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.
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). |
Hi @sns, I completely agree with you. In terms of sound quality vinyl before ~1965 is really special. I don't say it is better than any digital records but nothing gives me similar enjoyment of sound and music. For example, most records produced from 1965 to 1970 do not sound good and good digital or analogue remastering of same records sound much better. I think in these years the main issue in sound quality was in record pressing production and less in masters itself. The pressing quality has improved by 70x, but most of the records are not very special except some like for example, Sheffield Labs. Regards, Alex. |
@sokogear that is just Philelore talking. I can run a DAC off a laptop with an isolator, spend $1,000 on a DAC, and get far more resolution and accuracy then vinyl could ever dream of. That would be true of a $100 DAC too. Yes, true. There is absolutely no point on which vinyl can stand though many will try. Run a Pi off a linear supply instead. Same result. A Bluesound Node with an external DAC, same result. Almost no one uses a transport today, most streamers are purely to extract money, and the present day cost of 50 years of streaming at what I am paying would suffice for but a small record collection. No shipping, no driving to find things, etc. All there. I have about 10,000 songs in my permanent library. If my ISP is down, I have 30 days before the license expires.
@alexberger I don't discount the "synergy" between who knows what the frequency response is of vinyl setup and the rest of a system, the euphonics of high distortion, and other artifacts programmed over decades. |
To theaudioamp… I didn’t buy a MoFi record because I wanted the best sound possible. I wanted the best ANALOG sound possible. If I wanted the best digital sound possible I would’ve bought an sacd or a download. I wanted the analog experience. I have hundreds of digitally sourced records. The thing I was paying extra for was the analog experience. I wanted to know what the best a team of engineers could do to take analog as far as it could go, warts and all. If you argue that DSD makes a better record, fine. But I didn’t want a DSD record no matter how good it sounded. If I was paying extra for organic produce and I found out it was conventionally grown in another country, I’d be pissed even if the imported produce tasted good. Anyway, it’s clear no explanation or analogy will make you understand that what MoFi did is unacceptable. |
