- Joined
- Feb 23, 2016
- Messages
- 20,701
- Likes
- 37,441
Yes
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Mobile Fidelity Analog Vinyl Controversy
- Thread starter Azazello13
- Start date
Were you aware of this when you bought them?
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2016
- Messages
- 20,701
- Likes
- 37,441
Yes. Some of them are a bit valuable these days. Over a hundred bucks.
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2022
- Messages
- 1,116
- Likes
- 1,400
I kinda get that, conceptually. I mean if it’s getting converted to digital anyway…. And that is where I started. One signal chain for analog, one for digital, at least until the amp.Well, admittedly I'm not totally consistent on this "keepin' it real" analog records thing.
One reason I spin records is that I find the sound is generally a bit different from my turntable rig vs my digital, and I enjoy it. It doesn't seem to matter if
there was digital somewhere in the recording or mastering chain, the vinyl versions still tend to sound more like vinyl than the digital. I put it down, likely, to all the kludges of re-mastering for vinyl, putting it down in grooves, and scraping it back off with a rock. So even a digital master gets somewhat bastardized by the processSo I find the sound quality I hear from any record is never predicted by whether it came from a fully analog process or not.
Some records from analog masters suck, so do some digital. And visa versa.
But when it comes to how I treat my stereo, I keep my digital and turntable separate. That is, I don't care to digitize my turntable/vinyl signal. I know that I could in all likelihood digitize it in a way that is sonically transparent and keep the vinyl "sound," but I guess it's ultimately more of a conceptual thing that gives me some pleasure. I'm doing digital source when I want, analog when I want.
As a friend of mine who plays strictly vinyl in his main rig (and toils to keep vinyl up to snuff) says:
"Once you've digitized your vinyl, admit it, you've given up."
But then I got a USB interface and I can route the signal (using my computer) straight to my amp, or I can run it through my computer and apply DSP and/or click and pop filters. Most of the time I run it through DSP now, so my vinyl playback is digitized, but it still sounds like vinyl. But it sounds better than if I don’t use DSP to help with the room speaker issues. And it still feels like I’m listening to a record. I can watch it spin, see the head move, hear those occasional flaws. I still get the tactile sense of handling a record.
So I guess I’ve given up, but I’m finding more and more pleasure in giving up my own weird rules these days.
watchnerd
Grand Contributor
Exactly.
I'm not sure why people have this idea that digitized vinyl wouldn't sound like vinyl or would sound the same as streaming / CD.
It would sort of defy the whole concept of digital capture of audio if it didn't still sound like LP.
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2016
- Messages
- 20,701
- Likes
- 37,441
I convinced a couple different people with good vinyl rigs to digitize the phono pre output. They had moved onto DAC/pre's with digital inputs. A good digital input from an ADC for the phono worked great. A little blind shuffling with and without the ADC/DAC step convinced them it sounded the same either way.
Sorry I was only joking. Referring to the ‘issue’ at hand i.e. the digitization step. Should have included a smiley. Will show myself out.
The source for this topic is a troll on one of those endless Steve Hoffman Forums topic (dozens of pages of baloney). The original video is some guy spouting rumors from unattributed sources, and torturing the English language (watch it you can stand it and you will understand what I mean).
I pulled out a MoFi Gain2 LP, which specifically states was mastered on a Studer A80 to the cutting head. The A80, of course, is an analog reel to reel tape deck.
But don't take my word on this. Here are links to a presentation (in two parts) by MFSL engineers Shawn Britton & Rob LoVerde on the processes used at Mobile Fidelity for both analog LPs (Gain2 and One Step) and SACD/CDs. Notice in part 1, Shawn Britton states that the Gain 2 LP system has a 100% analog chain, and that they have a separate analog room for LPs, and two digital rooms for SACD/CD.
spartaman64
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2021
- Messages
- 137
- Likes
- 140
For the SACDs
Waxx
Major Contributor
The thing about the vinyl sound is not that it was kept analog trough the whole chain. None of the vinyl records (a few exceptions) with music recored after the 1990's is fully analog from recording to the record as tape machines are not used anymore in studio's (again a few exceptions not counted). They are not made anymore, hard to maintain and calibrate and tape to record on is also out of production and ridiculour expensive since over a decade.
The sound of vinyl comes trough the mastering for vinyl and the pressing itself, the mastering needs to be done right to fit the technical limitations of vinyl records, so keep a minimum of dynamic range, put the bass in mono (mostly all below 150Hz is mono) and roll of the high frequencies slowly. If this is not done the record will sound like shit and the needle will jump arround. I did release some records (underground music of more than a decade ago) and for the vinyl release it was always a seperate mastering then for digital releases. Digital releases sound closer to the source, but vinyl releases of the same digital recording (when done right) sounds better to the ear for me and many others. That is one of the key reasons why vinyl is still so popular.
On those Mofi records, the mastering is done right, so the sound sounds "analog" (even if it was digital in some phase of the production). Those records are way overpriced, but not bad made. I got some, but i bought them second hand from people who don't know what crazy prices got paid for it on the second hand market. I would never pay those prices altough, even when it sounds right. And they are surely not the only ones who do it right. But it's always a guess when buying modern vinyl releases, that's why i prefer to go to shops to buy them (so i can listen to the record itself), and not online.
The sound of vinyl comes trough the mastering for vinyl and the pressing itself, the mastering needs to be done right to fit the technical limitations of vinyl records, so keep a minimum of dynamic range, put the bass in mono (mostly all below 150Hz is mono) and roll of the high frequencies slowly. If this is not done the record will sound like shit and the needle will jump arround. I did release some records (underground music of more than a decade ago) and for the vinyl release it was always a seperate mastering then for digital releases. Digital releases sound closer to the source, but vinyl releases of the same digital recording (when done right) sounds better to the ear for me and many others. That is one of the key reasons why vinyl is still so popular.
On those Mofi records, the mastering is done right, so the sound sounds "analog" (even if it was digital in some phase of the production). Those records are way overpriced, but not bad made. I got some, but i bought them second hand from people who don't know what crazy prices got paid for it on the second hand market. I would never pay those prices altough, even when it sounds right. And they are surely not the only ones who do it right. But it's always a guess when buying modern vinyl releases, that's why i prefer to go to shops to buy them (so i can listen to the record itself), and not online.
So quick summary is that labels like Sony don't want to lend out their tapes. So Mobile Fidelity sends a guy with tape decks to capture the master into DSD. They then bring the DSD back and create the LP master from that. It makes sense why they do it. What doesn't is not telling their customers this.
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2022
- Messages
- 1,116
- Likes
- 1,400
That’s what makes Blondie’s Heart of Glass on LP so good.hmm always thought the mofi LPs had a rather glassy midrange
Robin L
Master Contributor
I remember a MoFi CD I bought ages ago. "I Never Loved A Man the Way I Loved You" Aretha Franklin. One channel was -6db compared to the other. Haven't been interested in MoFi product since.
DMill
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2022
- Messages
- 915
- Likes
- 1,307
I must confess to buying a number of Gold CDs from MoFi back in the day for albums I played over and over. Probably the same Aretha album you mention as it’s one of my favorites. May God and my wallet forgive me.
Robin L
Master Contributor
Just as bad in its own way, the MoFi Magical Mystery Tour LP that used the Capitol mastering of side two, the one with fake stereo instead of the George Martin stereo mix found on the German LP of MMT. Good vinyl, terrible mastering on that one.I must confess to buying a number of Gold CDs from MoFi back in the day for albums I played over and over. Probably the same Aretha album you mention as it’s one of my favorites. May God and my wallet forgive me.
This whole rash of "AAA cut straight from the tapes" nonsense annoys the hell out of me anyway.
You can't "hear" a digital step, and you're a fool if you think you can. We don't want every Tom, Dick, and Harry boutique label wearing out master tapes for the 500th reissue of A Love Supreme just so the people buying it can pretend there's a difference (although I grant you, given the Universal Fire, this particular example isn't the best one)
You buy good masterings. MoFi has released (and continues to release) some good masterings, and that doesn't change if you know they make a DSD copy first or not.
I for one don't give a shit because I buy their SACDs anyway.
That being said, yeah more transparency on their process would be good - their whole "Gain 2" thing is very opaque to me, and probably mostly snake oil to begin with.
But frankly I don't care what intermediate stages they use or whether they cut from DSD or not - if it's a good mastering it's a good mastering - does it compare favorably with masterings already out there, or not? And they have, as far as I know, always been pretty clear when and if they source from the original master tapes, in their advertising.
The problem are people that will spend extra $$$ for "no digital stages" when they couldn't tell the difference either way, because they mistakenly believe that's an indicator of whether the mastering is good or not.
You can't "hear" a digital step, and you're a fool if you think you can. We don't want every Tom, Dick, and Harry boutique label wearing out master tapes for the 500th reissue of A Love Supreme just so the people buying it can pretend there's a difference (although I grant you, given the Universal Fire, this particular example isn't the best one
)You buy good masterings. MoFi has released (and continues to release) some good masterings, and that doesn't change if you know they make a DSD copy first or not.
I for one don't give a shit because I buy their SACDs anyway.
That being said, yeah more transparency on their process would be good - their whole "Gain 2" thing is very opaque to me, and probably mostly snake oil to begin with.
But frankly I don't care what intermediate stages they use or whether they cut from DSD or not - if it's a good mastering it's a good mastering - does it compare favorably with masterings already out there, or not? And they have, as far as I know, always been pretty clear when and if they source from the original master tapes, in their advertising.
The problem are people that will spend extra $$$ for "no digital stages" when they couldn't tell the difference either way, because they mistakenly believe that's an indicator of whether the mastering is good or not.
Last edited: