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

We don't have to go through all this again, though I will say once more that nowhere in MoFi's ads or marketing materials did they claim 100% analog processes from master tape to LP; some customer service people stated it but otherwise it was people stating they claim "direct from the master tape" or "all analog mastering chain" meant that, which is simply not true.

If you feel you were misled, great, but I have never been pointed to where they claimed an all analog process from master tape to LP, or how that would have worked with digital masters like Brothers in Arms or The Nightfly.

I will also say that despite what Fremer has to say, to me the One Step of Tapestry is the best I've ever heard on vinyl.

I also love my 45 RPM Eye in the Sky (it's much better than the Speaker's Corner version) and just ordered the 45 RPM Blue Hawaii, mastered direct from a DSD 256 copy of the original analog master, which to me means it was indeed sourced from the master tape.

 

With some exceptions (emails, Britton interview comments), I think you’re missing the big picture despite citing the problem at hand.

People are upset because they were misled by the wording and implied language. MoFi’s wording was obviously designed to mislead. They succeeded at misleading the majority of people buying their records and this is the whole problem. Why would a company one would want to do business with operate in this fashion?

You’re speaking like they aren’t in any trouble from a legal perspective. Clearly that was their goal in case this thing ever blew up. Few here care about that aspect of things. They are upset that MoFi did this dance and that they got taken. Nobody is questioning that their wording was carefully designed to avoid the truth. It’s that avoidance of the truth until they had to admit it that has them upset.

 

I don't see that at all; I feel they were entirely accurate in what they said and I don't believe they even intended to mislead anyone.

To me DSD copies of the original master are an unimportant detail of the process, like asking which brand of cables they used to connect the tape machine playing the original master tape and the DSD recorder; though that would be of paramount importance to some, it's not a deal breaker for me as long as the end result sounds good.

Really, do you have proof of that? We have a lot of loud voices on forums that claim they were misled, but what fraction of MoFi's sales do those voices make up? Which portion simply don't care? Which portion do care but don't care as long as the LP sounds good?

I don't believe we have that data, but if we do, I'd love to see it.

They are, because people sued - and today people sue for anything they perceive as a slight from a company.

People claim it is "whataboutism" but I've mentioned before, I don't see people upset at Chad's Analogue Productions for not bothering to disclose their use of DSD in at least some cases until the MoFi issue started to gain traction; only then did they update their web site.

Were they also misleading the public or simply not disclosing an implementation detail? If not mentioning the DSD step was purposely misleading people wasn't Chad just as guilty?

You won't find the current verbiage on the web page for Roger Waters' Amused to Death:

Mastered from the original analog tapes to high-resolution digital by James Guthrie and Joel Plante. Lacquers cut by Bernie Grundman.

https://store.acousticsounds.com/d/140357/Roger_Waters-Amused_To_Death-Vinyl_Box_Sets

on the Acoustic Sounds web page in September, 2020:

Roger Waters-Amused To Death-Vinyl Box Sets|Acoustic Sounds

or even in October, 2021:

Roger Waters-Amused To Death-Vinyl Box Sets|Acoustic Sounds

Note in October, 2021 they did acknowledge DSD on other titles:

Various Artists-The Wonderful Sounds Of Female Vocals-180 Gram Vinyl Record|Acoustic Sounds

So was this intentional and/or meant to cause incorrect inferences on their part? Did they also not mention it to "avoid the truth?"

I don't believe so any more than I believe it was MoFi's intent; a jury may feel differently, they often do.

Ultimately if MoFi doesn't go under due to a legal judgment, the public will decide.

Hopefully not in a negative way before they ship the titles I still have on preorder.

 

You have nailed the subtlety of this thread nicely.

 

You may feel that way but neither does MOFI nor does anyone else in this thread. Granted there are people who don't care about the DSD step but the idea that MOFI didn't mislead by implying an analogue process doesn't confirm to reality. Thankfully after admiting the truth they are putting lineage stickers.

You are in engaging in a post-hoc rationalization. Because you don't care about the DSD you choose to ignore the weight of evidence posted repeatedly on this thread as to why the overwhelming assumption was that they were analogue.

 

Indeed.

That's why I don't like the word "sourced."
I have learned that "cut directly from the original analogue master tapes" is the what I should look for if I want an AAA (reissue) record.

 

Yes you don't have to state this misinformed opinion yet again! If you were aware of the history of Mo-Fi they were generally putting out all analogue records. This was way before master tapes became hard to acquire or DSD was even invented. It seems reasonable to assume that they continued to cut from an analogue tape where this was the format of the recording. In fact most titles earlier in the Jim Davis era were cut from analogue tape. They did stop cutting half speed which was noticeable if you examine the sleeves though a big thing was not made of it. Possibly this coincided with DSD being used for some titles. However they completely concealed the change to DSD and continued to label titles 'Original Master Recording' rather then the alternative 'Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab ' banner which they said was used when albums were not cut from an original master tape. Seems pretty misleading to me. Just stop making the ridiculous excuses and calling us all idiots for assuming they were AAA. It's getting pretty tiresome. Same goes for every other apologist on here.

 

Interesting to catch up on this thread, reading rationalizations for MoFi's behavior.

There is ample evidence that they explicitly mislead. That is a closed matter.

Whatever your individual opinion about the appropriateness of a DSD step, most MoFi customers were paying a premium because they thought they were buying all-analog product.

Their loyalty is going elsewhere.

 

I'm "misinformed" then you follow with sentences of "general" practices and stated it was "reasonable to assume," again proving it was customers' assumptions, not their statements at fault here.

Technology changes, procedures change, and people still refer to "taping" something when talking about content they recorded on their DVR.

It's "closed" because you can't prove anything,

Again proving the whole brouhaha was not because of MoFi "lies" but rather customer assumptions and misconceptions, which many are showing to be more important than how the actual product sounds.

If you say you will never buy MoFi again because you hate the way their products sound, Godspeed.

If you say you will not because you thought they were all analog, that's entirely different.

 

Please.

 

Have you not seen the video where they claim the process is ALL analogue?
Have you not seen the e-mails sent to customers stating that the process was all analogue?

 

They stated the mastering process is all analog, which it is.

The audio goes into a black "mastering" box if you will, analog when it enters and it stays that way, whether the original input was a master analog tape, a master digital tape or a DSD copy of a master tape, the mastering process is 100% analog.

I've seen the emails, and a misstatement by a customer service employee is not comparable to their statements, web site information and descriptions of their process that never claimed any such thing.

If you're going to stick with that argument why didn't you sue when they released their first versions of Brothers in Arms and The Nightfly which obviously couldn't be "all analog?"

 

There are none so blind as those who will not see

 

Is your real name Jim Davis? LOL.

 

This is a legal defense. Are you a lawyer? What is this entire discussion about?

The simple fact remains that you won't find evidence of any digital step in their advertising materials. They hid it. They mislead buyers who thought they had all-analog product. That's why (nearly) everyone is outraged.

 

No.

Seriously though, the all analog claim was made for the Gain 2 mastering system, which begins with the input of a music signal; the signal before that is not considered part of the mastering process.

Ultimately yes, the lawyers and perhaps ultimately a jury will have to sort it all out, and the end result is MoFi will likely go away and will not be replaced by any other vendor and we'll be stuck with only major label "special releases" cut from their latest ultra-compressed for earbuds digital master.

 

I am not a lawyer but you are accusing them of hiding something they had no duty to disclose.

As I mentioned previously, they did not disclose what cables were used between the tape deck and their mastering system - is that hiding information?

Was it deliberately misleading for Analogue Productions to not mention the Roger Waters album came from a DSD source until the MoFi situation blew up?

If you are going to state the former was misleading, at least be consistent and say Chad was guilty of misleading buyers too.

 

Eloquent.

 

If they use a digital source (DSD) it's not all analogue. Any vinyl cutting involves converting digital to analogue. So Calling it Gain 2 does not make it different from any digital cut to analogue other than the files are not pre mastered. Mastering in analogue on the fly as you cut is not something different to what BG and KG do with a digital source. Also the DSD copy is not the Original Master Recording. It's very convenient that they omitted two digital steps in the entire transfer/mastering/cutting process. Any record is cut from analogue signal at that end of the chain which makes it easy for labels to fudge hype stickers to make a record seem to be a completely analogue process all the way from the tape. Using 'sourced from' is pretty ambiguous as any copy of a recording was originally sourced from the master tape at some point whether 0 or 100 copies in between.

 

I'm tempted to say lucky for Chad, but on the other hand almost every other AP disk is all analog. That wasn't luck. And he certainly isn't charging $100+ dollars for DSD step disks.

Not that I want to make a saint out of Chad. But his track record is the exact opposite of MoFi's.

And there are others out there, Intervention Records for instance, who are doing the hard work to get the master tapes.

I'm going to reward the companies that are being honest, and take a break from MoFi. I hardly think I'm alone on that.

Your argument boils down to this: "All is well".

It isn't.

 

And the insanity of this thread continues…

 

Apart from one, likely little viewed, video, care to point out that explicit evidence?
As @Classicrock conceded a few posts ago, he assumed….
It won’t be a closed matter on your say so.

 

I agree. I hate re-hashing but here is one:

Watch the end.

 

Someday, after more fracturing of the audiophile "movement", after attacks in all directions on other reissue companies and a new front opens on the equipment and accessory manufacturers, we may see essays with titles like:

"Audiophiles - What Happened?"

"Audiophile Sales Dropping - Licensing Agreements Cancelled"

"High End Cable Producers Under Attack"