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

[Al M.]

There’s a number of types of upset going on here which are often mixed up together -

1. Dishonesty - ‘I was misled into paying a premium for a product that isn’t AAA’

2. Financial miff - ‘I bought these based on demand exceeding limited supply to flip now or invest and sell later, this debacle has damaged my return’

3. Audiophoolery - ‘I feel embarrassed that my golden ears were fooled by Mofi and before this revelation I was content that these were AAA’

Personally I have the most sympathy with 1. as it’s universally a pretty shit thing to feel cheated and lied to in any kind of transaction.

I have pretty much zero sympathy for 2. as I think records are there to be played and enjoyed. If you turn audiophile records into a trading commodity for profit then I’m afraid you have to accept like any other commodity the price can go up or down.

Like crypto. Zero sympathy.

Its 3 where I think the most angst is for certain audiophiles who believe they have golden ears and purport ‘digital is always a bad thing’ and now have been found out that their claims to be able to spot D anywhere in the chain aren’t credible - just look at the somersaults Fremer is doing right now to try to distract from his former claims.

Oh yes, golden ears. Who doesn't like to pride themselves of golden ears? Do you have some Fremer or other links for entertainment?

The purists who without any evidence but rely on belief that AAA universally produces the best audible results are also being forced to question their assumptions or double down on their faith.

Doubling down, not just in this case but in general, is the usual defense mechanism. Most people don't like to question their assumptions because they lack self-confidence. You have to get over the idea that admitting that you were wrong, either to yourself or to others, or both -- or that you might be wrong -- is somehow a weakness. It's not, it's a sign of an open mind, which is strength.

There is a strong mechanism unfortunately, on which even some people's livelihood depends, which is identity-protective reasoning (it is what makes politics so difficult as well).

Regardless, AAA *can* lead to superior results. I can easily admit this to myself even as a digital-only guy. But it isn't automatically always the case that it does.

 

[the sound of Tao]

I'm sure if I put a few grams of dog shit in your lasagne you wouldn't be able to tell. Doesn't mean you wouldn't like to know before you order or taste it though.

So what do you call this… buffalo mozzarella

 

[PeterA]

Like crypto. Zero sympathy.



Oh yes, golden ears. Who doesn't like to pride themselves of golden ears? Do you have some Fremer or other links for entertainment?



Doubling down, not just in this case but in general, is the usual defense mechanism. Most people don't like to question their assumptions because they lack self-confidence. You have to get over the idea that admitting that you were wrong, either to yourself or to others, or both -- or that you might be wrong -- is somehow a weakness. It's not, it's a sign of an open mind, which is strength.

There is a strong mechanism unfortunately, on which even some people's livelihood depends, which is identity-protective reasoning (it is what makes politics so difficult as well).

Regardless, AAA *can* lead to superior results. I can easily admit this to myself even as a digital-only guy. But it isn't automatically always the case that it does.

I agree with you Al that an open mind is essential to making progress in this hobby. Sometimes even a rejection of conventional thinking is necessary.

In general, as an only vinyl listener at home, I prefer older original pressings when available. When not available, I will enjoy whatever I can get for the music in the grooves.

I would like the labels to be more transparent about the process they use, but in the end I just try to buy what sounds best to me if I can get it. Luckily, there’s still an awful lot of great music on old records. What we don’t have enough of, is the time to listen to it all.

 

[microstrip]

This is a spurious assertion, a “straw man” type of argument. You make it sound as if many people have attempted this comparison under “real” conditions and have failed to identify correctly which record has the digital step. But no one has made this comparison.

We’ve all been believing these records are AAA and that there is no digital step. Why would anybody think to listen for a digital step no one believed was there?

As mtemur writes above: “The proper way to determine if people can identify a digital step, test should be like this: - A record cut directly from master tape should be played side by side with same record cut from a dsd transfer of master tape (using same equipment)”

Francisco, your post makes it sound like numerous people have heard this comparison and failed to identify which playback has the digital step. But the implied comparison does not exist (and cannot exist unless mtemur’s conditions are achieved).

Well, I expect this forgiving argumentation - for some people being deceived during more than fourteen years is really an issue.

The point is that people who spend long years criticizing digital, imagining diseases caused by digital, associating it with the decadence of stereo reproduction failed to identify it during all these years. Even those who seem to dislike these recordings associated it with mastering and pressing decisions, as people also do with many analog reissues. This just means that under real blind conditions people failed to identify explicitly the presence of the bits. And I mean all audiophiles along all these years.

What you are now suggesting - I assume you are supporting the quoted text, I am answering to you - is arguing that only a new test created can prove the transparency of digital and imagining it. Sorry it is not what I wrote or argue. I am not making science or claiming the transparency of digital. I just say that the golden years of analog supremacy failed to identify the digital link in their usual top conditions - vinyl being played in their systems. What is proved is that under positive bias - people assumed that there was no digital step - people failed to detect it. I often say and assume that biases are an essential part of the high-end and of this hobby, it is a natural fact for me.

Your argumentation is similar to hard core objectivists who say that unless we prove in their accepted conditions that cables sound different all cables sound the same. I hope WBF does not want to enter that way.

You are saying that unless it is proved under objectively that digital is transparent the digitalphobes can forget about all this sad affair. Ok. Should I tell you that this type of listening tests have been informally carried , using microphone feeds, and the results are well known?

 

[microstrip]

I'm sure if I put a few grams of dog shit in your lasagne you wouldn't be able to tell. Doesn't mean you wouldn't like to know before you order or taste it though.

Ok, WBF members should now have learned the lesson - never eat lasagne you have prepared or you have been close by, you seem to have strange implulsive temptations.

 

[Tango]

Does it sound good to your ears? Does it sound better and you can trust your ears better if it is written complete analog. Does what used to sound great to your ears no longer sound great after realizing the scam? Oh I am sure many so called pure analog guys love those records before. How long have you been enjoying the record until today? What is wrong with the sound to your ears not to your head now? Imo those who enjoy the label are only cheated by the price they charged.

 

[microstrip]

(...) Regardless, AAA *can* lead to superior results. I can easily admit this to myself even as a digital-only guy. But it isn't automatically always the case that it does.

Surely. As I am preparing to move in a few months, the Studer A80's are now out of reach, but the TapeProject copies of master tapes are fabulous recordings. I use some of them as a my reference for the best of analog.

After this sad MoFi affair, people could ask if I am going to make digital copies of the tapes and sell them, as well as the machines - they are now reaching high prices. Surely not. I love the open reel machines, keeping them in top condition and from time to time listen to a few tapes. Once you listen to the characteristic solid sound of the A80 capstan going in position you can't forget it. This hobby is a lot more than music love and rational thinking.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Well, I expect this forgiving argumentation - for some people being deceived during more than fourteen years is really an issue.

The point is that people who spend long years criticizing digital, imagining diseases caused by digital, associating it with the decadence of stereo reproduction failed to identify it during all these years. Even those who seem to dislike these recordings associated it with mastering and pressing decisions, as people also do with many analog reissues. This just means that under real blind conditions people failed to identify explicitly the presence of the bits. And I mean all audiophiles along all these years.

What you are now suggesting - I assume you are supporting the quoted text, I am answering to you - is arguing that only a new test created can prove the transparency of digital and imagining it. Sorry it is not what I wrote or argue. I am not making science or claiming the transparency of digital. I just say that the golden years of analog supremacy failed to identify the digital link in their usual top conditions - vinyl being played in their systems. What is proved is that under positive bias - people assumed that there was no digital step - people failed to detect it. I often say and assume that biases are an essential part of the high-end and of this hobby, it is a natural fact for me.

Your argumentation is similar to hard core objectivists who say that unless we prove in their accepted conditions that cables sound different all cables sound the same. I hope WBF does not want to enter that way.

You are saying that unless it is proved under objectively that digital is transparent the digitalphobes can forget about all this sad affair. Ok. Should I tell you that this type of listening tests have been informally carried , using microphone feeds, and the results are well known?

only the individual listener knows their MoFi pre digi-step reveal viewpoint; what degree of enthusiasm they might have had for specific pressing types and periods? how bought in to the One Step versions and why? had they been less than gung ho about either the sound or the music and exactly where those feelings came from?

i know personally i have been much more excited about the Tone Poet Blue Note Series than any recent MoFi pressings. i did not think the MoFi's sounded digital, just i was not that impressed. specifically when i compared my much anticipated MoFi One Step KOB to my 4 step Classic 45, the One Step sounded 'meh' in direct comparison. since many had given it high praise, i decided to just set it aside and come back to the compare later for another try. never got around to it. which was my MoFi perspective mostly.

 

[Audire]

If you owned a Mercedes and later discovered it had a Ford Pinto engine in it, would you purchase another Mercedes? Some people desire real Mercedes vinyl (AAA) not Pinto digital vinyl. It’s their choice.

Were any artists deceived by MoFi or were they (their people, etc) in on it and just not tell their fans?

 

[Ed.P]

Or an Oppo inside a Lexicon.

 

[Eichenbaum]

Sound is about what you hear, not what you read. To stop liking the sound of a vinyl after the MoFi confession doesn't make sense to me.

 

[rDin]

when i compared my much anticipated MoFi One Step KOB

There is no One-Step KOB... There is the MoFi 45RPM with it's bloated bass.

 

[microstrip]

only the individual listener knows their MoFi pre digi-step reveal viewpoint; what degree of enthusiasm they might have had for specific pressing types and periods? how bought in to the One Step versions and why? had they been less than gung ho about either the sound or the music and exactly where those feelings came from?

i know personally i have been much more excited about the Tone Poet Blue Note Series than any recent MoFi pressings. i did not think the MoFi's sounded digital, just i was not that impressed. specifically when i compared my much anticipated MoFi One Step KOB to my 4 step Classic 45, the One Step sounded 'meh' in direct comparison. since many had given it high praise, i decided to just set it aside and come back to the compare later for another try. never got around to it. which was my MoFi perspective mostly.

Although your post in not directly relevant to my post you have quoted and you were never a fundamentalist - just the opposite and fortunately as passionate as we can be in this hobby - I remember that you have written enthusiastically about of some other Mofi One step recordings.

As everyone knows KOB is the worst example of a recording to debate sound issues - this fabulous recording was carried in very particular conditions and no one knows how it should really sound. I appreciate when people write about the "natural" ambiance of this recording and the quality of the bass ...

 

[microstrip]

If you owned a Mercedes and later discovered it had a Ford Pinto engine in it, would you purchase another Mercedes? Some people desire real Mercedes vinyl (AAA) not Pinto digital vinyl. It’s their choice.

Were any artists deceived by MoFi or were they (their people, etc) in on it and just not tell their fans?

Well, Mecedes uses Renault motors in their more popular diesel models and they sell like cakes ...

 

[Audire]

Well, Mecedes uses Renault motors in their more popular diesel models and they sell like cakes ...

While true, a Renault definitely isn’t a Pinto engine and Mercedes have informed their customers of the fact they are using a Renault. This is far different than MoFi has done. Some people desire what they are paying for - genuine AAA, not something fake.

And MoFi while they’ve corrected some of their website (I commend this) it still isn‘t completely transparent as they also use DSD64, not just DSD256, in their mastering. Their new photo needs to be corrected (https://mofi.com/collections/ultradisc-one-step).

I’m still wondering if any artists were deceived by MoFi?

 

[RnRmf]

This article from 1998 about DSD being compared to the master tape at Mobile Fidelity's headquarters is a great time capsule of changing technology at the time.

https://positive-feedback.com/Issue1/MoFiDSD.htm

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Although your post in not directly relevant to my post you have quoted and you were never a fundamentalist - just the opposite and fortunately as passionate as we can be in this hobby - I remember that you have written enthusiastically about of some other Mofi One step recordings.

The only other one I own is the Abraxas which I do like. if I written anything on the others please point it out to me.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Well, I expect this forgiving argumentation - for some people being deceived during more than fourteen years is really an issue.

The point is that people who spend long years criticizing digital, imagining diseases caused by digital, associating it with the decadence of stereo reproduction failed to identify it during all these years.

I appreciate that you are not talking only about me. In fact, I think you are not aware that you are not talking about me at all. Reading this I realize I likely have fomented a misunderstanding about my personal experience with Mobile Fidelity records.

1) I have never in my life heard a Mobile Fidelity UD1S release on my own stereo system.

2) I may have heard randomly once or twice a UD1S in friends’ systems.

3) The only Mobile Fidelity release — of any variety — I have heard in my own system, or I have heard repeatedly on other peoples’ systems, is the early Mo-Fi Fleetwood Mac Fleetwood Mac release, which, even now, I think we believe is AAA.

So all of the psychological difficulties you are presuming and attributing to pro-analog audiophiles who have been listening happily to Mo-Fi digital releases without realizing it literally does not apply to me personally.

 

[microstrip]

While true, a Renault definitely isn’t a Pinto engine and Mercedes have informed their customers of the fact they are using a Renault. This is far different than MoFi has done. Some people desire what they are paying for - genuine AAA, not something fake.

Just joking. But I can assure you that Mercedes do not refer the motor origin in their marketing ...

And MoFi while they’ve corrected some of their website (I commend this) it still isn‘t completely transparent as they also use DSD64, not just DSD256, in their mastering. Their new photo needs to be corrected (https://mofi.com/collections/ultradisc-one-step).

I’m still wondering if any artists were deceived by MoFi?

Yes, still a lot to be known. But the more we know the more golden ears will suffer.
This type of threads survive on speculation - if all the facts were known it would die fast.

 

[microstrip]

The only other one I own is the Abraxas which I do like. if I written anything on the others please point it out to me.

I was addressing exactly the Abraxas and your 2016 post. You were so hot about it that you posted your enthusiasm in more than one forum. I also said nice things about the Gain 2 Ulta Analogue 33rpm issue, not the one step.

In fact you predicted it all as soon as in 2006 when you wrote :

"MOFI used their relationships with the various labels to secure the original masters. in theory at least; this would result in better records when combined with half-speed mastering and other process enhancements."

You were really spot on! Congratulations!