Agree - unfortunately the industry (including gear) is absurdly unregulated.
Do Mobile Fidelity Vinyl Re-issues Have a Digital Step in the Process?
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
Agree - unfortunately the industry (including gear) is absurdly unregulated.
How can you be so sure? I wrote my concerns about ERC on another thread.
Superiority Of Electric Recording Company Releases
For the last couple of years everything Electric Recording Company released is sold out before hitting the shelves. I highly suspect superiority of London based ERC releases compared to Analogue Productions, ORG, Music Matters etc in terms of sound quality. I compared two ERC titles with OJC...www.whatsbestforum.com
I'm not 100%, but their equipment list they've given before would not indicate there is a step that's digital, and Ked has seen it all in person. That doesn't mean they're sonicaly superior. They just appear to be honest about being analog. I guess the sourcing is a thing of question however. To me it seems like many of their titles would have had the original in europe.
It's well understood that AAA is an expensive process that makes it difficult to produce volume. Some are prepared to pay a decent premium for that. I doubt I've met an audiophile or collector who would be prepared to pay the same premium for a new ADA recording. MOFI don't know that? That stretches credibility for me. Wow...
I don't have any MOFI records, I do have digitally sourced vinyl and MOFI digital that I enjoy listening too. I'd feel ripped off had I paid a premium for what were purported to be AAA records only to find they were in fact ADA - they are two different things irrespective of how they sound.
I don't have any MOFI records, I do have digitally sourced vinyl and MOFI digital that I enjoy listening too. I'd feel ripped off had I paid a premium for what were purported to be AAA records only to find they were in fact ADA - they are two different things irrespective of how they sound.
What is the source of this 95% statistic?
Do you know which companies are in this sample set, and how this analysis was conducted?
The source is my buying experience. Very few companies at this point detail the pedigree of their releases, whether it is what tape was used or if there was a digital step. The only ones I buy from that I can name off the top of my head are Analogue Productions, Speakers Corner, some Blue Note (but not always), Sundazed, and a handful of others.
Rather than 'uneducated masses' this might be re-read as people who don't really care about provenance with the same urgency expressed in this thread, perhaps 'the man on the street' might be a kinder differentiator vs enflamed audiophiles.
I thought the three letter SPARS code (Society of Professional Audio Recording Services) should be adequate if it is applied as an informational tool by record makers rather than as a promotional device for digital, as it was originally conceived. Remember, in the early days of enthrallment with digital, the more Ds the better. Gotta have at least one D.
Times change, now the interest is with the modern record and the vinylistas.
There is an interesting SPARS history and editorial from Wojciech Pacula on PF:
SPARS Code - Positive Feedback
Technology - AAD, ADD, DDD: the SPARS Code in the 21st century
positive-feedback.com
"However, the fact is that it was a system for coding product information that we all need today. Nowadays, when nobody gets excited about the word "digital" anymore and it is much more interesting to know that a recording was analog, the system could be used to actually inform clients, i.e. us, about what they buy. It is because when we buy vinyl today, we get a total mystery. The medium is analog, but the master, mix and recording can be either analog or digital. It is also similar with files."
"Record labels are not interested in informing their clients about the products they make. Why? To a large extent, it is because clients do not care about it, either. And only audiophiles still remember that the SPARS code used to be such an information-carrying medium."
Modern Record and the Vinylistas - cool name for a band.
That's only partly true.
The general record buying public probably aren't very interested in SPARS codes or how their record was produced.
They're also not buying $100+ records. These records are entirely marketed at audiophiles who most certainly are interested in provenance. Record companies in this market know that full well and by and large are open about their process, particularly those looking to achieve the highest sticker prices.
Did you read the article?
I'm not here to put words in his mouth, but I think Mr. Pacula was making a case for using the SPARS code on LPs because record companies are less than open about their process, particularly about whether they work from an analog or digital source.
That may be the case but it's the summery paragraph you highlighted. Just pointing out that in the context of this thread I don't think it's a particularly relevant statement. The audiophile market does care about provenance and record companies do know that.
Regulation and mandatory transparency would kill the high-end. As usual, after a scandal there is lot of water moving, a few small things will change to please the mob and it will be soon forgotten.
Remember that the tools, methods and people handling standards and regulations are not favorable to the high-end audiophiles - they consider audiophiles some kind of ETs ....
If you are generally libertarian and anti-regulation then fine.
But if you are pro regulation in other areas like medicine (also you buy electronics that go through the EU certification criteria), then audio should at least have similar standards that misrepresentation should not be allowed.
No, I am not.
Probably people should be instructed that this an additive hobby and besides the general trade and appliance related regulations has no rules!
The problem with stereo is that it is illusionary and extremely diverse. Impossible to rule IMHO. But I am open to read about exact suggestions on how to do it.
If there is a regulation that says MoFi has to state they use a digital step if they are using one, and not claim otherwise or be grey, it won't change the hobby. You could still buy MoFi, compare them if required to originals or reissues, or just listen to them.
Regulation won’t kill the high end but it will result in a very different high end to that which is represented in 2022. Like any markets, evolution and adaptation will occur as long as there is a demand and ability to supply.
I find it relatively easy to hear if vinyl is digitally infested.
10 out of 9 new releases (180g audiophile or not) are.
A notable exception are the acoustic sounds/analogue productions/chat kassem ones. They always sound great.
I’m surprised (well not really) that the so-called “audio press” hasnt picked up on it earlier.
The original thriller doesnt sound digital to these ears. But what followed clearly was.
Digital vinyl doesnt make any sense to me.
You can stream that sort of stuff for free.
10 out of 9 new releases (180g audiophile or not) are.
A notable exception are the acoustic sounds/analogue productions/chat kassem ones. They always sound great.
I’m surprised (well not really) that the so-called “audio press” hasnt picked up on it earlier.
The original thriller doesnt sound digital to these ears. But what followed clearly was.
Digital vinyl doesnt make any sense to me.
You can stream that sort of stuff for free.
Can you explain what kind of specific of high-end regulation you want to introduce in high-end gear?
Similar threads
- Sticky
