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

I’m wondering if they had issues with the Dolby on the tape and maybe transferred to DSD to try to clean it up without having to keep running the tape? Bossanova is the only questionable one I feel like in that it is really bright and doesn’t have much bass, like they couldn’t process it properly. Just a theory.

 

Yes, I was told that they were from DSD when I called mobile fidelity

 

Yet the UK of the Pixies Doolittle sounds better. Again, mastering.

 

I recently got the MoFi of Ryan Adams' "Love is Hell" for a good deal, and it sounds incredible.
Being a relatively newer recording that they put out (album's from 2004, Mofi's vinyl is 2014), I'm assuming they went straight from the original tapes since they're still in relatively good shape, but I could be wrong?

 

the chances that it was recorded digitally are pretty good

 

Don't think tape condition matters in their decision, whether they can take the tapes with them is the main issue for them....if there are tapes in this circumstance.

 

Here's the list of 123 LPs using DSD that have been admitted in court by MFSL.

Pics by @spewey

 

This is for titles with Original Master Recordings as the banner that have DSD
There are more DSD titles that have MFSL as the banner, but the courts are not finding fault with those, so they are excluded.

 

Thanks for the list.

Who compiles this list and where do they get the information?

Is there a list that comes from MoFi (other than court information) directly or have they yet to publish a list? And if not, why not?

The court list looks pretty slip shod.

 

I do. With the good help of two other SHF members.
The information is directly provided by MoFi (sporadically updating their website) and SHF members forwarding direct MoFi's answers on their social medias accounts.
They have yet to publish a list (don't know if they will do it eventually...).

 

Thanks for doing it.

I have not found a list on their website.

 

Thanks for this and other responses to my rant about the weirdness of intensive sound-quality shootouts.

No, shootouts are not normal. (But normal is generally overrated.)



As someone who is suspicious of some aspects of the herd mentality of shootout audiophilia and the elevation of “best-sounding” as an ultimate value, I enjoy inviting people to take a step back and examine the precepts of these practices, and I get some great insights and rebuttals in response.

I continue to feel that there is a whole lot of motivated reasoning that wildly exaggerates differences in sound quality and the importance of what I would call modest incremental improvement in many cases. The hi-fi excellence of most standard commercial releases (the ones not afflicted with loudness-war and other mastering malpractice) is something audiophile labels and their customers tend to downplay because the idea of dramatic improvement is the core product, sometimes legitimately but often not so much.

 

Thanks for the kind words.

You won't find any list neither on their website nor on Music Direct's.
You have to check out every MFSL/MoFi entry on Discogs if you look for any official mastering info regarding a title.

 

Shootouts are all about FOMO.

"Oooh, I have six different versions of Led Zeppelin II, but I don't have an RL!!!!" Forum says: "You ain't heard LZII until you've heard the RL!" Thanks, I've heard Led Zeppelin II. Many, many times. I'm past the point of hearing something on that record I haven't heard, and I'm certainly not spending over $500 for bragging rights.

"Best-sounding" is totally fungible. Ears, rooms, systems, all contribute to different impressions. So does cost. If someone spends over $100 on a reissue, they have more invested in it being the best they've ever heard.

If shootouts were all that meaningful, you'd see more of a consensus among those who are really into them, but more often than not, no such consensus exists.

 

Odd to see shoot outs being thoght of as odd..... on a forum owned by a mastering engineer. And I'm not talking about beief comparisons of a track or two.

 

I don't see what Steve being a mastering engineer has to do with anything. The forum's huge, and the only real audiophile part of it is the equipment section.

Maybe it was more of an audiophile conclave 20 years ago, but now? It's a general purpose music forum.

 

And yet here we are posting on a MoFi thread.

 

Unfortunately, it certainly has gone downhill in the past 2-3 years.

 

And? So what?

It's still not an audiophile-only forum. If it was in the past, that's fine.

 

Congratulations on completely ignoring how different gear sounds and how people's tastes differs.

 

This gets proven time, after time, after time, after time.......

 

Not just in the past...it's still going on strong.

 

Well, in this poll from 2010 it was a slight majority of 54,2 percent.

Are You An Audiophile?

 

My standard line and I've used it as my signature before is that "I could have had a kick ass audio set up, but I chose to have a kick ass music collection instead'. I do have better systems than what is listed in my gear profile, but I do 90% of my listening on what is listed.
Another is that "an audiophile was someone who spends tons of money to convince themselves they still have the ears of a twenty five years old." That one got Paul McGowan's panties in a bunch,
Here's the kicker though. This isn't called the Steve Hoffman Audio Forums. It's called the Steve Hoffman Music Forums. So the emphasis should be on music. However I read a not too old quote from Steve saying he still thinks of this as an audiophile forum and it is his party..

 

Not even 600 votes on a forum comprising over 114K members. Hmmmm,...