Mobile Fidelity Analog Vinyl Controversy

[tmtomh]

Some of the comments here completely miss the point. The issue is that Mofi defrauded people, for years.

That has been acknowledged multiple times in the thread.

 

[Cbdb2]

Some of the comments here completely miss the point. The issue is that Mofi defrauded people, for years.

Welcome to Hi-Fi.

 

[KHodges66]

The fact that people who bought these records couldn’t tell that there was a digital step doesn’t mean that Mofi didn’t brazenly lie about that step, nor does it mean that they wouldn’t have been able to tell the difference between the record they bought and a record that was mastered as Mofi represented.

 

[antcollinet]

Some of the comments here completely miss the point. The issue is that Mofi defrauded people, for years.

Again - no convincing evidence of this has been provided. The plaintiffs will have to do much better if they want to win the class action.

 

[MarkS]

We'll see, but I disagree. Plenty of class action lawsuits in the US are won (or settled) on far less compelling evidence, eg,

Automobile Antitrust Cases I and II, case numbers JCCP 4298 and

 

[MarkS]

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

Once the analog master tape has been digitized, why not wear it out? The digital copy is perfect, right? So who cares about what happens to the analog original?

 

[DMill]

I’m no lawyer so

Again - no convincing evidence of this has been provided. The plaintiffs will have to do much better if they want to win the class action.

Im no lawyer and you may be correct. I’d be far more concerned if I was MoFi about consumer perception. A hot dog for vegans is great until you put meat in it. Im not even saying you could tell the difference. Probably you can’t.

 

[DMill]

Once the analog master tape has been digitized, why not wear it out? The digital copy is perfect, right? So who cares about what happens to the analog original?

You are likely correct in this thought. I would only say maybe we might develop a digital transfer that is “better”. So for posterity sake let’s not nuke analog tapes to make a $100 vinyl limited edition.

 

[RammisFrammis]

Once the analog master tape has been digitized, why not wear it out? The digital copy is perfect, right? So who cares about what happens to the analog original?

You're kidding, right? I'm sure someone has taken a perfect digital photo copy of the Mona Lisa, so why not just chuck the original in the trash?

 

[Labjr]

We'll see, but I disagree. Plenty of class action lawsuits in the US are won (or settled) on far less compelling evidence, eg,

Automobile Antitrust Cases I and II, case numbers JCCP 4298 and

Generally, they hope to come to a settlement in class action suits.

If I was a juror in this case, I'd need deliberate for at least 10 seconds so I wouldn't seem biased. "Fry 'em!"

 

[sq225917]

We do not use digital sources except in cases where the title's original master was digital itself.

One Can argue that the source is whatever material is provided to mofi. They sure as shit don't get to take the original master tapes away, no one does outside of the company who owns them. They might get access to a first gen analogue master, in which case one would expect them, as claimed, to keep it analogue throughout remastering, but that doesn't exclude the lacquers being made from a digital copy of their remastered works. Because that's pressing, not mastering.

likewise they could be provided a digital copy of the stereo masters, so they remaster than digitally. Or they could get a digital copy of the stems and remaster that digitally.

the only time they'd be breaking their word is if they took analogue copies of masters and digitised them for remastering digitally.

we don't actually know what they do and any legal case will have to be based on specific album treatments, not a generality of file handling.

 

[Labjr]

You're kidding, right? I'm sure someone has taken a perfect digital photo copy of the Mona Lisa, so why not just chuck the original in the trash?

I remember when CD's were supposed to be "Perfect Sound Forever." Now each time there's a new digital format it's like a brand new technology. New detail is revealed from the originals. Happened with HDTV and then 4k and 8k video transfers from 35mm film.

I saw the Norman Rockwell 100th Anniversary Exhibit. I was stunned at the realism of the originals.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I remember when CD's were supposed to be "Perfect Sound Forever." Now each time there's a new digital format it's like a brand new technology. New detail is revealed from the originals. Happened with HDTV and then 4k and 8k video transfers from 35mm film.

I saw the Norman Rockwell 100th Anniversary Exhibit. I was stunned at the realism of the originals.

You sure about this? Video yes, we knew it was short of our full visual acuity in several ways. CD.......that is not an easy case to make other than the hype. Fidelity of CD certainly exceeds tape. Offering 96 khz and then 192 khz and then 384 khz it isn't really clear there is anything being revealed other than a remastering which CD would also show. DSD 64, DSD 128, DSD 256 etc. etc. also isn't revealing new realism.

 

[Sal1950]

Some of the comments here completely miss the point. The issue is that Mofi defrauded people, for years.

That is very true.
But the bottom line is "much ado about nothing (or very little)
IMHO it couldn't happen to a nicer crowd.
For years, decades really now, the high end believer audio crowd has been ranting this BS about digital
being inferior to analog, digital rips of analog sources degrade sound quality and all the rest.
So whatever powers that be at MFSL decided to tell a little fib about there being no digital steps in the production
of these obsolete, overpriced, rice krispies sources. Just plain smart marketing, although a little deceptive. LOL
And now after years of their customer base proclaiming what special, beautiful, pure analog sound they get from these discs, they
find themselves with egg on their faces, wondering how they can eat their words with grace.
ROTFLMAO

 

[RammisFrammis]

You sure about this? Video yes, we knew it was short of our full visual acuity in several ways. CD.......that is not an easy case to make other than the hype. Fidelity of CD certainly exceeds tape. Offering 96 khz and then 192 khz and then 384 khz it isn't really clear there is anything being revealed other than a remastering which CD would also show. DSD 64, DSD 128, DSD 256 etc. etc. also isn't revealing new realism.

You're ignoring breakthroughs such as the Plangent Process. If an analog original master is digitized then chucked in the trash, then the flutter and wow removal capability of the Plangent Process would be impossible. This is because this process uses the latent bias signal embedded in the original analog tape as a stable timing reference. There is always the possibility that other processes in the future could come into being which allows retrieval of more information from an analog tape than can be currently done. These are very good reasons to archive the original analog masters.

 

[kchap]

Once the analog master tape has been digitized, why not wear it out? The digital copy is perfect, right? So who cares about what happens to the analog original?

I wouldn't destroy them yet, you never know when they be be required in the future. However at some point in the future the originals will age and become unplayable. So these digital versions will be all that we have. I only wish they have been copied as 24bit PCM.

 

[tmtomh]

You're ignoring breakthroughs such as the Plangent Process. If an analog original master is digitized then chucked in the trash, then the flutter and wow removal capability of the Plangent Process would be impossible. This is because this process uses the latent bias signal embedded in the original analog tape as a stable timing reference. There is always the possibility that other processes in the future could come into being which allows retrieval of more information from an analog tape than can be currently done. These are very good reasons to archive the original analog masters.

Excellent point. It should be clarified, though, that the reason you and some others are having to explain and defend the importance of retaining the original analogue master tape is because @MarkS raised the question, but not because he actually thinks the digital copy should become the new master and the original analogue master should be discarded.

I agree with Mark - and you - that there are many good reasons to keep and preserve the analogue master. But I do not agree with Mark that one of these reasons is because a digital copy cannot capture 100% of the musical information on the original analogue master tape. Your example of the plangent process using the bias signal is IMHO a much better example and reason. I would also add that I think there's intrinsic cultural and artistic value in retaining the true original analogue master for any recording that can be considered significant. Of course what does and does not count as a "significant" recording is debatable - but that does not mean the principle is invalid.

 

[Sal1950]

These are very good reasons to archive the original analog masters.

I wouldn't destroy them yet, you never know when they be be required in the future. However at some point in the future the originals will age and become unplayable. So these digital versions will be all that we have. I only wish they have been copied as 24bit PCM.

If financially feasible it might be a good idea to store them somewhere under ideal controlled conditions.
Though I'm not really sure why. No matter how well stored they will never be in a better condition to play back and archive on a good digital file now.
Here's a copy/paste of a post I made on another forum today on the same subject.

"There's another fact here, each time those old analog tapes are played the sound quality deteriorates. Same happens every day they just sit on the shelf getting older. They shed oxide, they stretch or shrink, get ever more brittle, they print-thru, much more.
Best thing that could be done today is to copy all those old analog tapes to digital now while they exist in the best condition they ever will be, then send them to a museum. "

 

[Labjr]

You're ignoring breakthroughs such as the Plangent Process. If an analog original master is digitized then chucked in the trash, then the flutter and wow removal capability of the Plangent Process would be impossible. This is because this process uses the latent bias signal embedded in the original analog tape as a stable timing reference. There is always the possibility that other processes in the future could come into being which allows retrieval of more information from an analog tape than can be currently done. These are very good reasons to archive the original analog masters.

I remember reading about that several years ago but I'd forgotten about it. Sony and Ampex used bias frequencies over 400khz. That would take ultra specially designed electronics and ADC to playback and capture that. Some smart engineer will always discover a better way to do something. Successive generations of ADC's get better too. That's why analog tapes must preserved.

 

[IPunchCholla]

You're kidding, right? I'm sure someone has taken a perfect digital photo copy of the Mona Lisa, so why not just chuck the original in the trash?

As a photographer and a painter, let me say there is no way any photograph of a painting is transparent to the painting. Even a photo of a lithograph wouldn't be transparent. Resolution/gamut/lack of three dimensional information/issues of specularity/etc. I have access to a drum scanner that can scan at 8000dpi and it still isn't transparent to photographic film. Pixel-shift high resolution digital cameras using stitching are getting close to film. But unless you are stitching a huge number of pixel shifted files together and incorporating lidar and specularity measurements, you're not even going to get close to a painting. And why bother. The Mona Lisa isn't a very good painting, just a cultural phenomena.

On the other hand everything we know, says the digital audio copy IS transparent to the original. So the master tape might be a nice historical fetish, but it isn't really the same as a painting.

edited to add the word audio.