• 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

IPunchCholla

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2022
Messages
1,102
Likes
1,383
So is this sheet new or has it been out for some time and people just didn't pay attention?
It's updated. There is a link to the original version upthread. No mention of DSD.
 

MarkS

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 3, 2021
Messages
1,062
Likes
1,502
Yes, here's the original, no DSD:

UD1S-2-005-StevieRayVaughan-TexasFlood_03_Full_Box-1400x1246.jpg
 

abdo123

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
7,423
Likes
7,940
Location
Brussels, Belgium
It’s not in my Top 10, but there is no arguing that it is an album of massive historical significance in pop music. As a 54 year old it seemed to dominate the airwaves when it was released for a good year or more with hit after hit. I’m curious of your impressions of the $100 MoFi vinyl remaster? Are you able to hear differences vs other vinyl or CD?
Oh i didn't buy the remaster, I was talking about the actual first print vinyl from 40 years ago that is possibly 'all analog'. I have one of those.
 

rwortman

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 29, 2019
Messages
740
Likes
683
I don’t own many LP’s pressed in the digital era. I have been disappointed in the quality of most of them. I find that clean vintage vinyl if you can find it is superior to most of what is being pressed today. That said, there are a few company’s doing a good job. I find the whole idea of making and LP from a digital file a bit silly. Adding a pressing plant and a turntable to a digital playback chain is hardly going to increase fidelity although I have been given nonsense arguments by two professional audio on why it does. Unless one has an interest in music recorded more than 50 years ago, I don’t think vinyl is worth the bother or expense.

On the other hand, recordings from late 40’s on into the 60’s were made when magnetic tape recording was pretty new and those tapes don’t last forever. The S/N and frequency response degrades and fairly quickly. A clean vinyl record made from a new master tape in 1950 is going to sound better than any digital transfer done when the tape was 40 to 70 years old. The problem is that the hunt for that clean LP is frustrating. One might have to buy many copies from vendors who always lie about the condition in order to find a good one. You have to find a record that was owned by an audiophile that didn’t like it and hardly played it.
 

Mnyb

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 14, 2019
Messages
2,640
Likes
3,604
Location
Sweden, Västerås
I still wonder about the court case .

“Sir we lost an imagined intangible thing , but the recording sounds identical to how it had sound if it where there” :facepalm:

The poor judge would have a head scratcher for sure
 

IPunchCholla

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2022
Messages
1,102
Likes
1,383
I still wonder about the court case .

“Sir we lost an imagined intangible thing , but the recording sounds identical to how it had sound if it where there” :facepalm:

The poor judge would have a head scratcher for sure
As much as I wish that was the way these things worked, it is going to be: "I purchased a speculative commodity at price X based on information Y. The defendants were clearly lying about information Y. After their lies were revealed, the value of the commodity fell by Z amount. The defendents owe me the difference between Z and X."

The actual philosophical difference between the 2 might be zero, but the market is God.
 

skraz

Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2022
Messages
16
Likes
27
Has any of the analog only purists realised the importance of this blind test yet, or are they all doubling down?
 

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,386
Location
Seattle Area
Has any of the analog only purists realised the importance of this blind test yet, or are they all doubling down?
The bit of feedback I have seen elsewhere goes along the lines of "I didn't care much for MoFi releases anyway...."
 

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,522
Likes
37,050
The bit of feedback I have seen elsewhere goes along the lines of "I didn't care much for MoFi releases anyway...."
I'd say sales at elevated pricing indicates those people are lying.
 

Mnyb

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 14, 2019
Messages
2,640
Likes
3,604
Location
Sweden, Västerås
As much as I wish that was the way these things worked, it is going to be: "I purchased a speculative commodity at price X based on information Y. The defendants were clearly lying about information Y. After their lies were revealed, the value of the commodity fell by Z amount. The defendents owe me the difference between Z and X."

The actual philosophical difference between the 2 might be zero, but the market is God.
That will be the day when someone sues the homeopaths , i bought nothing and nothing happened with my illness :)
 

rdenney

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Messages
2,235
Likes
3,856
As much as I wish that was the way these things worked, it is going to be: "I purchased a speculative commodity at price X based on information Y. The defendants were clearly lying about information Y. After their lies were revealed, the value of the commodity fell by Z amount. The defendents owe me the difference between Z and X."

The actual philosophical difference between the 2 might be zero, but the market is God.
I don't think so. The seller of a product is not responsible to the buyer for its secondary value. That's precisely because the market is god and therefore outside the control of the seller.

There may be a determination that the advertising was misleading, but I think the buyers will have a difficult time showing a material loss.

Rick "IANAL, either" Denney
 

rdenney

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Messages
2,235
Likes
3,856
The bit of feedback I have seen elsewhere goes along the lines of "I didn't care much for MoFi releases anyway...."
Too perceptive to have been fooled, those golden ears. But when it comes to ex post facto auditory perception, nobody is as expert as those golden ears.

Rick "whose last MoFi purchase was a CD" Denney
 
D

Deleted member 19122

Guest
I don’t own many LP’s pressed in the digital era. I have been disappointed in the quality of most of them. I find that clean vintage vinyl if you can find it is superior to most of what is being pressed today. That said, there are a few company’s doing a good job. I find the whole idea of making and LP from a digital file a bit silly. Adding a pressing plant and a turntable to a digital playback chain is hardly going to increase fidelity although I have been given nonsense arguments by two professional audio on why it does. Unless one has an interest in music recorded more than 50 years ago, I don’t think vinyl is worth the bother or expense.

On the other hand, recordings from late 40’s on into the 60’s were made when magnetic tape recording was pretty new and those tapes don’t last forever. The S/N and frequency response degrades and fairly quickly. A clean vinyl record made from a new master tape in 1950 is going to sound better than any digital transfer done when the tape was 40 to 70 years old. The problem is that the hunt for that clean LP is frustrating. One might have to buy many copies from vendors who always lie about the condition in order to find a good one. You have to find a record that was owned by an audiophile that didn’t like it and hardly played it.
LOL,this is audiofoolia 101,enjoy the useless rabbit hole you've dug for yourself...
 

formdissolve

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 19, 2019
Messages
363
Likes
309
Location
USA
I don’t own many LP’s pressed in the digital era. I have been disappointed in the quality of most of them. I find that clean vintage vinyl if you can find it is superior to most of what is being pressed today. That said, there are a few company’s doing a good job. I find the whole idea of making and LP from a digital file a bit silly. Adding a pressing plant and a turntable to a digital playback chain is hardly going to increase fidelity although I have been given nonsense arguments by two professional audio on why it does. Unless one has an interest in music recorded more than 50 years ago, I don’t think vinyl is worth the bother or expense.

On the other hand, recordings from late 40’s on into the 60’s were made when magnetic tape recording was pretty new and those tapes don’t last forever. The S/N and frequency response degrades and fairly quickly. A clean vinyl record made from a new master tape in 1950 is going to sound better than any digital transfer done when the tape was 40 to 70 years old. The problem is that the hunt for that clean LP is frustrating. One might have to buy many copies from vendors who always lie about the condition in order to find a good one. You have to find a record that was owned by an audiophile that didn’t like it and hardly played it.
The main things I notice buying older vinyl (which is presumably AAA), is that 1) The master is usually superior for the most part to a lot of digital loudness war brick-walled crap with zero dynamic range, and 2) The pressings are much, much better. These two things alone sometimes cause me to spend a bit extra for some older music on vinyl.

I own a lot of digitally-sourced vinyl and while most of it (if mastered correctly) actually sounds "better" (subjective, of course) compared to the lousy master on a digital file, the biggest complaint I have is the dreadful pressings with insane amount of scuffs and debris causing pops/clicks/distortion, and some are even off-center which is terrible. QC is gone due to massive pressure from high demand and low amount of lacquer cutters and pressing plants.
 
Last edited:

krabapple

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 15, 2016
Messages
3,168
Likes
3,714
There is some process where the Master tape is the source for cutting the lacquer.

yes, that would be the obvious way to go if you are making a big fuss about using OMTs (mixdown masters).

But to keep it all analog, and keep tape generation to an absolute minimum, you would have to
-- play first track OMT, performing whatever required EQ moves while cutting; pause, insert proper silence on lacquer ; then load second track OMT; rinse and repeat
(from what I gather, an alternative historically is to splice together the individual track OMTs into a 'side' ,and play that Two or more sides per album, of course)
-- then repeat the whole process when the first lacquer wore out -- and repeat it whenever a lacquer needs to be cut at another facility (e.g., another country)

Alternately (and this is what all major labels did, to standardize lacquer masters of an album)
-- record a tape copy during the cutting, thereby capturing all the EQ and silence-insertion moves -- this is an 'LP production master' tape. Use that for a subsequent pressing. Multiple copes can be made at once, for sending to other facilities.


Make a copy of that in DSD and then use the DSD as if it were a tape machine. Again one could do it other ways, but this way no edits or processing of the DSD file is needed. Seems pretty simple. Of course hearing a blow by blow description of what they do would be nice.

Yes, though you'd still want to capture cutting moves to a production master, if you hope the record is a big seller and might require another lacquer master in the future (or farming out to multiple pressing plants). This of course can be a digital 'production master' , instead of tape.
 

krabapple

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 15, 2016
Messages
3,168
Likes
3,714
I don’t own many LP’s pressed in the digital era. I have been disappointed in the quality of most of them. I find that clean vintage vinyl if you can find it is superior to most of what is being pressed today. That said, there are a few company’s doing a good job. I find the whole idea of making and LP from a digital file a bit silly.

Well, the majority of albums released since the late 1980s were recorded digitally (or certainly have a digital step in their creation somewhere), right? None of them should be released as LPs?


Adding a pressing plant and a turntable to a digital playback chain is hardly going to increase fidelity although I have been given nonsense arguments by two professional audio on why it does. Unless one has an interest in music recorded more than 50 years ago, I don’t think vinyl is worth the bother or expense.

So, it's really *LPs* that you find a bit silly? Me too.

On the other hand, recordings from late 40’s on into the 60’s were made when magnetic tape recording was pretty new and those tapes don’t last forever. The S/N and frequency response degrades and fairly quickly. A clean vinyl record made from a new master tape in 1950 is going to sound better than any digital transfer done when the tape was 40 to 70 years old.

Maybe. It depends on what shape the tape is in now. And how well the original vinyl record was mastered.
 

krabapple

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 15, 2016
Messages
3,168
Likes
3,714
The bit of feedback I have seen elsewhere goes along the lines of "I didn't care much for MoFi releases anyway...."

And let me guess, they now retrospectively blame that on there being a digital step. (Rather than whatever EQ Mofi favored in mastering)
 

skraz

Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2022
Messages
16
Likes
27
The bit of feedback I have seen elsewhere goes along the lines of "I didn't care much for MoFi releases anyway...."
shame, it could have honestly been a good eye opener to some about cognitive and internal biases, but i digress.

As to the actual topic, i found an above post about it being like kosher meat the best analogy about why this is unethical (despite it being a hell of a funny blind test).
As a business you are accountable to the customers and if oyu tell them x, you cannot then give them y
 
Top Bottom