@dcm Those of us in the Phoenix area know of the In Groove as a very cool store do deal with. When I sold my Vinyl Collection to Mike 6 years ago. He actually gave me a few days to think about in case I got cold feet. In the end, I sold it and the transaction was very easy.
I don’t regret it and I did rip every to 96/24 with some computer denoising.
Yeah, that surprise ending plus their added marketing documentation of the UD1S process, they unquestionably misled people, it’s not a case that it’s a grey are open to interpretation that gives them some backout clause.
No, it’s lying, plain and simple.
He comes across very well, very genuine. It’s nice to know his local reputation backs that up.
I was about to say the same thing as you
I think the “surprise end” may be out of context - he simply said they have an “all-analog mastering chain”, which is true. That doesn’t say anything about how you mastered a particular title. Turns out they add a digital step to that chain a fair bit. Taken in the context of the current situation, it appear disingenuous at the least.
So it’s One Step…or two or three…
If a YouTuber was being similarly transparent, he would tell you that he gets points for engagement - and the number of people who watch until the end. So you were “baited” with the “surprise ending” thing.
I think you ignore the context in which he said that in this video. All in all it’s interesting for me how much folks find to defend for Mofi in a case that may not be crystal clear for many, but far away from “nothing to wonder about happened”.
Jazznut - if you were replying to me, I was not defending MoFi. And there are I think three videos being discussed concurrently in the thread at this point. I was referring to the kid whose video comments on the videos in the controversy, and put a clip from some years back of the MoFi engineers talking about having an all analog mastering chain.
I often find that there is a lot of confusion about what constitutes things like “mixing” and “mastering” and so on. I don’t think there is much doubt that MoFi has not been transparent.
I have to say that I’m not a big analog guy. Most of my investment in vinyl remasters have been from AP. I don’t mind at all if the remastering involved a digital master from which the analog chain started… all I care about is the sound—does it reproduce faithfully what was recorded?
But this whole thing has put a bad taste in my mouth about mofi. Am I likely to buy from them? Who knows. Maybe this will make them lower their prices!
Good news about the baiting (although it’s true it’s an old YouTube trick)…
Since I’m not really observant or read anything fully (or listen either as my otherwise-lovely wife keeps reminding me), I totally didn’t read the title of the YouTube video—so missed the bait!
I recently got onto this woodworker guy who has millions of followers(!) and he’ll often do half hour videos, and say at the end to comment with an answer to a question to receive X or Y in return. Then he started putting ANOTHER prompt in at 20 minutes in to reward those who were actually still watching at that point, so he could weed out the people who were skipping to the end to get whatever he was offering.
Hey Beef, ok I got you don’t defend but just understand it as you posted, that’s fine.
Paul just corrected on Paul’s posts that in his understanding their mastering chain is based on DSD but their cutting system is all analog. I interpreted it the other way around.
It’s only confusing because mastering and cutting if all analog is the same and they do everything to avoid mentioning the digital step.
What context I think you miss is, he talks about the system they use in the cutting room and that people often want to know if the mastering chain is all analog and then he said yes and that the cutting chain is from Paravincini. So they certainly knew what the question aimed for and answered it by implying all is analog and left out the DSD fact.
I really have no idea how folks can’t find anything wrong (except maybe hard core legally), that for years they (not only the marketing dept. but also the engineers) answer every question and publish any information just regarding the analog part of things, even write customer support answers denying a digital step (although they use it) and benefit commercially from people thinking they do all analog until they are forced to admit what they really do. Then they pretend to be proud of it, which rises the question why then then didn’t tell about it. The most crazy for me is, how folks can find this just normal.
Please understand - I don’t think it is normal or forgiveable or anything. It appears to have been knowingly misleading the customer. I am not defending MoFi.
I guess I tend to look at these things technically, and so for example, cutting is an analog process, and can in a way be talked about as part of a “mastering chain” but it is not “mastering”, which has to happen prior to cutting. And in most of these cases, it happened decades ago.
So you can cut a lacquer from analog or digital, and the Master may indeed have been analog from an all analog recording. But then as they apparently have been doing often, they are taking a DSD rip from that analog master, and using it to do the cutting.
I would not strictly agree with the statement “their mastering chain is based on DSD”. It depends on the project. They have the capability of doing all analog mastering and cutting. I assume they’ve done a lot of it that way over the years until the more recent use of DSD in the middle of that particular “chain”/process.
An incisive 24-minute take on the Mofi controversy from north of the border.
I personally have collected way more AP LPs than Mofi, only a couple of post 2015 Mofi releases. I like pressing, sound quality of AP, Tone poet, Music Matters LPs. Mofi’s 2015 release of Kind of blue (45 RPM box set and SACD) are pretty good, but not to point that will captivate me completely. I have a few pre 2015 MoFi releases which are actually more impressive. A little disappointed by this news. However, if anything worth collecting in the future, I will still consider buying Mofi releases.
Yes that’s the crazy thing. One can really talk about analog all the time, unless someone asks from what medium they master and cut.
They use analog masters (to copy them to their DSD), they have an analog mastering chain (but master a digital source), cutting is an analog process except of the tiny part if the source you cut from is digital.
It needs quite some energy to avoid the digital step in all discussions and descriptions but it’s possible as we saw 
I think it was foolish on their part if they thought they could get away with inserting an A to D and D to A step in what is assumed to be an all analog process. And assumed to be “One Step”.
Again, just to be technical - vinyl cutting needs an analog source and is an analog process. Even if that source is from the “A” output side of a DSD DAC. People tend to think of DACs as digital devices, but they’re half analog, and the better ones are better because the “A” stuff is better.
As long as you don’t want to tell me their DSD copy of the tape isn’t a digital step
Oh, but it is awesomely perfectly perfect as it gets though! It is Perfect Sound Forever all over again!
An interesting question is how and/or will MFSL present the 4xDSD in a non-vinyl format (their SACDs are being said to be of the 1xDSD variety). Some SACDs owners like me think they have the same as the UD1S, but we don’t. It is different and presumably better as 4xDSD UD1S from what I’m reading and have directly experienced for myself. Doesn’t change anything being said recently here, but more food for thought.
What there’s something north of the border? Our history and geography books never mentioned such a thing. 