MoFi controversy


I see this hasn't been mentioned here yet, so I thought I'd put this out here.  Let me just say that I haven't yet joined the analog world, so I don't have a dog in this fight.

It was recently revealed that Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs one step LPs are being cut from digital masters (DSD) rather than being straight analog throughout the chain.

Here is one of the many Youtube videos that discusses it

 

To me, it seems that if MOFI is guilty of anything, it's "deception by omission."  That is, they were never open about the process and the use of digital in the chain. 

One thing to mention is that hardly anyone is criticizing the sound quality of these LPs, even after this revelation.  Me personally, I wouldn't spend over one hundred dollars for any recording regardless of the format.

 

ftran999

Really what does this say about the vinyl vs digital debate? Evidently it's quite possible people are paying $2k for a MOFI one step record on the secondary market that is essentially the same product as a $30 MOFI SACD. Everyone agrees one step vinyl is superior, the best available version, until this new information is presented. Now comes a reevaluation. What if this information never came to light? If the one step vinyl is digitally sourced it is, in essence, the sacd pressed onto vinyl, no? The ramifications are interesting, particularly for the wallet. 

If only irt was the same jdm11! Add to the LP tracking and speed errors and the value proposition looks even worse.

"MFSL engineers begin with the original master tapes and meticulously cut a set of lacquers"

A quote from the sheet that MoFi explain how they're doing the one step process.

To me it is not omitting anything when it is a clear lie. And saying omitting is to be nice in my opinion.

How one feels about vinyl vs digital, about prices for 1-Steps, or about the sound quality of MoFi products isn’t the point, compared to the issue of the little banner across the top of MoFi albums....there are 2 and they used to have a meaning....

"Original Master Recording" meant it was sourced from the original master tapes, and the other banner "Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab" meant they had to use something else as the source (often a duplicate "safety tape", or the master was lost/damaged and all that is left is digital, for examples) and now their third category, super duper 1-steps , (because it was digitized somewhere in the process) and suddenly all of those distinctions are meaningless. It’s a big omission to people who care about transparency in the process.

For me it isn’t about the "quality" of the sound (they’re incredible most of the time) it’s just not 100% analog which is deceptive when Master Tapes are part of your brand identity. It’s a small but very competitive segment of the market. And obviously the consumers care.

I think the only people who are upset are the ones that have been:

1. Screaming (loudly) that analog is the only way to go and that digital sucks.

2. Extolling the virtues of MoFi’s products and using it as a basis to support point #1.

I’m a digital guy, but we all have an audiophile friend who meets the above criteria.

As for the controversy itself, I think MoFi has made a fortune using misleading advertising, as well as playing to the "word of mouth" movement during the analog resurgence of the last 15 years or so. But hey, it’s a business.

Caveat Emptor.

There’s no doubt that MoFi recordings are absolutely top notch. I’d be a little salty, too, though if I paid $100+ for a "One Step" pressing of what amounts to a SACD that you can buy for $30-$40.

If you like your MoFi recordings, great! Keep playing them. I certainly wouldn’t be mad enough to go smash the record in the street or anything like that, lol.

If you’re an analog only guy, perhaps re-evaluate the what’s and why’s and where you stand, and let’s all move on.

Happy Listening!