MoFi controversy

1. This is about misleading marketing practices...not which one sounds the best. A One Step could be made from an 8-track tape dub and may be the best sounding ever. However, the box needs to say the source and signal chain for such expensive pressings.

Why isn’t it about which one sounds the best? It certainly is for me.

Is it OK if less expensive pressings don’t have all the details of how they were made? Do food manufacturers tell you what the artificial and natural flavors they use are? That leaves a lot of room for unknown sources in the food we eat, doesn’t it? But people are ready to blow a blood vessel over how a record is made?

This "controversy" reminds me of many discussions I’ve heard over the years about the use of Photoshop and other image manipulation tools. The "true believers" insist that you "get it right" in the camera (as if there isn’t a computer in all the cameras now). Others are more concerned with the end result than the process. If the end result is pleasing and the process doesn’t obviously affect the quality of the end product in a negative way, why does it matter?

I love a good controversy!

I did not know that Mofi claimed to use only first generation master tapes. Are you sure? That sounds like a bad practice. Common sense would be to use the generation that has degraded the least. Some of those 2nd generation master probably got less use over the years.

I own some Mofi. I never even considered whether they were AAA ADA, or whatever. I bought them for how they sound. If using a digital intermediary step is what got them there, then I am glad they did!  I got them to listen to, not as an investment. Whatever happened to "If it sounds good, it is good."?  Removing two plating steps is a far bigger improvement than any loss converting to digital and back. Their alternative was to create their own 2nd or whatever gen analog tape copy. That would be even worse and it would degrade a little every time played. Progress is hard to swallow people.

They do appear to have shot themselves in the foot with that Ultra Analog marketing stuff. I could see them getting fined for that, but good luck as the end consumer seeing any of that money. To prove damages, you would need to prove it sounds worse than if they didn't do that. Good luck with that. Forced to accept returns? Perhaps, but they likely go bankrupt first.

@big_greg 90% of people who purchased one steps did so believing they were buying an all analog “ chain” record. Regardless what sounds best, MoFi was well aware of this, thus avoiding any mention of dsd in their literature. 
 

Regardless of what you think sounds best, the analog aspect was important to those buyers and may have influenced if the purchase was made or not. 
 

the controversy has Nothing to do with sound quality. It’s about deceptive marketing practices

We are audiophiles. If we never bought anything from companies that use deceptive marketing practices, we would be listening on Gramophones.

Yes, it is about deceptive marketing practices.  And that is why I suggested they need to dive in deeper in their Technology tab and describe the entire process, full disclosure.  They are very good at marketing, and they need to do a good job now, marketing their entire chain from source to finished product, describing the full benefits for their end users.  Nothing to hide from, the product sound quality is excellent.