Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab has been cutting vinyl from digital since a long, long time ago...

Whatever happened to the Washington Post article?

Never saw it

 

I'm pretty sure those inner sleeves are all from the same 3rd party manufacturer just printed with QRP or MFSL. I don't think mofi or QRP manufacturers inner sleeves.

 

Right on. Good to see Fremer smiling.

He has been a guest on some YouTube channels recently doing just that (and plugging his new website/channel).

 

Again, that have been already discussed to tiresome levels already. New MOFI LPs are sourced from DSD256, SACD is DSD64 if you can't see what that means you should start from page 1.

 

They are much better sleeves

I replace my Mofi product sleeves with those

 

To be fair… at about page 520 or so it was asserted that you can’t hear what that means either. Or do you think you can you distinguish DSD64 vs DSD256?

 

More admirable position? Not at all. Everyone needs to make the decision for themselves.

But those against MOFI are certainly coming from more of an emotional position because it’s coming from being hurt and angry, albeit a justified feeling. Doesn’t make it a better or worse decision by any means. And it doesn’t make those who don’t feel that way a troll (not that you have necessarily been the one saying that).

 

Yes, I know the difference between DSD64 and DSD256. And a number of SACDs are DSD128. I also own DSD256 files of classical recordings, though those don’t play off of disc.

You completely misunderstood my post.

My question is about ripping vinyl to SACD. Essentially the opposite of the MoFI controversy, and more of a curiosity.

I promise you that has never been mentioned in this thread before.

 

We know Chad Kassem said the he could hear it to. I'm guessing if one knows what to listen for it wouldn't be that difficult.

 

What I can distinguish is that when it comes to making money the law of the minimum effort and expenditure rules. MOFI used to use DSD64 but they upgraded to DSD256, I suppose it was wasted money because nobody is able to tell.

 

I am sorry if I misunderstood you, anyway my take on that is: Do you think many individuals have the kind of equipment necessary to make copies that are indistinguishable from the original source? In the past I've seen posts claiming that, to me that is just wishful thinking, not even studios will have such magic devices.

 

Steve, we can easily listen to an original pressing and then the MoFi release. I have done this with my collection on numerous occasions. The MoFi typically sounds better, but not always. For instance, if we take an original six -eye Porgy and Bess and compare it to the MoFi release...we hear a cleaner and more dynamic portrayal with the MoFi, yet we also hear a certain 'stridency' to Miles' trumpet that we do NOT hear with the original. Everyone that has heard this difference when listening to my system assumed ( like I did) that the mastering engineers at MoFi captured a more accurate and exacting reproduction of what was on the original master tape ( Miles maybe overloading the mike or ??) . That has turned out to be not necessarily the case, as we now know that a 'digital' step was involved, likely leading to the findings. BUT it still could be other aspects of this MoFi release--so, no I don't think that it is that easy to compare the two, as there are many potential variables...albeit foremost among them being the DSD file vs the AAA mastering!

 

I have used witch burning analogy once. Maybe others used it. And it wasn’t to imply you were burning witches or witch hunters it was purely an exaggeration.

Sorry if it came across the wrong way.

No one is my fella…..I was speaking about my own experiences. Regardless of how we feel, the name calling isn’t needed and a differing opinion doesn’t make one a troll.

 

I am absolutely amazed at all the Youtube personalities who came out of the woodwork during the Mofi fiasco and the number of channels on the “Wonderful World of Vinyl”

Links to pages of their works seemed to come out in droves unsolicited when you opened up youtube
They have this huge network where everyone name drops each others pages back and forth

I did discover a couple of very informative sites

 

lol it'd be Aspera not dropbox . . . but yes either way- not a lot of work on the file transfer hehehehe

 

Not specific but You know a person can’t share gossip or opinions that are not verified. Especially here.

 

I beg your pardon! IT"S PAINSTAKING!!!

 

I understand completely.

 

Did Chad say this? Id like to see that quote.

That is interesting for sure.

Kevin has said he can hear 64 from 256 also didnt he?

So in and of itself digital can be heard. At least by some. Maybe it is like the warble thing, some can hear it and some just cant.

Gosh thinking about it though I would think more than a few in the 1000's of audiophile listeners would be able to say "that is digital! They are lieing saying it is AAA"

I would think so, yet many an overwhelming amount in fact have heard dsd and are familiar with that dsd sound (whatever that may be) and cant distinguish it as digital.

Fascinating, its all very fascinating for certain.

 

Based on the usual behavior of the VC, probably start a rumor that MoFi is deliberately making those discs sound bad to con people into thinking digital is acceptable.

 

How much, if you don't mind me asking?

 

But I’m taller.

 

The news cycle is so fast nowadays. This is already old news.

 

MoFi’s engineers explain the process they use to create digital transfers in detail in the first five minutes of the Mike Esposito video. There is no speculation involved.
Now, as far as the random cases where MoFi is transparently listing less than DSD256 as the digital source goes, are those cases where they were not allowed to make their own transfer, and were only able to use what the label provided? Perhaps?

 

I did. So far, cant find an original that beats the One Steps I compared. BS&T, Fragile, Abraxas, Eagles S/ T and Nightfly.