MoFi controversy

Thank you for the post @moonwatcher.   I hope all the people who hold analog and tape up as some holy grail will hone in on one sentence,

And besides, as a tape lover myself, finding new tape that sounds good is a problem. After Ampex/Quantegy went out of business, I had questions whether I could tolerate the sound of new tape... some of it sounds worse than PCM recording - just my opinion.

I will repeat it again for those that do not want to believe,

sound of ... tape

If tape has a sound, then obviously it is far from perfect.

I don't think it was because the reviewers and vinyl\analog promoters did not want to know, or didn't want to ask an uncomfortable, for them, question. No, for all their bluster as being the experts, they simply did not know and it they didn't ask because it never occurred to them to ask. Nothing nefarious except not holding nearly the expertise they claimed.

Unfortunately, people want to hold onto their truths, so some companies are getting accolades because they are "pure analog", working all analog from the masters to the stamp. From the article above and as I stated.  It will not be the original, 1st master, driving the cutting heads. It will be a 2nd gen, maybe 3rd gen (but still called a master). Do you see all those pure analog companies telling you how many steps removed from the 1st master the tape driving their cutting heads are? Nope.

So it’s okay to use deceptive practices, and charge more money for it. I’m pretty sure it’s a lot easier to use DSD than analog, but they charged for analog.

Looks like the digital b_#ches are here to prop up their format.

Regardless fact is a lot of studios use digital master and cut lacquer.

Third Man records will not and Jack White is true to the art of vinyl. As a matter of fact Jack is now cutting the masters to vinyl first shot.

@blisshifi - I'm certainly far from a hifi expert.  I do a little reading and watch some videos and try to pick out the commonalities and things that seem to be common sense to me.

The idea that the mastering for vinyl (70 dB dynamic range) and CD (100 dB dynamic range) and SACD (120 dB dynamic range) would be expected to yield different sonics making it impossible to truly compare them directly.  It's always going to be an apples to oranges comparison starting with the media.

It seems reasonable that the best mastering for each format would result from the mastering being done with that format in mind.  Even though the mastering for vinyl could be placed on on either CD or SACD, maybe the sound could be improved by better utilizing the full dynamic range.

I doubt they will do it, but I suggested that PS Audio include their masters for vinyl on SACD.  This would allow listeners to compare SACD mastered for SACD to SACD mastered for vinyl to vinyl mastered for vinyl.

My personal opinion is that the more limited dynamic range of vinyl leads to a specific sound that is very pleasing to the ear for most people and the mechanical process of the stylus also adds some of the smoothness that's associated with the format.  I couldn't find the video, but I think it was Paul from PS Audio that described the methods of "compressing" the master onto vinyl where it can be done by squeezing top and bottom (bad) or just increasing the level of the bass (good).

In the end, there's so many factors the impact the final result that I don't think it's possible to make a definitive statement.  The best that I've heard in an A/B was vinyl, but the digital was also fantastic.

I was told once by a legend in the recording/record business that the "art" of recording and mic placement is different if recording in analog vs recording in digital. I've also been told that editing in DSD is a pain...doesn't much matter to me. I hope MoFi continues to thrive and continues to put out great sounding recordings. Same goes for Jack White...

If it sounds good it IS good.