Mike of The In Groove posted an update on YouTube today. Mo-Fi invited him to their facility in California on Tuesday for a sit down interview, they will answer all his questions and show him how it's done.
Does this make any sense for Mo-Fi? The business cluelessness and unprofessionalism of some audio companies in our industry astounds me.
What’s the point of answering privately the questions of one YouTube poster? A serious company would not delegate its crisis management response to an unrelated third-party.
Professional management, if it takes the question and controversy seriously, would issue an explanatory press release.
Thank you, but this is not dispositive as to the vinyl. It’s possible that a digital recorder was running side-by-side at the same time an analog record was running.
This is why I’m curious to know exactly what rDin asked, and exactly what rDin was told. Words matter.
Thank you, but this is not dispositive as to the vinyl. It’s possible that a digital recorder was running side-by-side at the same time an analog record was running.
This is why I’m curious to know exactly what rDin asked, and exactly what rDin was told. Words matter.
The question is answered: For Mobile Fidelity a digital transfer satisfies the representation of “mastered from the original master tapes.”
Indeed this is true: The resulting vinyl record which was made from a digital transfer was, indeed, “mastered from the original master tapes.” But this is not, I believe, what most audiophiles would expect, especially given the ubiquitousness of the AAA to DDD (recording/mixing/mastering) disclosure convention.
In my opinion it was a material misrepresentation for Mobile Fidelity not to disclose a digital conversion in the process between the analog master tape and the resulting vinyl.
“Mastered from original master tapes” or “original master recording” titles don’t explain enough and misleading. I only want to see “cut from original tape without any digital stage” that’s what should be written on jackets.
Mastering used to mean transferring audio to lacquer. For the last 40+ years it also means EQ’ing, compressing, shining the sound. I want to know how the lacquer is cut.
If there is a stripe at the top of the album “Original Master Recording” = all analog (AAA) UNLESS it is a one-step or a UHQR which remain open questions.
If the album says only “Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs Release” = could have a digital step.
We do not yet know explicitly what “one step” means in terms of a digital step.
We do not yet know explicitly what “UHQR” means in terms of a digital step.
Thank you for explaining. It’s a long known thing but Im not so sure about what they stand for. I can use original master recording, digitize it and nobody can sue me because of that. It’s still an original master recording with a digital step. On the other hand how can we be sure “original master recording“ means AAA? Is there a concrete declaration by mofi that anbody can raise a claim if it’s not AAA? Does mofi legally announced that “original master recording” means full analogue and no digital process involved? Or it’s just a word of mouth. I don’t know I’m just asking.
IMHO they should also write down “AAA”, “cut from tape” or “no digital process” somewhere on the jacket
This depends on your definition of “be sure.” I believe the Mobile Fidelity gentlemen who are answering the questions in the video are speaking the truth.
This is stated in one of the answers in the video.
Given the long one hour interview, the interviewer, unfortunately, neglected to ask some critical questions. (If I’d been the one asking the questions we would’ve gotten more answers.)
Why? What we have learned is that a stripe at the top of the album “Original Master Recording” = all analog (AAA) UNLESS it is a one-step or a UHQR which remain open questions.
We are also learning that different Mo-Fi labels mean different things which mobile Fidelity has never explicitly stated or made clear. We still don’t know, as of this writing, the true nature of the one-steps or of the UHQRs. Hopefully, Mobile Fidelity has treated each of the titles in these subclasses of releases the same way, and, hopefully, Mobile Fidelity will tell us what is that consistent convention for each of these subclasses of releases.
This depends on your definition of “be sure.” I believe the Mobile Fidelity gentlemen who are answering the questions in the video are speaking the truth.
This is stated in one of the answers in the video.
Now I'm watching the video and those gentlemen from mofi already admitted that Santana Abraxas was cut from a 4x DSD digital file. So it's not AAA, there is a digital mastering process but on the top of the jacket it says "original master recording". This one example indicates that “original master recording“ does not always means AAA. that's why I'm suspicious. Don't you?
