Mobile Fidelity Analog Vinyl Controversy

[tmtomh]

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 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.

Yes! Thank you for stating this important distinction so clearly.

 

[Blumlein 88]

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.

Wait a minute. I never said throw away the master tape. Not me. That would be stupid.

 

[levimax]

"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.

Which is why the original vinyl, created from fresh original master tapes, can be the best sounding version for some recordings. Sorry Sal couldn't resist .

 

[Sal1950]

It is an extremely complex subject, and nothing like the broad brush stroke you seem to think it is. For instance, there are tapes from the 1980s which were stored perfectly which are unplayable today, and tapes from the 1950s which play perfectly (a friend has a few).

Nothing is ever cut and dried and of course there are huge variables.
But my statement that

copy all those old analog tapes to digital now while they exist in the best condition they ever will be,

stands true. They're not going to get better and can only deteriorate with time, some faster than others.
Plus your claim of

Analog tapes with Mylar base do not 'deteriorate' sitting on a shelf unless stored improperly, and that doesn't mean it has to be a vault. The magnetic signal on the tape does not 'deteriorate' by being in storage, again in reasonably good storage conditions. The signal does not deteriorate to any measurable degree by being played on a properly maintained machine. Print through is avoided by storing tapes tails-out.

I don't know why your debating this, everything I said in the first post is true, it's only a matter of time. Some show problems in a few decades, some not.
What about 50, 75, 100 or more years? How many times can you play those old brittle tapes without accrued damage?

 

[RammisFrammis]

How many times can you play those old brittle tapes without accrued damage?

Mylar does not get brittle.

 

[Sal1950]

Which is why the original vinyl, created from fresh original master tapes, can be the best sounding version for some recordings. Sorry Sal couldn't resist .

Sorry, your in error. No vinyl pressing has a snowballs chance in hell of being tranparent to the master tape.
Face the facts.

 

[levimax]

Sorry, your in error. No vinyl pressing has a snowballs chance in hell of being tranparent to the master tape.
Face the facts.

Maybe not transparent to the original master tape but if the original master tape was damaged or destroyed before it was transferred to digital the vinyl can be the best copy that exists. Plenty of CD's of artistically significant old recorded music are need drops.

 

[Sal1950]

How many times can you play those old brittle tapes without accrued damage?

Mylar does not get brittle.

Not sure I buy into the claim that Mylar won't EVER get brittle but I give you that.
How about wear from playing, being dragged over the heads and other objects in the tape path?
It will never stretch or shed oxide, magnetic particals under use?
There will be no accrued damage?
We're not talking kryptonite here.

Maybe not transparent to the original master tape but if the original master tape was damaged or destroyed before it was transferred to digital the vinyl can be the best copy that exists. Plenty of CD's of artistically significant old recorded music are need drops.

Very true, sometimes you just have to use what you got, no matter how poor the quality.
As they say in life, Schitt happens. LOL

 

[levimax]

Not sure I buy into the claim that Mylar won't EVER get brittle but I give you that.
How about wear from playing, being dragged over the heads and other objects in the tape path?
It will never stretch or shed oxide, magnetic particals under use?
There will be no accrued damage?
We're not talking kryptonite here.

The other issue is where do you find a tape machine to play back these tapes. While technology advances no one is making "new" tape machines to play back these old tapes so they end up getting played back on "antique" equipment which is getting harder and harder to maintain. Both the tapes and the tape machines have a shelf life that is getting close to expiration.

 

[antcollinet]

I’m no lawyer so

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.

Apart from the vegan/meat analogy (the product Mofi created is measurably indistinguishable from an all analogue process) Absolutely correct. And the irony is for this particular idiotic batch of audiophools** that they are likely to take down one of the few businesses making the best quality versions of vinyl they can get.


** not a word I like - especially when applied generically - however in this case, when the cap fits....

 

[Vladimir Filevski]

And the irony is for this particular idiotic batch of audiophools** that they are likely to take down one of the few businesses making the best quality versions of vinyl they can get.

Do not shoot the messenger - audiophiles which took the Class Action against MoFi. I would like to see similar actions against all snake oil salersman in audio.
Actually, lies of the MoFi officials will likely take down their business, which is pity indeed. I didn't by any of their releases, but I do believe their vinyls are among the best in sound quality.

 

[N9R]

"no analog to digital conversion in our vinyl cutting process"

I'm guessing the way this would be argued in court, if it came to that and was presented as evidence, would be that they meant not using a digital delay line in the actual cutting process - which, by the way, became widespread in the record industry from the late 1970s / early 1980s and continues to this day.

A delay line is almost always required when cutting a lacquer - in order to allow the engineer to adjust groove spacing on the fly for loud / quiet sections, with the goal of achieving the required amount of music time on a side without running out of physical space on the lacquer surface.

Even back in the 1970s engineers determined that doing this digitally was the best way to do it! Yes, those wonderful 70s and 80s vinyl records are, more likely than not, digital copies.. A fact many vinyl lovers either are unaware of, or conveniently ignore.

And at the time it certainly wasn't a fact that was announced, or even thought should be a consideration. Which, I'm thinking, would be another precedent that could be argued to MoFi's advantage when it comes to what they were legally required to declare in their packaging and marketing regarding their production process.

 

[antcollinet]

Do not shoot the messenger - audiophiles which took the Class Action against MoFi. I would like to see similar actions against all snake oil salersman in audio.
Actually, lies of the MoFi officials will likely take down their business, which is pity indeed. I didn't by any of their releases, but I do believe their vinyls are among the best in sound quality.

Which is the source of the take down? The original lies, or the current class action?

 

[Vladimir Filevski]

Source is original MoFi lies, of course. If the lies didn't exist in the frist palce, there couldn't be any class action.
Cause and effect, you know...

 

[antcollinet]

Source is original MoFi lies, of course. If the lies didn't exist in the frist palce, there couldn't be any class action.
Cause and effect, you know...

I was just pulling your leg over this:

You are turning your blind eye on this.

Contrary to your phantasy (bolded in your post) which, by the way, MoFi never said, they clearly stated this:
"We do not use digital sources except in cases where the title's original master was digital itself".

That DSD recording is the source for the next step. I used to work in the factory, so I totaly understand what the word "source" mean. You don't.

Source must be the analogue tape of course. If the tape didn't exist in the first place there couldn't be any DSD file. Cause and effect, you know...

 

[Vladimir Filevski]

I was just pulling your leg over this:

Source must be the analogue tape of course. If the tape didn't exist in the first place there couldn't be any DSD file. Cause and effect, you know...

But they lied that there is no digital process! Cause is not the analog tape, cause for the Class act is their lie! Cause and effect, you know...
There were and there are many companies which use(d) digital recording (from analog or digital sources) for their vinyls - but they didn't lie, they state the truth that they were using digital intemediate step in the process!

 

[antcollinet]

But they lied that there is no digital process! Cause is not the analog tape, cause for the Class act is their lie! Cause and effect, you know...

Yes but.....


never mind - this could go on all day.

 

[danadam]

But they lied that there is no digital process!

never mind - this could go on all day.

Let me try

@Vladimir Filevski , in this diagram:

[A] lies  -->  [B] class action  -->  [C] take down

you are saying, that A is the source and not B. At the same time, in this diagram:

[A] analog tape  -->  [B] dsd  -->  [C] vinyl

you are saying that B is the source and not A. @tonycollinet is just making a bit of fun out of your inconsistency

 

[Vladimir Filevski]

(Yes but.....

never mind - this could go on all day. )

No, it could not go on, you exhausted all possible excuses. You can not defend lies of MoFi. Yes, you tried, but...

 

[Snarfie]

Roger Nichols (audio engineer of Steely Dan) about loss of transients within hours after recording on analog tapes. So what about 30 years or older mastertapes reused for remasters.

Roger Nichols interview – Sound Design, production et conception audio

– What were the determinant factors.....? RN : Well, that goes back quite a way. I love listening to music. I think it was hereditary. You know, my grandfather was in the film and the music…

pieralessandri.com

You..., in the whole debate...debate about Analog and Digital, you’re preference...is for digital?

RN: Yes, and it’s mostly because when I record something on a digital machine..um, you know, and I play it back ten years from now it will sound exatly the same. So if there is some little artifact because it’s digital, it’s a majorable (sic) artifact, and it’s going to be the same artifact ten years from now. If I record something on Analog tape and it doesn’t matter whether I’m do using Dolby SR, Dolby A or DBX or no noise reduction or whatever it is, if you record something on a piece of analog tape and play it back later the same day, the same program is not on the tape. And there’s nothing so far that anybody’d been able to do about that, you know, like those little magnetic particles are made to be able to wander around and they do so by themselves while the tape is just sitting there. I’ve made DAT copies when I’m cutting tracks, and then have an automation snap shot of the mix and then later that evening put the tape back on, play it back, compare it with the Dat, and there’s already starting to be a difference. And by the time a week or two weeks go by and it’s time to mix, a lot of the transients have started to disappear. If you use this as a tool, some people like what this does, and it sort of helps to mix all their music together, that’s fine, but, you know, you can’t say that Analog tape with Dolby SR is as good as Digital. It might be as quiet, and but it’s not going to retain the signal, you know, as long as Digital tape. So that’s my biggest worry about Analog tape.