitrack being mixed down to a 2 channel stereo or 4 channel media (usually tape prior to 1982).
For me, the original means a first generation mix source from the multitrack that was used to cut the original album. Then it’s a matter of what elements in the food chain are Analogue or Digital.
Michael Fremer in an interview today stated exactly the same about Tapestry. How the bottom end was boosted on the One-Step. They should have used the same source and levels from 2013 2x45RPM to let the one-step process shine and bring at 45RPM show off the value of that difference. But noooo, they had to muck with the mix. Di$appointed…
@@SafeAndSoundTXAudioExcursion Right, the original mix-down tape made to cut the albums. But there could have been multiples recorded at the same time. In the digital world, it's like multiple masters can be made from the original digital source, at any time, and be indistinguishable between all the copies.
When recording multiple mix original masters simultaneously, there can be varying factors, like they are recording them simultaneously on different machines and might get different results. Then, when they were used to cut the lacquers, one original master disc may be different from the others.
Then, of all the original pressings, it has to be determined which one is the best and then chase that back to the particular original master tape was used.
But, there could have been maybe 10 master mixdown tapes recorded simultaneously, so there are 10 original masters.
Taking a few steps back, when Miles at Abbey Road cuts a 1/2 speed lacquer master disc(s), he then probably does the metal plating, making mothers, fathers and/or stampers, then sends them to all the different pressing plants.
This was done with the Beatles' "Stereo Box" master discs, then the difference ends up with who did the pressing. I prefer the U.S. Rainbo pressings, as a higher quality of vinyl mix was used than Optimal used. The less surface noise of the Rainbo discs is noticeably lower, which makes them superior. Yes, I compared the 2 different pressings back-to-back. With almost any Optimal pressing, I can identify them by the surface noise between tracks.
The sound may be transparent but the engineers arent.
Good one…
I laughed, I cried, it moved me Bob. What a joke audiophiles are. Still making excuses. Many will lie and say they could hear the difference all along. I wonder if any will consider that their system and certainly their ears are not as good as they think.
Digital is just a way to archive something. 💿
Since I've had bad experiences with them, I'm not a MoFi fan with the exception of older MoFi albums typically pressed in Japan with great QA/QC. It may be possible to produce a really excellent sounding digital recording. In the past the digital sampling rate for the sound curve was low. If you can sample more of the sound curve, you can produce a more faithful digital recording. I doubt it would surpass a quality all analogue pressing, but it could get close. This plus their digital manipulations of the audio spectrum may be why some recent MoFi albums sound so good. I'm open to being converted, but as of right now, I want all analogue vinyl records, and MoFi must be up front about how their vinyl is made. Unfortunately, it seems like MoFi is more interested in making money than producing true audiophile products. 👿
I get your point. I just saw an interview with Michael Fremer where he dissed some one-steps with the Carole King Tapestry example of have base boosted. Well whether from analogue tape or digital, manipulating the sound the make it sound different than previous releases, which Fremer sites as his guess why they do it, is another example of the label mucking around with the artists product. Modifying the EQ isn’t what I expect them to do. I can take an OG and an equalizer if I wanted to get that! Thanks for watching
@@SafeAndSoundTXAudioExcursion I have the MoFi Miles Davis Kind of Blue 45 rpm. It says "Mastered from the Original Master Tapes" on the "Gain 2 Ultra Analog System". Now I'm thinking that I got a dud for two reasons: (1) the vinyl had QA/QC problems and I got past the return date and (2) it's likely to have digital elements. I really feel like I got the gaff. 😒
Some stuff is recorded in the digital domain, get over it and enjoy the music
I'm OK with that :) it's the titles NOT originally recorded digitally that are Analogue Master Tapes, those are what should be used for an "Original Master Recording" by their own definition as I showed from late 1970's inserts. If the OMR is digital, then it's a mute point: Brothers in Arms, The Nightfly are no problem
Mofi only claim is to use "original master recordings" on their vinyl cover. Its common knowledge that when CDs appeared the 4 track reel to reel tapes commonly used in the recording studio were transferred to digital, tapes degraded both due to age and transient degradation every time they were played they lost dynamics clarity and sharpness. Whilst the vinyl revival continues everyone in the music industry is exploiting the market and the opportunity to make "easy" money, that's business. Its the consumer who drives demand, if they are prepared to pay $$$ for something they want then its obvious the industry would only be to happy to supply. I do wonder why anyone would pay $$$ for new vinyl rather than just pick up a CD costing peanuts in comparison. If you want the original vinyl, BUY the original.
1s and 0s don’t degrade on tape, f they aren’t read fully or correctly that can cause error correction on the digital equipment which lessens the accuracy of the translation of the music and affects the sound. Analogue on tape causes dropouts that are audible losses of quality and reproduction.
Well if you should find out that MOFI IS using enhanced to sound like perfect analogue masters burned to a digital format to make their one-steps, just call Santa Claus and he'll straighten the whole thing out, okay Kids?
Unless you directly work for MOFI, that's the only way you're going to really know for sure what their processes are. lf they do put in a little of digital into the mix, l'm sure it's best digital out there, and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference anyway.
I’m sure many know within MOFI but the across the board “no comment” response given through Music Direct and MOFI is a clear indication to me they’re attempting to control the narrative. Which implies there is something going on other than what they want people to believe given their history. Again, I referred to objective information shared over the years and then diluted or removed over time. As in politics, what takes people and parties down is this truth: “it’s not the lie, it’s the cover up.”
I say if we have to ask this question, then either it doesn't matter or the people who claimed to hear the difference were proven by MoFi to be full of it. 😅😅
this suspicion and eyebrow raising situation has been going on for some time. I have had some audible indicators that made me wonder if it was pure analog from the Original Master Recording or not. But I didn't really have any objective basis to pursue it. However, the Thriller # of units pressed kind of pushed the logic that the chance of being able to use an Original Master Recording tape to make 40,000 units was questionable at best. We have to ask the question also because other labels are so overtly transparent and, by comparison, one realizes now how coy MOFI has been. Thanks for commenting and watching :)
The thing is... Mofi didnt hoodwink anyone. If they dont state - as every other label will - that a record is cut from analogue tapes then its consumers fault to assume it is. If they cut from a digital master made from the tapes and it sounds amazing.... then it sounds amazing! Theres countless digital recordings that sound amazing, on vinyl. This is where vinyl and analogue snobbery becomes a thing im glad i dont associate with.
My real issue with Mofi is their prices and availability. It is inherently cheaper to master with software programs than without them, yet Mofi charges the most premium prices of any labels where in fact their products are actually revealed to be cheaper to put together than say a 20 quid/buck Blue Note classic which is all analogue. Like i say when AP, Blue Note or any other label cuts a record all analogue it damn sure gets mentioned by them in some way, usually hype sticker. Mofi doesnt do this which is fine so we shouldnt just assume they are. As a Mofi SACD collector im doubly not bothered by the method when its the mastering and sound that matters at the end. The other issue of availability is another matter but it looks like they are going to get better in the future there. I just hope they expand to produce more titles, more records/sacds, wonderfully mastered however they see best at prices that dont take the p1ss!
They are opening a pressing plant in California early next year to address the capacity and (hopefully) quality issues. Regarding not saying what the process is and consumers assuming, I must admit there is some truth to that reality. As I said in the video, given the half-speed master phase out without saying anything, they have a history of operating this way. I guess we gave them more credit than deserved over time. Their history is now why asking the question is the fair thing to do for the consumer. But some industry folks think it's OUR fault by asking which puts MOFI in a bad position. To that I can only say, I will send a mirror to MOFI so they can clearly see who is to blame.
I ordered two copies of the one-step “Thriller” but wish they had done it on two discs at 45 RPM.
That’s coming later apparently
Welcome to the VC. A hot topic right now.The last few years have seen a huge increase in Vinyl Community videos. Many focus on reviewing and comparing pressings and how they sound. My current pet peeve is that they never do a room/equipment tour. Your intro talking about Bose is not reassuring. I'm curious why you need a headset to talk to a camera ?
Digital is not the problem, lie is.
Or, at the least, what I call “sins of omission”. Like if you’re married and a girl at the bar says “I would never go out with a married guy” and you come on to her being married and just happen to not mention that you’re married, but she never asked you and you never volunteered….
ok I susbcribed and Enjoyed the video ohhh that sneaky MoFi
Thank you. I will have an update coming this weekend
Recent????????????/ InGrove Mike says since 2015! 40k, greed will out
Other labels tell you what the mastering chain is.They need to hang there lieing heads in shame
Their records are too expensive
Only a dweeb would buy Thriller
Over 70 million dweebs and counting. "Over 70 million people can't be wrong" sounds like a Presidential election :)
Yeah, no way this is a one step from the original. The recording process alone negates that. Bruce Swedein (RIP) helped develop each track being recorded in stereo. Stereo kick, stereo snare, stereo guitar, etc. Because of this, more tracks were needed then what came on the regular 2 inch/24 track reels. So two studer 24 track machines had to be synced to play back everything. Add to that, he didn't want the drums to lose their punch with each playback they would have to do to track the other instruments, so the original drum tape was copied and then stored away until mixing/mastering. The copy tape was used during all the overdubbing parts. If that much care was taken not to have it played over and over just in recording it at Westlake Studios, do you really think they would let mofi run it 40,000 times?
Thanks for those details, interesting! I guess many of us may have been in a “hope springs eternal” mode about the clear analog path but of course as we get to 80s releases things were changing fast!
The stereo mixdown 1/2” tape has nothing to do with what Swedien did to preserve the 2” multi-tracks. Furthermore, to press 40,000 copies of a record does not mean the tape has to be run that many times. It only has to be run ONCE.
@@SPAZZOID100 then it is technically not a one off. It is a two off. Plus which half inch are you talking about? Did you know there were multiple half inch masters and mix downs made. Over 80 mixes of Billie Jean were done alone. It's a great story. My point is, even though i ordered one, I highly doubt it is a true one off from the actual master used for the original pressing. Maybe a copy of a copy of the original master?
Why dont you guys go ahead and require the bands to disclose they use digital effects in creating music? Unbelievable…
Why are you spreading unfounded rumors? It is absolutely irresponsible.
Asking the question is not irresponsible. If people in the industry know and have kept it under wraps, that would be irresponsible. 45RPM Audiophile was first to raise the question, then a few others and finally a credible retailer. I gave MOFI’s product kudos and also said “does it even matter” as it relates to the finished product. I think I went out of my way to not besmirch them.
Playing the devils advocate here a bit.
Why do you need to know?
How does knowing change things in a real way?
Is knowing going to change the sound for worse or better?
Right. No one could tell before, now they’re saying “oh these records just don’t sound good all of the sudden?”
Kinda shows how pretentious and what a joke “analog only” is…
@@zackamania6534 You missed the whole point, Imbecile.
@@zackamania6534 IT'S ONLY A RUMOR.
Hi John, nice seeing you at another site trafficking in rumors. P.S.: I've still forgotten more about this subject than you'll ever know. Quincy Jones hired me to be an expert witness in his suit against the estate of Michael Jackson. Did you know that before you insulted me with your bullshit about my hearing? What have you done?
Only in two ways. One: If they in fact said they were completely analogue and they are using a digital step, then people are not getting what they paid for. Two: It is freaking certain audiophiles out, because it would shatter some of what they claim about digital and is a blow to their aural egos.