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

[Ian B]

You are far too trusting. How do you know they are quality SACDs? If MoFi deceived so many regarding AAA vinyl how do we know they are really doing what they claim to do on their SACDs?

I think the pendulum is swinging a little too far. There are a lot of knowns here: We know what MoFi's mastering/cutting chain is, we know why they misrepresented their records, and IMO most MoFi SACDs sound excellent.

If for instance they were doing something sneaky like converting DSD to PCM, the proof would be in the pudding and we could hear a loss of quality. Also, the benefit would be unclear, whereas the DSD step makes technical sense for mass One-Step pressings. I see no reason to believe their SACD process would be other than represented, and until they start sounding not-good I wouldn't be concerned.

 

[Audire]

What is the point of changing the subject with a condescending and poor minded comment? I was just addressing digital sourced recordings in my post. FIY I own a Studer A80 and copies of master tapes, as well as many excellent fully analog sourced LPs. I know pretty well how good top analog can sound.

Whose changing the subject. You are the one slamming pure analogue vinyl … as you stated, “… that a digital master is much closer to the original recording.”

I could care less what you own, as it depends on what your ears can hear. And apparently you can’t hear the beauty of either your Studer or pure analogue vinyl. Apparently, you prefer digital over vinyl.

But your taste of digital over vinyl still is no excuse for MoFi‘s lies!

 

[dminches]

No, they are not alone. But until someone has the complete certitude and exposes it - surely no one wants to spread rumors - the high-end will go on relying on the golden ears that will play the victimization role again.

Even Michael Fremer has expressed doubts about the origins of some top expensive LP recordings in AnalogPlanet more than once.

Just look at the photos of the tape machines owned by several cutting facilities accepting analog tape masters - they do not have the look ahead loop system, relying on a digital delay line and computer system to space the grooves.

I will go as far to say that any company selling an LP which is digitally sourced without saying that is being deceptive. After all, it is a record which used to be all analog.

What’s ironic is that there was a period when companies would say when an LP was digitally remastered as a selling point.

 

[Audire]

I think the pendulum is swinging a little too far. There are a lot of knowns here: We know what MoFi's mastering/cutting chain is, we know why they misrepresented their records, and IMO most MoFi SACDs sound excellent.

If for instance they were doing something sneaky like converting DSD to PCM, the proof would be in the pudding and we could hear a loss of quality. Also, the benefit would be unclear, whereas the DSD step makes technical sense for mass One-Step pressings. I see no reason to believe their SACD process would be other than represented, and until they start sounding not-good I wouldn't be concerned.

Well I don’t trust the golden ear reports. Apparently, only a few people heard that the MoFi vinyl wasn’t right. A lot of golden ear boys gave it a thumbs-up. So, I’ll need evidence that MoFi isn’t doing the same with SACDs.

 

[Nathanu]

For what it's worth, I am a practicing attorney and read the complaint filed (on August 2, 2022) against Music Direct d/b/a Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab and MoFi. The following is a summary: The two plaintiffs, Stephen Tuttle and Dustin Collman, are seeking to certify two classes. The first class (the "Washington Class") is on behalf of all purchasers in the State of Washington who directly purchased vinyl records which were not fully produced by and from analog sources but were promoted or advertised to the contrary, from Music Direct or its subsidiaries. The second class (the "National Class") consists of all such purchasers in the United States and its territories and possessions. If the class is certified, all purchasers within each class (starting in 2015 or 2016; it is not clear) will have an opportunity to participate in the net award after payment of legal fees and costs. The plaintiffs’ counsel is BADGLEY MULLINS TURNER in Seattle. The causes of action include violation of state consumer protection laws in Washington and Illinois. Damages under the Washington Consumer Protection Act will only benefit the Washington Class. The other causes of action are alleged on behalf of the National Class which will also include the Washington Class. These causes of action include a breach of the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act, Breach of Contract, and Unjust Enrichment. Other causes of action include unjust enrichment and breach of contract including breach of warranty. Essentially, the complaint asserts that the defendant unjustly earned more money than it would have been able to earn had it truthfully disclosed the nature of the product it was selling. By misrepresenting its products, it breached applicable consumer protection laws and breached its contracts (formed by its offers of sale and consumer acceptances) and express or implied warranties of fitness for a particular purpose, good faith, and fair dealing. Plaintiffs seek the certification of the classes, unspecified damages allowed under law including actual, incidental, consequential, exemplary, and/or statutory damages, attorney fees, costs, interest, and such other relief as the court may grant. Like most complaints, the plaintiffs' case will not be proved in its complaint. There is a long way to go. Presumably the next step for the defendant will be to file an answer and object to the certification of the classes. Without class certification, it is unlikely that this lawsuit will proceed as it will not make economic sense based on the minimal damages to these two defendants and the cost of litigation. If the class action is certified, it will most likely end in settlement and the largest individual financial winners will be the attorneys for the plaintiffs and defendant. There it is in a nutshell.

 

[microstrip]

If we want extreme transparency everyone selling vinyl sourced from digital should warn consumers that they are getting an inferior product and that a digital master is much closer to the original recording ...

Whose changing the subject. You are the one slamming pure analogue vinyl … as you stated, “… that a digital master is much closer to the original recording.”

Read and quote the whole sentence, not part of it. I told that a digital master is closer to the original recording if there is a digital step in the process.

I could care less what you own, as it depends on what your ears can hear. And apparently you can’t hear the beauty of either your Studer or pure analogue vinyl. Apparently, you prefer digital over vinyl.

You seem to live on an "apparently" world. Please read this forum posts before writing non senses and pseudo guesses. And learn how to behave in a forum that addresses mainly preferences.

But your taste of digital over vinyl still is no excuse for MoFi‘s lies!

Again, please understand that 99% of us have complained and condemned MoFi behavior times enough and are now moving in other subjects related to this case that we find more interesting.

 

[Audire]

For what it's worth, I am a practicing attorney and read the complaint filed (on August 2, 2022) against Music Direct d/b/a Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab and MoFi. The following is a summary: The two plaintiffs, Stephen Tuttle and Dustin Collman, are seeking to certify two classes. The first class (the "Washington Class") is on behalf of all purchasers in the State of Washington who directly purchased vinyl records which were not fully produced by and from analog sources but were promoted or advertised to the contrary, from Music Direct or its subsidiaries. The second class (the "National Class") consists of all such purchasers in the United States and its territories and possessions. If the class is certified, all purchasers within each class (starting in 2015 or 2016; it is not clear) will have an opportunity to participate in the net award after payment of legal fees and costs. The plaintiffs’ counsel is BADGLEY MULLINS TURNER in Seattle. The causes of action include violation of state consumer protection laws in Washington and Illinois. Damages under the Washington Consumer Protection Act will only benefit the Washington Class. The other causes of action are alleged on behalf of the National Class which will also include the Washington Class. These causes of action include a breach of the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act, Breach of Contract, and Unjust Enrichment. Other causes of action include unjust enrichment and breach of contract including breach of warranty. Essentially, the complaint asserts that the defendant unjustly earned more money than it would have been able to earn had it truthfully disclosed the nature of the product it was selling. By misrepresenting its products, it breached applicable consumer protection laws and breached its contracts (formed by its offers of sale and consumer acceptances) and express or implied warranties of fitness for a particular purpose, good faith, and fair dealing. Plaintiffs seek the certification of the classes, unspecified damages allowed under law including actual, incidental, consequential, exemplary, and/or statutory damages, attorney fees, costs, interest, and such other relief as the court may grant. Like most complaints, the plaintiffs' case will not be proved in its complaint. There is a long way to go. Presumably the next step for the defendant will be to file an answer and object to the certification of the classes. Without class certification, it is unlikely that this lawsuit will proceed as it will not make economic sense based on the minimal damages to these two defendants and the cost of litigation. If the class action is certified, it will most likely end in settlement and the largest individual financial winners will be the attorneys for the plaintiffs and defendant. There it is in a nutshell.

Thanks for posting this. It’s very informative.

 

[Audire]

Read and quote the whole sentence, not part of it. I told that a digital master is closer to the original recording if there is a digital step in the process.




You seem to live on an "apparently" world. Please read this forum posts before writing non senses and pseudo guesses. And learn how to behave in a forum that addresses mainly preferences.



Again, please understand that 99% of us have complained and condemned MoFi behavior times enough and are now moving in other subjects related to this case that we find more interesting.

Sorry if I misunderstood what you wrote. And I apologize if I did.

But you stated, “If we want extreme transparency everyone selling vinyl sourced from digital should warn consumers that they are getting an inferior product and that a digital master is much closer to the original recording ...”

While I do agree that Vinyl sourced from digital is inferior (the reason I didn’t quote it originally) IMO the digital master isn’t “much closer to the original recording.“ The closest thing to the original is the master tape. Always has been and always will be when it comes to vinyl.

 

[Ron Resnick]

For what it's worth, I am a practicing attorney and read the complaint filed (on August 2, 2022) against Music Direct d/b/a Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab and MoFi. The following is a summary: The two plaintiffs, Stephen Tuttle and Dustin Collman, are seeking to certify two classes. The first class (the "Washington Class") is on behalf of all purchasers in the State of Washington who directly purchased vinyl records which were not fully produced by and from analog sources but were promoted or advertised to the contrary, from Music Direct or its subsidiaries. The second class (the "National Class") consists of all such purchasers in the United States and its territories and possessions. If the class is certified, all purchasers within each class (starting in 2015 or 2016; it is not clear) will have an opportunity to participate in the net award after payment of legal fees and costs. The plaintiffs’ counsel is BADGLEY MULLINS TURNER in Seattle. The causes of action include violation of state consumer protection laws in Washington and Illinois. Damages under the Washington Consumer Protection Act will only benefit the Washington Class. The other causes of action are alleged on behalf of the National Class which will also include the Washington Class. These causes of action include a breach of the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act, Breach of Contract, and Unjust Enrichment. Other causes of action include unjust enrichment and breach of contract including breach of warranty. Essentially, the complaint asserts that the defendant unjustly earned more money than it would have been able to earn had it truthfully disclosed the nature of the product it was selling. By misrepresenting its products, it breached applicable consumer protection laws and breached its contracts (formed by its offers of sale and consumer acceptances) and express or implied warranties of fitness for a particular purpose, good faith, and fair dealing. Plaintiffs seek the certification of the classes, unspecified damages allowed under law including actual, incidental, consequential, exemplary, and/or statutory damages, attorney fees, costs, interest, and such other relief as the court may grant. Like most complaints, the plaintiffs' case will not be proved in its complaint. There is a long way to go. Presumably the next step for the defendant will be to file an answer and object to the certification of the classes. Without class certification, it is unlikely that this lawsuit will proceed as it will not make economic sense based on the minimal damages to these two defendants and the cost of litigation. If the class action is certified, it will most likely end in settlement and the largest individual financial winners will be the attorneys for the plaintiffs and defendant. There it is in a nutshell.

Coming from a practicing attorney it’s worth a lot! Thank you very much for this report, Nathanu!

What do you think is the likelihood that a national class will be certified?

What do you make of the fact that the plaintiffs do not seem to be seeking a right of rescission on behalf of the members of the class they are trying to certify?

 

[Ron Resnick]

It seems that the absolute sound sent written questions to Jim Davis, the owner of Music Direct, to which he responded in writing.

MoFi President Jim Davis Addresses the Digital LP-Mastering Controversy - The Absolute Sound — the absolute sound

MoFi President Jim Davis Addresses the Digital LP-Mastering Controversy - Jim Davis, president of Mofi, gives JV and RH insight into the company's mastering process in this exclusive interview.

apple.news

The questions strike me as “softball.” For example:

“The revelation that MoFi cuts from digital masters has suggested to many that the advantages of a purely analog chain are imaginary. How do you reply to that line of thinking?”​

I do not see any hard questions about past misleading statements. Is the absolute sound letting Michael Fremer carry the water on the tough stuff?

 

[Nathanu]

Ron,

Although I am a practicing attorney, I am not a litigator. I am a transactional business and real estate lawyer. Therefore, I am no expert, but it is possible that a right of rescission which is an equitable remedy is not necessary if money damages are sufficient. On the other hand, the prayer for relief is so broadly stated that it could subsume just about any damage claim which is yet to be established in discovery. Also, the consumer protection may include punitive damages and possibly other relief to discourage the defendants and similarly situated actors to repeat the alleged wrongdoings. I have no familiarity with the Washington and Illinois statutes. Those other statutory remedies could include rescission. It is difficult to read too much into a bare bones complaint. The more interesting read will be the briefs in support when filed. I will keep an eye on the docket and report back if and when there are developments.

 

[Audire]

It seems that the absolute sound sent written questions to Jim Davis to which he responded in writing.

MoFi President Jim Davis Addresses the Digital LP-Mastering Controversy - The Absolute Sound — the absolute sound

MoFi President Jim Davis Addresses the Digital LP-Mastering Controversy - Jim Davis, president of Mofi, gives JV and RH insight into the company's mastering process in this exclusive interview.

apple.news

The questions strike me as very “softball,” and none of the hard questions about past misleading practices and statements are asked. Is the absolute sound letting Michael Fremer carry the water on the tough stuff?

Soft ball is correct. AS is losing some serious credibility!

It seems as if some are doing their level best to defend MoFi by changing the topic to “it’s good vinyl” from “why didn't MoFi just tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about their vinyl from day 1?”

After all, if their digital one steps are so very very good that they even command a premium price over pure analogue vinyl, why didn’t they start on day 1 stating their digital one step vinyl is better than master tape vinyl? Clearly MoFi desired to hide the fact that their vinyl was digital. But why if it was so good?

 

[Folsom]

I hope that the lawsuit just results in everyone labeling their LP releases faithfully out of fear of needing to end up in court…

Also, I said it before… I think businesses have grounds for damages. Consumer level is just the justification of whether a business has something to stand on. And given the explosion of concerns, clearly there is a felt wrong.

Let me put it this way… I wouldn’t want to be a business that had part of my capitol tied up in MoFi. Public distrust and business mistrust… being stuck in the middle would SUCK.

 

[nirodha]

Whatever happened to listening with your ears? I mean who felt screwed before reading all this info?

 

[exupgh12]

simply to put it. MOFI misled consumers.
yes, the one step and other MOFI vinyl are great productions but it doesn't change the fact that MOFI misled their customers by believing the masters came from an analog source.

The fact that other manufacturers (IMPAX) can do one-step productions from a pure analog source correctly shows it can be done without misleading customers.

I hope consumers will know to punish them where it hurts for every business - in the pocket.

 

[Audiophile Bill]

Soft ball is correct. AS is losing some serious credibility!

It seems as if some are doing their level best to defend MoFi by changing the topic to “it’s good vinyl” from “why didn't MoFi just tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about their vinyl from day 1?”

After all, if their digital one steps are so very very good that they even command a premium price over pure analogue vinyl, why didn’t they start on day 1 stating their digital one step vinyl is better than master tape vinyl? Clearly MoFi desired to hide the fact that their vinyl was digital. But why if it was so good?

In all likelihood, AS receives money in advertising from Mofi / music direct.

 

[Audiophile Bill]

Whatever happened to listening with your ears? I mean who felt screwed before reading all this info?

Alas this argument is of no relevance. There are many collectors of vinyl (not me) who aren’t even bothered about the listening as they will remain sealed. In addition, because some folks can’t tell the difference it also moot. It is about honesty and trust in what you are getting no different to being sold an organic food product - most won’t often be able to tell the difference either but that doesn’t matter.

We can’t endorse a society where it is perfectly acceptable to deliberately mislead consumers.

 

[microstrip]

Sorry if I misunderstood what you wrote. And I apologize if I did.

But you stated, “If we want extreme transparency everyone selling vinyl sourced from digital should warn consumers that they are getting an inferior product and that a digital master is much closer to the original recording ...”

While I do agree that Vinyl sourced from digital is inferior (the reason I didn’t quote it originally) IMO the digital master isn’t “much closer to the original recording.“ The closest thing to the original is the master tape. Always has been and always will be when it comes to vinyl.

Things can easily become confusing if we are not careful. The concept of master tape is most of the time ambiguous and dependent on context. In general no one has access to the "closest thing to the original", just to copies of it. As far as II have read from professionals a HiRez high quality digital link is closer to this copy than the whole vinyl process, that needs some specific tailoring.

IMHO an indisputable benefit of original vinyl is that it was carried from fresh tapes - a pity that these tapes were not copied to DSD256 fifty years ago!

See this interesting article on AnalogPlanet https://www.analogplanet.com/content/want-lacquer-love-supreme-cut-original-master-tape - it clears shows how far things are from being simple in these affairs.

 

[nirodha]

Alas this argument is of no relevance. There are many collectors of vinyl (not me) who aren’t even bothered about the listening as they will remain sealed. In addition, because some folks can’t tell the difference it also moot. It is about honesty and trust in what you are getting no different to being sold an organic food product - most won’t often be able to tell the difference either but that doesn’t matter.

We can’t endorse a society where it is perfectly acceptable to deliberately mislead consumers.

Digital: love it. Have been enjoying its benefits for years without knowing it. Haha.

MoFi President Jim Davis Addresses the Digital LP-Mastering Controversy - The Absolute Sound

MoFi President Jim Davis Addresses the Digital LP-Mastering Controversy - Jim Davis, president of Mofi, gives JV and RH insight into the company's mastering process in this exclusive interview.

www.theabsolutesound.com

 

[Audiophile Bill]

Digital: love it. Have been enjoying its benefits for years without knowing it. Haha.

MoFi President Jim Davis Addresses the Digital LP-Mastering Controversy - The Absolute Sound

MoFi President Jim Davis Addresses the Digital LP-Mastering Controversy - Jim Davis, president of Mofi, gives JV and RH insight into the company's mastering process in this exclusive interview.

www.theabsolutesound.com

I don’t have anything against digital. Mofi should change the product to a usb stick in a fancy box. What is the point of digital vinyl? If the native source of the master came from digital, then sell it as digital. Putting that back into vinyl seems utterly pointless. But then doing that won’t make anywhere near the revenue they make off selling their digital vinyl at exorbitant prices. Ymmv etc.