2. analog
  3. 178673-171212

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
tylermunns
601 posts
 

You make some good points. $125 is a lot of money for a 12-inch album sleeve and the cachet of the vinyl experience. I phrase it that way because:

What other features of this product would benefit the consumer should the sound be comparable (or inferior) to a digital copy, since the source is digital from the get-go?

People like what they like, and can spend their money however they see fit.  I’m not sure it is fair to smear MoFi as some dishonest company. Had they explicitly stated their products were purely analog then, sure, this charge would be valid.

It is worth pondering as an audio person the cost/benefit ratio of many vinyl purchases.  Analog is great.  Sometimes we just want an album on vinyl, and may be fine with a $30 vinyl copy that was sourced from digital.  I think it’s fair to say, “my willingness to spend a high premium for a particular album is based on having a purely analog experience.” For me, personally, this is why I pay the big bucks for certain albums because it will be inherently different (and perhaps notably superior) to its digital counterpart.

mceljo
1,357 posts
 

@jdm11 - I think the physical interface with vinyl will always sound different than with a digital source, but the dynamic range of the two forms of media can also have a significant impact on the sound.

The dynamic range on SACD is significantly higher than vinyl, so an analog recording that was mastered for vinyl can be put on SACD, but the opposite is not true.  If a recording is mastered for SACD and uses the full dynamic range it must be compressed to be put on vinyl.

Paul from PS Audio had an interesting video on this topic where he explained several of the ways that audio can be compressed to fit on vinyl.  If done well it brings the bass levels up and results in a warmer and richer sound that is often associated with vinyl.

sns
3,270 posts
 

Failure to disclose certain information certainly isn't telling the truth. Whether that bothers one or not is for them to decide. I'd be interested in what SPARS code on jacket states.

 

 

blisshifi's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
blisshifi
1,192 posts
 

@atmasphere and anyone else who might know. You mentioned when you were cutting LPs:

digital release files are compressed since there is an expectation they will be played in a car

Is this still true today, especially for modern high resolution digital files, for instance those that are offered on hdtracks or on SACD? I know most modern pop music still doesn’t have high dynamic range, even when pressed to vinyl, but there are still a number of productions across genres that strive to preserve the integrity of this range.

If what @mceljo is saying is true about SACDs having greater dynamic range than vinyl (which seems plausible), and say the digital playback chain (clocking, DAC’s digital chip and digital implementation, the DAC’s analog stage, low noise, etc) is of a reference quality, then this would mean that there really is no benefit to playing the vinyl version of same mastering regardless of how great the pressing quality is, unless the listener prefers how their cartridge and phono stage sounds over their DAC or “prefer the distortion characteristics built in to record playback that are pleasing” as @jallan says, right?

Under these specific circumstances, there is really no possible benefit to the vinyl? Or am I missing other variables to consider?

I’m not trying to argue this in a “one is better than the other” manner, but just trying to understand the full picture for consideration. Thanks.

whart's avatar
whart
3,047 posts
 

@blisshifi - I’m not Ralph @atmasphere but I posted this to another site as my understanding of MoFi’s work flow:

According to AZ Mike in today’s recap video (this one, the day after the "interview" video posted), once they have the 4XDSD file, they use their analog mastering system. There’s a video a page or so up thread (here), which has 3 minutes of Krieg talking about mastering and shows their set up.
People asked about mixing or working with 4XDSD- my take, more as an analog than digital guy, is that the file gets played back (not sure they told us what digital recorder and playback they use) into the analog mastering set up. There, it looks like Krieg has a pretty full board, can mix (to the extent two tracks allow you to do anything), pan and probably EQ. I know they can use outboard units too- @TLMusic (who I haven’t seen in a while told me George Peckham aka Porky was famous for using those rare Fairchild tube limiter/compressors on his mastering set up, which gave it that beefy, bombastic sound).
Anyway, it seems like one of their advantages is process, apart from custom made Tim de Paravicini analog paths (probably preamps, amps and modifications to the lathe?). They are able to cut an acetate, have it plated and pressed and listen to it, as one would a regular LP. And they claim they did this multiple times, to hear how their "work" actually played. That would be an advantage. Over tape? Maybe if you are worried about a fragile tape, but I think the problem isn’t the condition of the true mixed down master, it’s that the labels won’t let ’em out the door. And if these guys found it easier, faster, better for work flow to just do the 4XDSD (I dunno), we’ll see how many of the recent releases went the DSD route rather than analog tape. Based on the interview, I suspect a fair amount.
Happy to be corrected on any of this."
@blisshifi -I don’t know if that answers your question. The benefit to you (as opposed to MoFi) is that you are playing a digitized file (cut by analog means and processes) through whatever turntable playback system you have; in my case, my vinyl front end is far better than my digital front end, so I benefit from that. Does it have some of the drawbacks of vinyl? Of course-- out of my cold dead hands, right?
I don’t think this is about the superiority of either format or medium. Both can be good or bad. It’s all about MoFi’s integrity, selling based on process for improved sonics. The argument about "well it sounds better so what’s the harm" excuses what I think are some serious efforts to mislead regarding their "steps." I think the fact they hid this to be appalling, but I’m also willing to give them the time to make it right, if that is possible. It is not going to happen overnight.
 

 

More to discover