I do not even like their latest offers. Their older SACDs sounded better it seems. May be the old releases are the real “from the master tape”? 
so, maybe a question of which Generation …
and whether from a digital or analog Master …
the Lie could also be a Truth?
One could comment in a variety of ways on the said fiasco; the way the news broke, the interview between Mike and Britton/LoVerde/etc., trust/truth/transparency, money, and much more.
I keep coming back to the idea that the products don’t sound any different today than before. This will be an interesting matter for the greater community sociologically.
I only have 57 MFSL titles in my collection of 1200 or so titles. Mostly SACDs, maybe 15 LPs, and 2 1-steps. Pleased with the products, but definitely expected a complete lack of digital from the 1step processes.
1 Like
You know I’m pretty much an “analog guy” - I prefer listening to vinyl, I only use tube amps for my guitars, lean towards “warmer” audio gear, etc. Having said that, some of the MoFi records in my collection are straight-up excellent and I guess I don’t really care how they achieve that. It just makes me realize that @Paul has been absolutely right about DSD all along.
If anything, this whole situation makes Michael Fremer look a little silly to me - he’s been at this for decades, yet it gets scooped by a record-store owner. When I watched Fremer’s remarks on the interview he basically insulted the record-store guy. Not a shining moment.
3 Likes
MoFI used the analog master tapes. But because labels, for the most part, no longer loan the masters, MoFI takes their DSD 256 gear to the label’s facility and create the DSD transfer.
Then they bring the DSD back to California to work on their version of the mastering. They said the labels only give them 4 hours with the master when they need 2 months.
MoFI asserts that the DSD transfer from the analog master tape is more accurate than copying the master to tape. That they’ve experimented with every possible way and that DSD 256 is the best.
Once they master the DSD file, it’s then put on vinyl.
All of that is totally cool.
But MoFI screwed up royally by keeping that DSD tidbit to themselves. In fairness, they do not claim their vinyl releases are analog only, and apparently no one has bothered to ask until now.
Many vinyl folks are very upset. Others don’t care.
8 Likes
Yeah. You know what they say: the lying and the cover up is often worse than the act itself.
3 Likes
That’s what I gathered as well. Good synopsis.
1Ss should be considerably cheaper on discogs. 
I’m all for that 
This is a good/critical look at the entirety of the fiasco imho:
4 Likes
This has definitely been on my mind as well. Good job @Paul!
2 Likes
I am trying to understand this. If you have an SACD from MoFI things are cool. But it’s the vinyl version where things are getting messed up, am I correct?
The vinyl of the same digital source still sounds better (for whatever reason), and the only problem is, they were lying about the fact that also the vinyl was cut from digital. Doesn’t make it worse in practice where they still are the best versions. Sometimes they are, sometimes not.
It is not that anything is messed up. The issue is MoFi is not properly disclosing if they are cutting records from analog or digital. The consumer is often misled to believe that it is analog and that is not always the case. It does not mean the MoFi records are bad, they just need to properly disclose what they are selling.
The real issue is why pay big bucks for MoFi vinyl if it is not cut from analog. Just save your money and buy the SACD. Either way it is from digital.
5 Likes
I’m curious if this just blows over or if the LP buying customer base (viral power) makes this a longer term headache for Mobile Fidelity and the MusicDirect empire?
In contrast, Acoustic Sounds sure looks good right now; I have great sounding SACDs from both companies.
Ok everyone… now that it has been CONFIRMED MOFI is ALL IN ON DSD and uses that to cut their records vinyl fans should FINALLY give SACD the respect it deserves! This also further confirms Paul’s creedo that DSD is THE best recording method and yields the BEST sound from an analog master tape. There is a REASON for this guys! Because DSD IS AN EXACT DUPLICATE in SOUND of the MASTER TAPE. John Newton from Soundmirror also said in all those RCA LIVING STEREO SACD booklets in the mid 2000’s that and i quote “The DSD Program is essentially identical to the analog tape. What you hear are faithful copies of each historic recording…” So dont give me that crap about “something is lost in digital”. Fremer is WRONG! MOFI’s true belief in DSD has only further confirmed that DSD and SACD is the SUPREME way to buy these releases, not vinyl. End of story! I would LOVE if Paul made a video on this whole mofi thing and told us his take!
4 Likes
I’m not sure that that’s the conclusion I’d reach. The conclusion I reach is that MoFi decided to use DSD because they were only given a few hours to remaster the originals and they took the quickest approach to yield the best results. (And they yielded great results.) And then lied about it.
Could the results have been even better if they could’ve spent weeks remastering with their analog process? Who knows.
I love DSD and have much investment in it. I’d love DSD to be the best format ever. But this debacle doesn’t make it so.
1 Like
You’re right, that’s not the conclusion if one realizes everything around this story and comparisons of releases. But he seems to have waited for this conclusion for so long that it was time to announce it 
well yes that appears to be the case re the timeline they have but they could have easily made a 30 IPS copy of the master and take it back to mofi and remaster off that but they chose the DSD equipment they have for the transfer because they feel DSD is the best way to go and gives you a duplicate copy of the master.
Let’s say Mofi had marketed how they used DSD to transfer master tapes, due to severe time constraints. I’m talking about well designed graphics describing the process and even coining a name and trademark.
Would purist analog chain customers still have bought the LPs or would it have been a deterrent?
He knows nothing about the digital. He doesn’t know the difference between PCM and DSD. Watch 45 RPM Audiophile’s streaming. He keeps saying DXD while MoFi engineers clearly said they use DSD256. Maybe Mike F didn’t really watch that interview video.