Do Mobile Fidelity Vinyl Re-issues Have a Digital Step in the Process?

[bazelio]

I have not seen evidence of “flat out lies.” I think it is more complicated than that.

I think it looks presently more like a matter of the principals at Mobile Fidelity making statements which may be technically true but which they know are highly likely to be misinterpreted by the audiophile community.

"MFSL engineers begin with the original master tapes and meticulously cut a set of lacquers."

While this statement is technically not a flat out lie, it strongly implies the lacquers are cut from the original tapes but we now seem to know they are not. Lie vs omission of critical information in the description of their process ... splitting hairs.

 

[dan31]

Maybe our mastering savvy members can comment on a thought I just had. Editing in DSD is difficult. I wonder if 4x DSD is then edited in DXD at 352.8 khz 24 bit PCM? Heaven forbid the DSD is converted to PCM. Ugh.

 

[dminches]

"MFSL engineers begin with the original master tapes and meticulously cut a set of lacquers."

While this statement is technically not a flat out lie, it strongly implies the lacquers are cut from the original tapes but we now seem to know they are not. Lie vs omission of critical information in the description of their process ... splitting hairs.

View attachment 95893

I am not excusing MoFi since they have not been forthcoming but just about every LP manufacturer does the same thing: they talk about what they started with and what they ended up with, without being transparent about the process.

There have been hundreds, if not thousands, of releases which tout "remastered from original tapes" but have a digital step in-between. It doesn't make it right, but if MoFi is "lying" then they all are.

 

[MikeHorns]

I am not excusing MoFi since they have not been forthcoming but just about every LP manufacturer does the same thing: they talk about what they started with and what they ended up with, without being transparent about the process.

There have been hundreds, if not thousands, of releases which tout "remastered from original tapes" but have a digital step in-between. It doesn't make it right, but if MoFi is "lying" then they all are.

MoFi is a major target mainly due to the "Original Master Recording" strip.

 

[dminches]

MoFi is a major target mainly due to the "Original Master Recording" strip.

They explained in the video that that strip means they used a verified master tape. I didn't realize that and I wonder if they advertise that. However, it doesn't speak to how the LP was made. Frankly, I expected even the LPs with the "Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs' strip to be all analog as well.

 

[microstrip]

Maybe our mastering savvy members can comment on a thought I just had. Editing in DSD is difficult. I wonder if 4x DSD is then edited in DXD at 352.8 khz 24 bit PCM? Heaven forbid the DSD is converted to PCM. Ugh.

I am not a mastering engineer or DSD expert, but I can foresee that a DSD process will be more adequate to vinyl cutting than PCM - the cutter can act as an electromechanical filter. Although DSD has intrinsic problems, some of them disappear if it is used just once as a link between analog processes .

It would be interesting to know which method of digitization is used in the cutter lookahead system of most current pressing facilities. Very few pressing facilities are equipped with tape machines having real lookahead loops.

 

[Jeffy]

I said we assumed they were all analog and everyone knows that they never wrote spars codes so what’s your point?

 

[bazelio]

I am not excusing MoFi since they have not been forthcoming but just about every LP manufacturer does the same thing: they talk about what they started with and what they ended up with, without being transparent about the process.

I don't know. In one concise sentence like that one, it's just too easy to make the wrong connection. I've seen a lot of other labels reference original master tapes, but don't recall such a strong implication as this.

 

[audioblazer]

Anyone want to sell their Mofi Santana for 125.00 I’ll buy it

Me 2. I offer usd150

 

[Klonk]

I am not an audiophile, so perhaps my question is pointless, but can one not tell the difference between anAAA and DDD pressing, when listening on a great play back chain, like so many have on this forum. I would assume, that the digital influence should be easily heard Moreover, is it possible to tell the difference on a CD, whether it is AAD or for instance DDD?

 

[Jeffy]

Me 2. I offer usd150

I’m talking about one step abraxas

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I am not an audiophile, so perhaps my question is pointless, but can one not tell the difference between anAAA and DDD pressing, when listening on a great play back chain, like so many have on this forum. I would assume, that the digital influence should be easily heard Moreover, is it possible to tell the difference on a CD, whether it is AAD or for instance DDD?

hi Klonk,

there was a time when the differences between digital and analog were easier to hear. but today digital has come far. really far.

AAA means analog source, mixing and mastering. DDD means the same for digital. so DDD would mean a digital media, not an Lp. you could have a DDA; with digital source, digital mixing, and analog mastering.

with CD or 16/44 files, these days it's not always obvious about the native source. mostly you can tell, but the better 16/44 native recordings can be really fine. so the differences have blurred a little. there are general trends but it's too fine a line to always 'know'.

the conflict here on this thread with MoFi has to do not with performance so much, but the spirit of truthfulness between the label and the customers. and at this point, it's not easy to determine what is what by listening. yes; some listeners, some systems, especially with top level original pressings to directly compare, can mostly hear the differences in a digital step and completely analog, but in some cases you simply cannot tell. which is MoFi's rational they are hiding behind.

buyers simply do not want to stress about it. they pay the premium, and have faith they are getting what is represented and no trickery or wink wink.

 

[Klonk]

hi Klonk,

there was a time when the differences between digital and analog were easier to hear. but today digital has come far. really far.

AAA means analog source, mixing and mastering. DDD means the same for digital. so DDD would mean a digital media, not an Lp. you could have a DDA; with digital source, digital mixing, and analog mastering.

with CD or 16/44 files, these days it's not always obvious about the native source. mostly you can tell, but the better 16/44 native recordings can be really fine. so the differences have blurred a little. there are general trends but it's too fine a line to always 'know'.

the conflict here on this thread with MoFi has to do not with performance so much, but the spirit of truthfulness between the label and the customers. and at this point, it's not easy to determine what is what by listening. yes; some listeners, some systems, especially with top level original pressings to directly compare, can mostly hear the differences in a digital step and completely analog, but in some cases you simply cannot tell. which is MoFi's rational they are hiding behind.

buyers simply do not want to stress about it. they pay the premium, and have faith they are getting what is represented and no trickery or wink wink.

Hi Mike, thank you for your comprehensive reply. Yes, I understand, that this thread is about MOFi misleading its customers. And this is, in my opinion a no go. I was just interested en passant, if you people with excellent gear, were able to hear the difference between different sourced (digital or analog), which you answered in your first paragraph. And I very much appreciate your reply, since you have one of the best setups digital or analog on this planet, according to all the reports on this forum.

 

[XV-1]

Mofi even admitted their 2008 release of Santana – Abraxas was from a DSD file.

no wonder almost anything that Burnie Grundman, Chris Bellman or Kevin Gray sound stunning, even when they don't get access to the master tape - they certainly would not convert it to DSD to make it easier to work with.

 

[Solypsa]

would be interesting to know which method of digitization is used in the cutter lookahead system of most current pressing facilities. Very few pressing facilities are equipped with tape machines having real lookahead loops.

In the absence of a tape machine with preview head the mastering engineer might choose to transfer fixed pitch. So digital preview is not an absolute must in these cases.

These days I have to believe that master tapes have had a digital backup made from them, and that certainly could be adequate for cutting lathe preview needs regardless of digital format. Only trick is timing the daw and the tape machine...

 

[Bergm@nn]

Burnie Grundman, Chris Bellman or Kevin Gray sound stunning, even when they don't get access to the master tape - they certainly would not convert it to DSD to make it easier to work with.

How do we know that?

 

[Drikus]

Saw a strange YouTube video last night of a talk between the 45 RPM Audiophile guy and Fremer on this subject. On the basis of Fremer’s comments it looked to me like he didn’t watched the interview video of Mike from The ‘In’ Groove and the Mo-Fi guy’s.

Watch this summary and you know what I mean;

 

[rDin]

Can you share with us the details of this?

Exactly what did you ask them? Exactly what did they reply?

Ron, sorry for delay in reply, and my answer is now redundant anyway, but I asked about Clapton:

"Could you confirm whether the master tape on this release was analogue or digital?"

They replied:

"Hi Mark, thanks for your email. This release is mastered from tapes made from the original live recording, which was digital. "

 

[Audiophile Bill]

Saw a strange YouTube video last night of a talk between the 45 RPM Audiophile guy and Fremer on this subject. On the basis of Fremer’s comments it looked to me like he didn’t watched the interview video of Mike from The ‘In’ Groove and the Mo-Fi guy’s.

Watch this summary and you know what I mean;

Thank you for this. This is pretty clear then - they are using DSD copies of the master for most of their stuff.

This being the case, their marketing is wholly unacceptable and deliberately misleading imho. The accidentally on purpose leaving out of this step in the transfer process schematic earlier in the thread is evidence of this obfuscation imho.

I also find it interesting that I never liked the sound of mofi LPs lol.

 

[XV-1]

How do we know that?

Do some research and you will find out.