Washington Post article on MoFi vs. Fremer vs. Esposito

Just curious!

Old master tapes, especially of famous albums & artists, are usually kept in temperature and/or environmentally controlled vaults ... are they not?  As such, doesn't that prevent or, at least, seriously mitigate aging & deterioration of the tape and recording quality over time?

Regardless, doesn't all of this debate really come down to sound quality or fidelity, regardless of how these recordings are engineered and reproduced? Even great vinyl recordings of old, from original master tapes, were subject to the quality of the PVC compounds used, quality of the pressing process, mold release compounds employed, environmental controls and quality control employed by various pressing plants, number of copies made, post-production storage & shipping methods employed, etc., etc., etc.

I just recently purchased a MoFi original master recording ultradisc one-step pressing of "Desperado" by Eagles. I haven't played it, yet, because I need to run it through my ultrasonic cleaning system. Nothing goes on my TT, now, without going through my ultrasonic cleaning system first.  I have an original pressing of "Desperado" that I purchased in 1972 and cleaned with my ultrasonic system last year. I cleaned it again this year, using a Degritter that I demoed.  Couldn't really tell any difference between my lash-up ultrasonic cleaning system and the Degritter, which is why I ultimately chose not to fork out 3 grand for the Degrittter (now, even more expensive). If Degritter lowers the price significantly, I may reconsider that position because of its sheer convenience and speed over my lash-up system. My original copy of "Desperado" and all my vinyl has always been lovingly cared for. "Desperado", one of my very favorite works, has always sounded great on my previous TT & sound system and on the new TT and system I have now. My original vinyl copy has been played many, many times. This is why I chose to spend so much money to buy this new pressing of it. The original pressing sounds noticeably better since ultrasonic cleaning. I'm anxious to see if this new MoFi pressing will live up to my expectations after I run it through my cleaning system. If any of you are interested in my two cents on this, I'll be happy to oblige.

As for the justifiability of the retail cost(s) involved in replacing your most treasured recordings with ones with quality fidelity that will truly knock your socks off, that all comes down to how much that really means to you, doesn't it? Isn't that why audiophiles spend so much money on their toys?

👉 READ IT FOR FREE. My Washington Post subscription allows me to share this gift article, at no cost to you: https://wapo.st/3BIg0jG

MoFi Records claimed its expensive reissues were purely analog reproductions. It had been deceiving its customer base for years.

"The fallout of the MoFi revelation has thrown the audiophile community into something of an existential crisis. The quality of digitized music has long been criticized because of how much data was stripped out of files so MP3s could fit on mobile devices. But these days, with the right equipment, digital recordings can be so good they can fool even the best ears. Many of MoFi’s now-exposed records were on Fremer and Esposito’s own lists of the best sounding analog albums.

The Emperor's clothes have been exposed! 

One more victory in the D vs. A war,

Meantime does this mean MoFi's venture

in the loudspeaker market is DOA?

Andrew where are you now???

There was a time when I considered getting into real to reel and buying music from the tape project. I inquired about the price, thought it was a little expensive but maybe I could swing it, and then I found out that the price was per minute!

I would like to get as close as possible to the original master.  I would be just fine with a DSD recording straight off the master, no more generations than that. I truly think that is the sweet spot. Mobile fidelity should be selling their high resolution DSD recordings straight off the masters. Why no mention of this?

Aside from fidelity as being the issue, that hard fact remains, that the customer was told that the product was one thing and not the other. Simple as that.