MoFi controversy

Optimize. You seem to be stuck arguing from your own set of facts. But the omitted fact is that RBCDs suck compared to a high quality LP played on a "very good" system, and any critical listener can hear that. I’d say RBCD is only a cut above MP3. If this were not the case, we wouldn’t be where we are now, and there probably would not even be an Analog Forum. I am not arguing about hi-rez streaming or even SACDs here, but in your original diatribe you managed to leave out all the physical aspects of playing a CD, not to mention the limitations imposed by RBCD standards in and of themselves, whilst harping only on those related to playing an LP.

Now here I go contributing to exactly what I hoped would not become the subject of this thread, digital vs vinyl.  Sorry.

@atmasphere said: "FWIW dept.: the correct term is 'lacquer'."

Thanks Ralph. I guess I always used the terms interchangeably. Not sure where I picked that up. We were still kids, I think, and one of my friends while in high school started engineering at a local studio. It was great fun for me to visit him at night when he got free time. Probably 1972. Old habits. 

I made the same mistake FWIW...

@tomcy6 It's in the July/August 2022 Absolute Sound print edition.  I don't think it's been posted on line yet.  It definitely discusses analog/digital stuff, as well as Tim de Paravicini's contribution.

I have a handful of MOFI LPs. In general, I think they sound great. However, I would have to say that every Tool album I own sounds better than my MOFI albums and the Tool albums are not MOFI.  Quality control probably has a lot to do with sound reproduction.