Why do you think a few members have an 'alcoholic anonymous' vibe towards the audiophile community? It seems a harmless hobby as far as things go?

[Gibsonian]

100% true.
But that is not what this thread is about. What we are dancing around here is that to the rest of the world, we are in the same bag. To them there is no difference between Audiogon and ASR. Why? Because to the rest of the world even what we do scientifically is too much Because to the rest of the world anything beyond an iPhone and Airpods is just silly.

Yeah, they (Iphone/airbudders) would argue that both groups are nutjobs.

 

[Bob from Florida]

The basic question, to me, is: are MoFi releases better sounding than the original label? If so, and it doesn't cost an arm and a leg, then that could be worth it. I am also pretty sure that all so called "master tapes" have been digital in nature since sometime in the 1980's. I am more interested in whatever music is better mastered - could be on vinyl or digital media.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

But they did more than not disclose something, they inserted this into the LP sleeve, a literal reading of which could lead to a few justified conclusions, one being that the original tapes were used:View attachment 345930

That is a hype page for one step pressings. It was included in the Donald Fagen The Nightfly one step. Do you think one could justifiably conclude they were trying to represent a record cut from a digital *recording* was all analog because it was a one step *pressing* that was sourced from the he original master recording? In this case a DAT?

Again, NOTHING in their description of one step pressing says anything about the specifics of the actual mastering of any of the many different records this was placed into.

 

[Phorize]

That is a hype page for one step pressings. It was included in the Donald Fagen The Nightfly one step. Do you think one could justifiably conclude they were trying to represent a record cut from a digital *recording* was all analog because it was a one step *pressing* that was sourced from the he original master recording? In this case a DAT?

Again, NOTHING in their description of one step pressing says anything about the specifics of the actual mastering of any of the many different records this was placed into.

That's the point.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

That's the point.

Anyone who spent $125.00 on Donald Fagen The Nightfly that believed this famously digital recording was now somehow magically an all analog cut LP because of a hype page that talks about the one step pressing process vs the traditional three step pressing process, a hype page that literally NEVER uses the word “analog” has only themselves to blame for their own ignorance.

 

[Phorize]

Anyone who spent $125.00 on Donald Fagen The Nightfly that believed this famously digital recording was now somehow magically an all analog cut LP because of a hype page that talks about the one step pressing process vs the traditional three step pressing process, a hype page that literally NEVER uses the word “analog” has only themselves to blame for their own ignorance.

You seem to discounting the possibility that manufacturers market ie. manage customer perception via intermediaries, as well as on the packaging. Anyway, we agree that this was the world's biggest blind test and those who claimed that all analogue sounds better had no clue what they were listening to.

 

[Galliardist]

That is a hype page for one step pressings. It was included in the Donald Fagen The Nightfly one step. Do you think one could justifiably conclude they were trying to represent a record cut from a digital *recording* was all analog because it was a one step *pressing* that was sourced from the he original master recording? In this case a DAT?

Again, NOTHING in their description of one step pressing says anything about the specifics of the actual mastering of any of the many different records this was placed into.

How would anyone not ordering LPs from digital masters be expected to realise what was included with an LP made from a digital master?

Whether or not the implication was intentional, you can hardly argue that a lot of people did not get an implicit message that the LPs made from analogue sources were indeed pure analogue. Tbe company itself has admitted that.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

How would anyone not ordering LPs from digital masters be expected to realise what was included with an LP made from a digital master?

Whether or not the implication was intentional, you can hardly argue that a lot of people did not get an implicit message that the LPs made from analogue sources were indeed pure analogue. Tbe company itself has admitted that.

One can hardly argue that the same was not true of the Hale-Bob comet cult. What I am arguing is that there was no such explicit message and one practically had to be in a cult to find that implicit message. There exists a reasonable expectation of knowledge, rational thought and reading comprehension on the part of consumers. In the case of MoFi the Donald Fagen LP sets that bar.

 

[Victor Martell]

The basic question, to me, is: are MoFi releases better sounding than the original label? If so, and it doesn't cost an arm and a leg, then that could be worth it. I am also pretty sure that all so called "master tapes" have been digital in nature since sometime in the 1980's. I am more interested in whatever music is better mastered - could be on vinyl or digital media.

As an vinyl person that is ALSO an ASRer - I wasn't bothered by the revelation. I did not return (like many did) or even filed for the class action thing, felt wrong to try to get money out of that, given that I am satisfied with the product. The ones I own sound great to me.

That said, while they technically did not lie, they also omitted the info in some places where it made sense to be provided, and KNOWING THEIR MARKET they should have known better not to do that. You should know the market you are in, wrong or right, whether it makes sense or not.

 

[Victor Martell]

But they did more than not disclose something, they inserted this into the LP sleeve, a literal reading of which could lead to a few justified conclusions, one being that the original tapes were used:View attachment 345930

Yep - Not sure if they settled or lost the judgment - never cared THAT much about it, but yeah, this thing is what it may have doomed them. This is where they DSD step should have been shown/inserted. The updated version of this shows the DSD step. I think the "technicality" that they were supposed to skate on was that they always said "all analog cut" which is true - some cutting techniques include a digital step - theirs didn't. The problem for them is that they transferred the tapes to DSD (which makes sense, DSD was created as an archival format), then cut from those. Again, it makes sense that the should have added that step to the insert above.
They didn't and they got in trouble WITH THEIR MARKET

 

[JustJones]

Didn't Mofi pay $25 million? They settled.

 

[Jaxjax]

m.

The basic question, to me, is: are MoFi releases better sounding than the original label? If so, and it doesn't cost an arm and a leg, then that could be worth it. I am also pretty sure that all so called "master tapes" have been digital in nature since sometime in the 1980's. I am more interested in whatever music is better mastered - could be on vinyl or digital media.

I think it is much,much more complex then that... if you follow alot of studio work & you may have ..but from what I know it is very, very complex as to what the final product will be..digital or not. Who did the transfer .? when, were, every step during the process, on & on. How much did they mess with it in mastering putting there spin on it.?
I've don't hear to many versions of anything that sound the same because they are not.
Joe

 

[Victor Martell]

Didn't Mofi pay $25 million? They settled.

Yeah - wasn't sure if they had gone to trial. My **speculation** is that they had to settle because of the insert posted above. In omitting the DSD step they opened the whole thing to interpretation which means that they might lost a trial.

 

[Sancus]

To them there is no difference between Audiogon and ASR. Why? Because to the rest of the world even what we do scientifically is too much Because to the rest of the world anything beyond an iPhone and Airpods is just silly.

Except that your airpods and homepods are designed using the research we discuss here and not using Audiogon woo.

That's a pretty big difference whether the user knows or not.

 

[eddantes]

No one likes to admit they got played.

 

[Victor Martell]

Except that your airpods and homepods are designed using the research we discuss here and not using Audiogon woo.

That's a pretty big difference whether the user knows or not.

Sure - I am not saying they are right in seeing us as part of the same lunacy, all I am saying is that they do and why. No sense to further discuss, we are on the same side here.

 

[JustJones]

Yeah - wasn't sure if they had gone to trial. My **speculation** is that they had to settle because of the insert posted above. In omitting the DSD step they opened the whole thing to interpretation which means that they might lost a trial.

How would Jurors interpret "Ultra disc one step"? Oh well everyone knows how that works they use digital files! Would they look at pictures of tapes and vinyl records and think " oh digital in there somewhere".

 

[Victor Martell]

How would Jurors interpret "Ultra disc one step"? Oh well everyone knows how that works they use digital files! Would they look at pictures of tapes and vinyl records and think " oh digital in there somewhere".

Not sure - not relevant, they settled so moot point, I am just speculating. There is a very lengthy Hoffman thread on the subject, don't care to re-do it here.

 

[Bob from Florida]

I think it is much,much more complex then that... if you follow alot of studio work & you may have ..but from what I know it is very, very complex as to what the final product will be..digital or not. Who did the transfer .? when, were, every step during the process, on & on. How much did they mess with it in mastering putting there spin on it.?
I've don't hear to many versions of anything that sound the same because they are not.
Joe

Let me be clear then. Digital or analog is not an overriding concern for me. All I care about is whether it is enjoyable during the listening session. Yes, the whole process of recording to final release can be complicated. I have a few MoFi releases that I like. I don't know of any way to know if it's a good recording without listening. The simple part is whether I like it. If I do, then I will sample more from the label or talent.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Didn't Mofi pay $25 million? They settled.

No. The potential total cost of the settlement maximum estimate was $25 million if every one of their customers returned every LP that met the criteria. And MoFi would have been free to resell those LPs.

The settlement was going to be less money than litigation even if they won.