MoFi controversy

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.

@moonwatcher Tape does not have much of a 'sound'. Tape technology does. In case you are not aware, new tape is being made by ATR Magnetics https://www.atrtape.com/

-and it 'sounds' just fine; every bit as good as the Ampex/Quantegy. But of course, any time you change the tape you're recording with the bias on the record head should be optimized for the tape or it won't 'sound' right. So it might sound bright or otherwise unpleasant if the bias is off. If you've run into this and think its the tape, its really your machine not being set up right.

Beyond that any properly functioning tape machine will express a bit of 3rd harmonic at or near 0VU (when properly calibrated) which adds a bit of warmth to the sound.

@theaudioamp Hard to say, amongst my vinyl collection are hot stampers, can imagine many more very early generation masters as vast majority of 3.5K vinyl collection is from the era it was first released in. I'm thinking most of difference I hear between old and new vinyl is from both differences in recording studios and mastering chain. I have a ton of 50's and 60's recordings, tube recording studio equipment, very little multi tracking. this sounds very different from late 60's into 80's vinyl, multi tracking, ss recording equipment. The much later vinyl I own does improve on most of the late 60's thru 80's vinyl, for the reasons you stated above. The earlier stuff I prefer on early vinyl, I like the warmth, resonance, natural qualities of those recordings, specifically on vinyl. I'm not going to complain about how digital does these recordings either, sound great as well. For most  recordings late 60's on up, in order of preference, best being last, old vinyl, new vinyl, digital streaming. Keep in mind these are my individual preferences played back on my individual vinyl and streaming systems.

For me, in general, these late 60's-80's recordings benefit from remastering and being played back via digital, I'm sure this has much to do with superiority of my steaming vs vinyl setups, but I also believe much of the remastering is done with digital playback in mind. I assume past 1980's recordings all being done digitally.

@sns with the fragility of older tape, I expect most tapes used to cut the vinyl were a few steps away from the 1st master out of caution and necessity. I have to assume the people who were making the master to the vinyl knew this and may have accounted for generational changes in the sound and compensated. I am guessing though. Are there any 90 year old mastering engineers in the house?  Perhaps the goal of being pristine to the 1st master is flawed?

If digital is used in vinyl remastering-production proses. Why do we need this vinyl at all? Why don’t stream these files or play this music on SACD/CD player?

Why anyone has to spend $150 for this kind of vinyl, and thousands of $$$ for carriages, turntables, tonearms and phono stages? Why don’t save money for a better DAC, streamer or transport?

To set up an equal quality DAC, streamer, transport, etc. costs more than an equivalent quality sounding vinyl rig. Plus add in some subscription fees and the inconsistency of your ISP and it's not as cut and dry as you think @alexberger 

If you want a huge variety of new music and library and are just starting out, I would go digital. Most people on AG are not in that mold. Lots of old folks, and those getting there (like me).