MoFi controversy

Good luck finding any vinyl (from the last 10? 15? years) that wasn't pressed from an original digital master. I'm sure someone, somewhere, is still using tape but they would be the rare exception proving the rule.

 

several prints of the tonal poet are analog master and are shown on the back cover or inside as almost all the houses that print vinyls report whether the master is analog or digital.

@clearthink I agree that my comments were a bit heavy-handed.  Probably about 6db too loud.  I'm just a believer in authenticity. Mofi is right on the edge of not respecting the wants and needs of its customers.

Whether MoFi has done unique mastering of a digital file or an analogue tape, whether the analogue playback chain alters the sound in a way some people prefer such alteration, what matters is whether one likes the end result.  I've heard several one-step recordings and they ARE very good sounding.  In the Abraxas example, it does sound at least as good as an original Columbia recording of that music, which is WAY better than any subsequent reissues in any format that I've heard.  I don't know why it is the case, but, a lot of high quality vinyl reissues seem to be more lively and dynamic than the digital reissue--that is even the case with MoFi digital vs. their LP reissue; is it distortion I am hearing and liking?  Perhaps, but so what?  

I am not at all religiously attached to analogue.  I listen mostly to digital music because of convenience and because newer classical releases are never offered in an analogue format.  There are plenty of outstanding digital recordings that I really like for sound quality.  But, there are so many amazing sounding analogue recordings that I have so I cannot say that one format is decidedly superior to the other.

In fact, when I want to demonstrate how little the recording and playback technology has advanced in the past 60 years or more, I will pull out certain original issue records from the late 1950's that are in stereo that are shockingly good by any standard.  I have an original Ellington "Blues in Orbit" in stereo that stomps all over the Sony SACD reissue that was suppose to showcase what the technology can do; is it vinyl superiority or the tape has deteriorated in time?  I don't know, but I do know that the original six-eye Columbia is the one to have.  On just the Columbia label, you can do a shoot out of original Brubeck "Time Out," Santana "Abraxas" Benny Goodman albums from the late 1950's and shock people on how good early stereo sounds.

MoFi releases what it thinks are essential albums is higher quality vinyl. I have seen nothing in their marketing that says they stick to analog masters. That would be hard to do anyway as most everything has been converted to digital. Digital has one major advantage. It does not age. You can also do processing in digital that is impossible to do in the analog world without distortion. 

I am totally with @rauliruegas on this one. I love records. I buy at least 1 record a week. I am in the process of spending $30,000 upgrading by vinyl rig. However, digital, from a strictly performance angle is superior. Where vinyl wins is in the psychology of the collector/gadget freak . Records are simply more fun from a sociological perspective. From a sonic perspective, the most jaw dropping recordings I have are in digital files. I will toss one more hand grenade while I am at it. In order to build a SOTA system in this day and age you have to use digital signal processing. There is no system that is totally free of problems that stand in the way of the absolute sound. Few of these problems are not amenable to digital processing. 

Amen to Larryi. Listen to frank sanatra recordings from 50’s to 60’s. Far better than todays redux.