“The best” and “The one” are the most subjective terms ever. Too many variables in the equation. The DSD step has precious little to do with the sound of that stack of records. We just analyze everything to death anymore. When I was a kid in the 80s blasting a well loved copy of whatever I was lucky enough to have in my small collection on my cheap Kmart Emerson record player is the gold standard of feeling for me. There’s no audiophile pressing or $10,000 cartridge that’s going to give that back to me. Hopefully there are kids out there experiencing the same thing. They’d be thrilled to have that stack!
Part Two: Many reissues lose alot of musicality and tonal quality. For instance, the Rhino-Hifi series has been this for me and many others. Brother it is not the digital step in these. Kevin does these all AAA. Yet they are harsh and way way detailed, not very musical sounding. Ironically his “From The Original Mastertapes” japanese Blue Note series sound terrific. You would swear they are analogue. But they are not. They are digital transfers. So there you have digitally sourced mastering on vinyl, yet they are praised highly and go for big bucks now on the secondary market. So why do the Mofi lps (or any reissue) sound inferior? The reason a Mofi sounds bad is due to a few things or combinations of: Poorly recorded in the first place and the hyper detail reveals the warts more, poor source (the mastertape is worn) or the mastering is wonky. It is usually the latter. Has ZERO to do with the hi quality digital transfer that Mofi did with these. Digital does not taint the sound. That is a total myth. Digital to analogue converters and further technology has improved substantially. The entire process has. At least 5 mastering engineers that I have spoken to attest to this. Digital transfers are here and be thankful that they can make a hi-quality digital transfer that is pretty much indistinguishable from the mastertape. Why? Because it preserves that mastertape for the future when the digital process is even more improved. You mention the originals have more “Presence, realism, dynamics..” All tape freshness and mastering descriptions. Zero to do with digital transfers. The “nuance and detail” that we are hearing more in reissues has also to do with “improved” mastering chains. I call it killing the frog. You lose musicality when things are taken too far. We think we want to hear exactly what is on that mastertape. After hearing mastertapes, I would not say that we do. What we want is realism balanced with detail without killing the musicality. Point? This mindset of “digital is harsh etc” or “digital is the culprit of why this sounds sterile and cold” is absolute nonsense. Not necc. quoting you and no offense but yeah. Conclusion: Why a record sounds great or not has to do with how the record was first recorded, produced, the freshness of the tapes and finally mastering. Sometimes reissues get it right and the stars align with all the positives of tape freshness, production and good mastering decisions. It is a case by case basis. Most likely what we do not like about the Mofi’s many times is the mastering style. Another example: The Cars S/T Mofi does not sound like caca because of a digital step. Why? Because the SACD sounds great and the Mofi lp sounds muddy. Why the difference? Well, for one two different engineers. If digital caused issues then why is it the SACD hybrid Mofi of this title sounds great? The Layla album sounds inferior no matter what. That would be an example of poor production. Now put that with a mastering chain that is more highly resolving. Guess what you get? Hyper detailed warts. But again has zero to do with the digital transfer tainting the sound. Had you ever listened to Bitches Brew before? It is kind of a grating album anyway lol. Free jazz and all. Love the album but if that is your first rodeo with the album, yeah for many it can be a shock and grating. Took me a minute to warm up to the style and material. “Tapestry” Are you aware of how this album was recorded? Hardly has any midrange. Thats the way Carol wanted it. It has this flat kind of distant eeriness to it and that how she wanted it recorded. Its a dumb album for an audiophile choice period. Beautiful music but the more it is under a microscope the more the production, for better (artistic choice) or worse (artistic choice again), stands out. The Muddy Waters for those who have compared the Mofi to the AP has pretty much been that the latter is way better. So Im not sure why you concluded that the Mofi was close. They sound very different mastering wise. But to each their own. Everyone of your examples of being disappointed in are either due to the original production or the mastering choices or advancements in technology that allows for this hyperdetail and clinical sound. AAA will sound better?… Go and purchase one of the Rhino Hi-Fi series and place it against the best original. That hyperdetail and overseparation/clarity that leaves musicality and tone to the side is present. And most if not all are AAA. Nothing to do with digital. Me no likey the sound of most of those bright bastards. A couple are good though. Devo for instance. Back to Mofigate… Again, if it is a principle issue, I get that. No ones likes being lied to. But people are way off thinking digital is to blame for bad sound or great sound. It is who and how skilled they are at using the digital and the digital transfer process that is the issue. One more… The reason the Joplin Pearl sounds better on the old regular 45 than the One Step is not due to simply the pressing. It is a completely different mastering process. You say you dont buy these to flip yet state these Miles Davis etc lps are going back because the market tanked. Sorry that seems a bit contradictory. Nothing wrong with investing. But that is technically the same as flipping. You bought extras and even records you dont even like to make a profit. Thats flipping partner. No judgement but that is what it is. I flip records sometimes too. Though I don’t purposely purchase mutliple copies to do so. but if I did, no shame in capitalism in my book. But yeah, we are pretty much flippers. Lets be honest here, is it really the lie and moral highground the reason for returning these or the fact that you’re investment didn’t work out play somewhat into this? Yeah. Ok now, hang on a minute, you thought the Mofi sounded great of Kind Of Blue but then the AP annihilated the Mofi. Ok. But WHY did the latter sound better? Why does the Mofi sound all the sudden disgusting when you thought it sounded great before you heard anything else? And if you had kept the Mofi and never got the AP, would the Mofi eventually sound not great but disgusting? lol …dude. I can tell you why I didnt like the Mofi. Goosed up bass. Though they said that is what is on the tape. If it is, then do your job and master it better without the overwhelming bass. But I didn’t have to have the AP or any other copy to realize that the Mofi Kind Of Blue was not my cup of tea. Do you kind of see what I am presenting here in all of this? Audiophiles, and I am one, can be kind of full of caca at times. And sometimes have no idea what they are talking about “What it is (what is causing me not to enjoy these Mofi’s) is because its not pure analogue” is one of those times. There are plenty of great sounding 4XDSD transfers to vinyl and plently of crap sounding AAA to vinyl. And vice versa. Case by case. Friend, you are quite a bit younger than I am so you are going to be an audiophile for longer. That means guess what? 10-15 yrs from now most all reissues on vinyl will be digital transfers. (And surprise, most already are.) Its the intial recording/production, freshness of tapes, source and mastering that are key. Nothing to due with a very good 4XDSD transfer. Return away but realize what is causing you not to not to like these Mofi’s. It aint because it is 4XDSD transfered. Dig that shirt and killer system btw! 👍🏻 From one insufferable audiophile to another 🍻
I agree with you, they claimed to be all Analog at the time and people justified paying 3 times as much for the album just because we thought it was 100% all analog, I rathe buy MOV its digital and the best Digital source for 3 times less and Sound better than mofi in my opinion
If they sounded good to you and you were happy (like most Mofi’s people) until you discovered the digital link in the chain, it goes to show what a mind game this whole digital/analog argument is. If it sounds good, enjoy! People need to squash their mental machinations and just enjoy the pure listening experience. My Mofi’s sound as good as they ever did in spite of that ‘ole demon digital.
Did you watch the video? I talk about how generally they never sounded that good to me, I was disappointed with most of them (except the few I note), which is why I bought "so few". Yeah, "this stack" is 20 records deep, but when you compare that against all the records I have, even audiophile pressings, it's really not that many. This video was more about why it was deceitful and the right choice to offer a refund/return.
@@daveydonut When I said “you” I was referring to people in general who spoke well of Mofi’s records and then went bananas when they learned about the analog link in the chain. I realized that you in particular weren’t crazy about them to begin with. I always thought they were overrated.
It’s NOT ok for companies to lie to us. They deserve to be exposed and punished. People have a right to their biased opinions when it’s their consumer dollars being spent.
Can you show us a RUclips video posted prior to finding out about the digital step where you express dissatisfaction with MoFi? A stack of 20, priced in total in the 4 figure range is not indicative of disappointment
They never lied in any of their promotional material. There were a few private emails that misrepresented the records as all analog but unless you personally got one of those emails you weren’t lied to
I was commissioned to cut 7inch 45 rpm records from 79-91. The tapes i received just completely eat most of the consumer releases. I'm glad that I kept many of the test pressings. It gets better than most of what consumers and audiophiles can get their hands on. Digital "can" get extremely close but your observations are true and very well explained. Many CDs suffer from very poor talent in the transferring process. A CD of vinyl can be tragically good actually but it's not the same.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I know it is difficult to explain the difference between listening digital and analog. Both can reproduce the sound correctly but quality analog has a different feeling, space and presence that is difficult to express. Keep the videos coming :)
Great to hear your experience on this matter. I didn't get in on the return offer and they just sit on the shelf with a couple of exceptions. Keep at the videos! Thanks for the mention!
The new MoFi fucked up big time. You might as well buy DSD CDs since that’s were the vinyl is sourced from and you won’t have the inherent surface noise!
I come at this from a similar perspective to jazzydog below. I have a large collection of sixties/seventies rock and so called 'Prog' eg. all King Crimson, all Genesis and you'll be interested to hear Al Stewart! I saw all these acts multiple times and bought their albums as they were released - I'm the fussiest record collector, and returned faulty discs til I got a decent pressing. My collection has been looked after, and is mostly still in pristine condition. I've had an abiding interest in HiFi too...my systems along the way typical of the equipment of the period eg. Quad electrostatics, various valve (tube, in USA!) amplifiers, Linn Sondek, various arms and moving coil carts. Although an electronics engineer by trade, I eventually opened my own (classical, my main interest) record store (later CD). I have a vast Lp and CD collection now I've retired, and have now had the time to listen carefully to some of my duplicated copies and compare different pressings. I have, for example 5 versions of Al Stewart, 'Year of the Cat'! I was alerted to the possibility that 'audiophile' pressings are not necessarily worth the outly with the Simply Vinyl release pressed by EMI. I have a first generation copy bought the day of release and the Simply Vinyl is overbright to the point of 'glassy' and has a 'fat' bass that is impressive on first hearing, but I easily tire of it. If you can find a copy, buy an original first pressing of Al Stewart's 'Time Passages', also produced by Alan Parsons, this knocks spots off subsequent 'special' pressings (and CDs....the Qobuz mastering is very good though!). Track 1, Side 2, 'Almost Lucy' is one of my test tracks when I audition equipment....but I always take that first pressing. No time to talk about classical vinyl.....but needless to say my pristine first pressings are unfailingly preferable!
Our musical interests sound quite aligned! Prog Rock is most certainly my goto, with the likes of King Crimson, Pink Floyd, Can, and Gabriel era Genesis my favorites. Unfortunately, I'm just too young to have been able to acquire pristine original pressings of these favorite albums on release. It's a near impossibility getting clean original pressings these days, even when I've paid premium dollars to get them they're usually noisy as well (and I ultrasonic clean everything). I was able to get them around the year 2000 when no one was buying vinyl, but not in the last couple decades. So I have gravitated more towards the reissues, hence here we are... but what you say aligns with my experience as well. Just because it's an audiophile label that doesn't mean it's good. That said, I have yet to this day heard an Analogue Productions 45rpm LP that does not beat the original. In fact, I suspect Chad won't release it if it doesn't beat the original (to his ears). If you're a huge Genesis fan, you owe it to yourself to at least try one of those new Analogue Productions Atlantic 45 reissues that came out this year. They are truly revelatory. But yes, by default, audiophile label doesn't mean better than OG. Clean OGs are almost always a safe bet. I also split my listening pretty 50/50 between classic rock/prog rock/blues and classical. Well, actually, for me it's pre-classical. Baroque, Renaissance and early music (I've had season tickets to Portland Baroque Orchestra for 29 years). For the performers I like, it needs to be done on original instruments and there just isn't that much vinyl for what I'm listening to. Alia-Vox releases everything recorded in DSD on SACD, and their recording engineer is incredible, not to mention having some of the best musicians from around the globe. The recordings are wonderful, even if digital (I find DSD so much more organic sounding than PCM). So for my "classical" listening, it's almost all SACD, simply because that's how it's recorded and released. I'm not a fan of large scale orchestral works post Mozart, which is what people love so much from those LPs from the 60s.
@@daveydonut I'm so glad in your reply you mention attending live concerts...and acoustic ones at that - I've spent a lifetime going to concerts...both amplified and natural acoustic - my classical concert going being really the key to the appreciation of sound in the home. Going to my favourite concert halls (I now live in the country, but near one of the best chamber music venues in the UK) gives an insight to what something 'should' sound like. Otherwise, although something may sound 'impressive', my question is 'is it accurate? Your comments on only having the MoFi (I'm not a fan either!) leads one to a jaundiced conclusion - one I've often made myself! But hearing a Steinway Concert D in a sympathetic space, and then coming home to my music room and playing a well recorded instrument is a test few comparisons with just another record can match. Live music's the thing.....recorded music is a wonderful other thing!
I used to be a “analog only geek” until I played records that I loved thru my DJ wife’s high end digital mixer. Now I am a believer in analog to digital preamps.
@@olaniyi570 i did not say it sounded analog I said I thought it was good in it’s own way. When you do the Analog to Digital conversion at the preamp stage you really lessen the opportunity for unwanted noise to be added to the signal.
I think you’re nuts! They must have sounded good to you as you kept buying them Right??? Freaking out about digital over analog is crazy You kept buying them right???? Must have sounded good for you Right??? Nuts!!
See the other comment I just left... I covered this in the video. No, other than a couple, they never sounded good, that's why I bought so few of them. ~20 records is not a lot. Each time I was disappointed, which is why I gravitated towards other labels. Without doing multiple comparisons, it's hard to tell if I didn't like them due to their mastering, or perhaps the original source just wasn't as good as I thought it could be. Since I trusted the label, I assumed it was the latter. Once I actually did the comparison (again, I didn't have multiple copies of these records, because I hate being redundant like that... I just want to hear the music), with the lie revealed, there was one obviously glaring difference in mastering that could contribute to the sound quality. I say in the video, I'm not saying the digital IS FOR SURE the reason... but what is for sure is these records don't sound realistic. Again... I covered this in the video, you just heard what you wanted to hear based upon your pre-existing opinion on the matter.
@@daveydonut I have some One Step Mo Fi that sounds wonderful on my system! Still wondering why you kept buying them if you were constantly disappointed by them I think a lot of the audiophiles make too much if there’s a digital step Digital done right sounds great!
@@davepounds8924 I too have MoFi One-Steps that sound wonderful! The Santana Abraxas is amazing! And I'm not saying the MoFi records aren't GOOD. They are GOOD. They are very clean, nuanced, and detailed. This is why people love them. I just don't think they sound realistic, or as good as they could once you DO put them up against other all analog pressings. I wasn't doing that, which is why I kept buying them. They were good... just not great, and not worth the constant hassle of trying to find clean OGs, as I was lead to believe by the marketing that these were better. I fell for the marketing. Once I did compare them against original pressings, I realized the OGs were actually better. That's all... not that the MOFIs are terrible, just that they weren't worth the premium, and it indeed bothers me that they lied to us. There's a reason they lost the lawsuit. It was deception, and there's a reason they deceived. I agree that digital done right sounds good... I've just experienced that if you can get all analog done on good equipment, it's better. That's all. It's my ears telling me that, not the knowledge. And it's generalities here... case in point, Abraxas.
He attributed it to system tweaks gone wrong. He clearly said that his brain was telling him that on paper, the mofis should sound better, but they just. Sometimes, it takes time to figure out what's really going on.
Great video. Got to say you are a pretty good communicator for someone with less than 25 subscribers when I watched. I am familar with the Mofi story and it was interesting to hear your take on it. I can understand the feeling that you don´t want to AB stuff all day long, you just wanted to get the best version in terms of ´emotional connection ´. I am with you on that. My position is slightly different In that I have mostly first/early pressings of my favourite records mainly because I bought them when they came out in the 70s onwards. I have bought a couple of audiophile records to obtain the definitive version. These include MoFi One Step Eagles Desperado, Analogue Productions Genesis- Selling England... and Lamb lies down on Broadway, Rhino Hi- Fi Yes Relayer. My general opinion on them - they all sound clean with a low noise floor but slightly different rather than better. If better in parts, it´s only to a 5-10% degree. Also I realise I can ´t be doing with the upy /downy all the time of 45 rpm or even 33 rpm records spread over 2 discs. It´s not the exercise of moving to turn the album over which no doubt is good for me, it´s the break in immersion that kills it for me. Anyway to sum up, I find I want to play the original /early pressings more than put on the hifi copies I have obtained. The hifi copies are fine but i am more emotionally connected to the originals.
Considering pretty much all recordings made these days are digital, I assume when you purchase LPs, you only buy original pressings or re-releases of older recordings that are guaranteed to be sourced from analog? If you buy any current artists, do you only buy CDs or hi res files?
Yes, these days certainly if I'm buying LPs where the source was analog tape, I generally always make sure they're original pressings, or if they're reissues I confirm it's cut from tape. But I say GENERALLY. I'm not saying digitally sourced LPs are all terrible. I'm not saying that at all. But I will say, in my experience, every single pure analog LP I've compared against a digitally sourced LP has won. But when I don't want to do the whole buy 10 OG pressings just to find one that's actually clean, sometimes I'll buy a digital LP if the reviews are good. For example, I love the band Can. Original LPs are bloody expensive, but they have reissued them on digitally sourced LPs. I also have all the SACDs. I like the digital LPs better than the SACDs, and I love the music so much I listen to them... but I know they don't sound great; simply good enough because I don't want to pay hundreds for the originals. That band isn't popular enough to get the whole audiophile pressing, but if they did, I'd be all over it. And I don't really listen to any current artists... I do listen to a lot of modern recordings of Baroque music, though, and for that my only option is SACD, and I like those too... a low noise floor is more critical for baroque music than rock. But again, based upon my experience, I'd expect a pure analog LP of baroque music would also sound more realistic. I do have some baroque LPs from the late 1970s that are stunning.
Like most things in life everything is not always the same - some original pressings sound better than reissues, sometimes not, some modern recordings on vinyl sound awful, many sound great, some cd's sound better than their vinyl originals but mostly not, some audiophile pressings sound cleaner than the originals regarding surface noise but the trick is researching each album on its own merits and finding them at a reasonable price, you have to be open minded.
So glad to hear your experience with DS Making Movies was the same as mine as everyone in my hifi circle all think im crazy as they all love those MoFi DS pressings and I agree with you 100%
When the 2009 digital Beatles masters were put on 180g vinyl I barely made it to the bathroom throwing up. I emailed Capitol asking why they hated the Beatles.
Ugh I literally just bought the Santana album (Mobile Fidelity) $79 bucks, now I feel like a sucker. Should be arriving in the mail soon. Thanks for the info/video.
I actually think Sananta I and Abraxas sound pretty good on the MOFI digital LPs (as I state in the video). That said, I have not compared them to the originals. Since these Sanantas sounded so good, I did go ahead and buy the Caravanserai that was just released (with the 10% coupon I got from the lawsuit from what I kept, like the aforementioned Santana). Caravanserai was disappointing in all the typical MOFI digital ways... no presence, no sense of realism of the instruments, and really just quite a boring presentation. So... that one I would not recommend. The MOFI Santana III is somewhere in between... I suspect not as good as a clean original, but still offering pleasure. The presentation of the Caravanserai I really didn't enjoy and doubt I'll listen to it again.
I know it looks very cool, but are you able to move your turntable and amps away from the middle of the speakers, I found it sounds a lot better especially the imaging.
I have certainly desired to put everything on the side, because I have heard the same... I know it would likely be better, but this is still one of the best imaging systems most people that have listened to it have heard.. and I'm one of those folks. In order to move the equipment from between the speakers I'd have to get significantly longer speaker cables, which is a significant monetary investment I'm not currently desiring to make. But yes... I'm sure it would sound better.
How did you get Mofi to accept the return at this time? I thought the return time from the lawsuit expired already? Help me please, i want to return mine!!!
Well, I did post this video three months ago. The return window did indeed close on August 15th. If you bought any of the records from musicdirect.com or mofi.com, you should have received a notice in the mail back in late 2023 that you were a member of the class in the lawsuit. I'm surprised you did not! Sorry you won't be able to return yours...
The Dire Straits albums from Love Over Gold onwards were recorded and mixed digitally. The original CDs were DDD, so good luck in finding all analogue releases. 17:2817:29
Love Over Gold was their last analog recorded album, actually. So every single Dire Straits album I showed here (and returned) was indeed recorded in analog. They would not have been eligible via the lawsuit for return if they were digitally recorded. You can (now) even find that directly on MOFI's listing for their digital LP of this, where they write, "1/2" / 30 IPS analog master - Plangent Processed - to DXD to analog console to lathe." Love Over Gold is one where I compared the MOFI directly to a first pressing on Quiex II vinyl (which is indeed all analog), and the first pressing absolutely annihilates the MOFI in every regard... larger soundstage, finer detail, and far more realism of instrument placement and vocal presence in the room. Same with all the other Dire Straits analog recordings I've tried. Brothers In Arms was actually the first Dire Straits record recorded digitally... and in this case, the MOFI sounds better than the original, to me.
@@daveydonut Ah! I stand corrected! My original European CD has DDD on the back cover. My best sounding Dire Straits vinyl are Half-Speed Mastered Editions from the 80s. I think I have them from the debut to Love Over Gold.
Dave - Hallelujah! I find I am in the same vein of audiophile as yourself. I collect Albums (have for over 50 years) but only artists that I have a reasonable belief that I will like. Most importantly I am looking for the best pressings I can afford to get. (especially not that my Turntable/system can reveal such sound quality) I like those collector LP version comparison videos because I can then hunt down the best version (Lots of first pressings from the artist's country of origin seem to be commonly the best). I have several older MoFi's and I don't think any of them sound interesting or particularly satisfying. I don't get the appeal. I find Acoustic Sound versions to be MUCH more satisfying and captivating. They often are the best pressing I can get of a particular album. And PS. I completely concur with your preference for Scotch with your vinyl listening experience! I'd like to hear more of pressings you do like and why! Keep up the good work!- Matt in L.A.
Have you ever tried ultrasonic record cleaners to remove those static noises pops and clicks etc. that cause you to return some of your records to DISCOGS.
It is August 15th (the last day to return your DSD records), and I still haven’t received my return shipping label from Mobile Fidelity. Very frustrating.
I'm not sure if you watched the video, but I probably have thousands of records. Having ~20 MOFI records hardly qualifies as "loads". The point was, I wasn't comparing against the originals, because I didn't have them and I trusted MOFI based on their original work, but was always generally disappointed with the sound. But I'd try again with future titles, and was generally disappointed. I covered that. It wasn't until I bought some originals of these same titles (I hate having multiple versions of records, since what I want is to listen to music, not "collect") and did more comparisons that I realized just how disappointed I was, and how much better I could have done. But yeah, 20 digital MOFI records is hardly loads vs. what I have of Analog Productions, or records in general.
@juliosanchez95 @scottwheeler2679 I addressed this in a different reply, so I'll copy and paste the relevant part here: I don't have any of the original Dylan records, but I do have several of the Dylan MOFI's... notice they weren't in this stack; I kept them, because I find them quite enjoyable and don't have anything to compare them against. So I'm not sure if the originals are better, but I'm satisfied with what I have and it's not worth the effort to source originals at the cost and frustration when the stripped down nature of Dylan shows pretty well with MOFI's approach. Again... I have nothing to compare them against. My opinion and desire to hold them may be different if I heard analog versions. No comparison has been done, though.
💯percent agree with you on the MoFi comments! I do buy and enjoy Analog Productions pressings over anything else out there, however lately the majority of what I received from Acoustic Sounds is poorly pressed: warped and/or off centered, even the UHQRs. I had several replaced by contacting their support team but I’m getting really tired of it, I want to buy, pay the premium and enjoy, not go back and forth until I finally have a decently pressed copy. With UHQR, what’s the point of paying for the flat profile when the record(s) are warped. I shouldn’t have to use a screw on record clamp to flatten the record to listen to it. The inserts mention quality control as one of their steps in the process - really? Reputation is like trust; hard to earn, easy to lose.
You and I like the same music. Your amp/ pre is the heart of your system that creates engagement. Get a vintage receiver or separates like Marantz or Sansui with tone controls and a loudness button and thank me later. New gear sucks for the kind of music we like. Vintage gear was voiced for 60s and 70s rock and soul and new gear is made to measure flat (not necessarily to sound good and most lack ability to contour the sound to your liking. Do this and you'll be so engaged both digital and analog will sound amazing. The key is the old gear brings out the needed bass and midbass.and is sweeter sounding. Quality was better then and many new amps sound flat, boring, dry and analytical. Much old gear was supremely musical!
@davidwald2938 I definitely do understand your sentiment and totally agree it's not about how equipment measures. I take a hybrid approach. All of my front end electronics (phono stage, pre-amp, output stage of cd player) are tube based, using NOS tubes from the 1950s. They all have shunt regulated power supplies so are very clean but have an incredibly rich, organic sound. I do have a modern(ish) power amp that provides limitless power (1100watts) into speakers that go down to 7Hz, at -3db, so I'm certainly not lacking bass quantity or precision. The NOS tubes give me the lushness and realism and the SS amp gives me the drive I like. I've definitely explored the vintage route and I am very satisfied with the path I have chosen; I have a beautiful blend of musicality and nuance. I have never heard a stereo that places you with the musicians quite like this. This could likely be the content of a new video.
LOL I could have told you you were wasting your money way before you bought, literally ,into the "audiophile" hype. No sympathy for Any of you As P.T. Barnham said , " There's a sucker born every minute."
Not any Mobile Fidelity sound great. Even the true analog ones sound terrible. Boosted highs and boosted lows. Very unnatural sounding vinyl neatly packaged to deceive you. Analogue productions do superior work.
I absolutely agree that this is false advertising. You are perfectly entitled to return them. However, I doubt anyone could practically do an analogue source. You'd either end up with variances in pressing as the masters wore out (as of old). Or you'd end up with unreasonable costs. I doubt anyone can tell the diffrence aurally anyway.
The fact we now have the capability to 3D print vinyl records yet is not happening is such a shame. We could have an endless supply of AAA copies into the future.
@@scottwheeler2679 well a 3D printed cup is not digital it is analog it is physical. The 3d printer isn't going to print cd pits in the vinyl. It will print the analog Soundwave using a digital machine. A car with a computer file injection isn't suddenly no longer an analog mechanism after the digital clink in the chain. The wheels don't roll in 1s and 0s
@@puglife6291 Absolutely it's sourced from digital. All 3D printers are digital machines that print from digital 3D files. There is no such thing as an analog 3D printer.
@@scottwheeler2679 very few AP titles were digitally sourced and they were already transparent about it in the product descriptions. I think the only ones I own are Steely Dan Two Against Nature, Roger Waters Amused To Death and the stereo 45 of Beach Boys Surfer Girl.
@@christophercowles2553 show me any ad predating Mofigate where Analog Productions discloses those were digital sources. I have old ads of those LPs where there is zero mention of digital.
All these same comments... did you guys even watch the video? Not suddenly started to sound bad. I was never happy with most of them all along. I know I say "thousands of dollars in records," but I have thousands of records... buying ~20 of my favorite records on an audiophile label, when I'm an audiophile, is not very many. I have hundreds of Analog Productions records. It's not a coincidence that I gravitated more towards that label. Yes, I kept trying ~20 times because those early all analog ones were good, so I trusted them, but I was never happy with the way these sounded. I say that in the video. That's why I bought so few of them. The comparisons (once I did them) truly validated that point.
@@daveydonut fair enough, but why keep buying if the first two or three sucked? I have many 80s discs from digital than are expansive with tons of air, sounds more like lame mastering than a high res digital intermediary step.
@@daveydonut yeah, we watched the video. You were blown away by the one steps, bought a stack of them for 4 figures and now you are sending them back because you found out they were cut from digital and they just don't sound good enough to keep anymore. Did I miss something?
@scottwheeler2679 Clearly you have poor comprehension skills and your bias is showing. I was not blown away by "The One Steps", plural. I was blown away by Santana Abraxas.. the first One Step, so I bought the next several thereafter, without comparing them to originals. And I was always disappointed with them. I said that in the video (as well as the other ones I was always disappointed in; I talked most about always being disappointed in the Dire Straits from the beginning, not just after I knew they were digital). In the few cases I had an original (the only case was the Stevie Ray Vaughans), I liked the other version better, which is why I ONLY bought the ~20 I did vs. hundreds of Analoge Productions records. Once I actually did the comparison (yes, AFTER knowing there was a digital step), I found that they sounded inferior. I also clearly stated at the end of the video that I don't KNOW that it's the digital step, I just know that the MFSL records don't sound as good as the all analog ones I have, and that they don't sound realistic as the all analog ones I have. AND... they deceived us, says a court of law.
@@daveydonut ah, when all else fails ad hominem. But you bought the "next several" for over $100.00 a pop and was "always disappointed" and had no reference to compare them. But you kept buying them. That sounds like a repetitive act of stupidity. But it also sounds like revisionist history typical of audiophiles that had their all analog egos exposed. There's no problem with my comprehension. You are obviously butt hurt because you found out there is no magic to all analog vinyl and your audiophile ego got slammed. Instead of dealing with that reality you made it about a deception that never happened. By the way, if we are talking about reading comprehension let's examine yours. Please show us where any "court of law" tells us they deceived us. If your reading comprehension was competent you would know that nowhere in any of their promotional material did MoFi ever claim any of their LPs were mastered all analog. Go back and read the material again and try to comprehend it. Not any of their albums contain any claims that the album was an all analog mastering.
It’s completely unrealistic to expect that record companies are going to replay 40 to 60 year old analog master tapes. They are growing old, and some are likely in danger of shedding or other damage in continuing to pass them through playing steps. Thus the digital step or steps comes to the fore. Some people are screaming for Apple to issue the Beatles’ Mono vinyl box yet again, all AAA. Not Happening without digital now! Just dream on! Apple will not be playing those increasingly fragile master tapes anymore! Too bad, So sad!😢
It doesn't seem like you're familiar with what happened here? The labels weren't sending MoFi existing digital files. They were letting MoFi come to the label and digitize the tapes themselves. And regardless, there are still plenty of all analog reissues from other labels.
do u have ur sacd. playee. looks amazing setup maybe u need to enjoy the music and. the equipmebt about mofi. in austrlia. its double the price. have few from 80s. good video
I’ve been telling all my vinyl friends that 99% of all Mofi records sound inferior to other pressings. I think it’s the choice in the mastering that was part of the problem. 1st iteration of Mofi they insisted that Stan Ricker use half speed plus that ‘smiley face’ eq. Fast forward to current iteration of Mofi, that Krieg Winderlich is pretty much a shitty mastering engineer, making bad mastering choices. The Steely Dan catalog which was released by universal, was mastered by Bernie Grundman to dsd, then cut to vinyl sounds very very good indeed. So there! So it does not mean all records cut from dsd sounds bad. That means the mastering engineer has a very big part to play to make or break the sound quality! 😅
Part One: Wow, is this Mofigate thing still going on? I doubt any of this will change your mindset of “digital made my Mofis sound bad” but if you care to read… Hmm, the old MFSL Yes, Crime Of The Century and White Album annihilate the originals? If you say so :) Id ask which originals, their country of origin and runout groove info of these you were comparing. I get that you do not want to buy ten copies of a title. Perfectly understandable. I also understand the hyper detail if modern mastering to be an issue. It is for me also many times. I get it. More on this later. As far as Mofigate… If you feel deceived and lied to, I absolutely understand that moral decision. And you and others who consider them liars I hope you all stick to your guns and never ever purchase another Mofi product. However, and I don’t mean to nitpick your statements but what I don’t understand is this thinking: “I am returning these after finding out they do not sound as good as they could” How would one know that these could sound better? Two scenarios… Concerning strictly these One Steps: None of us can determine that unless we have heard that which hypothetically could sound better. We can’t know what something sounds like unless we have heard it and compared. We simply do not have One Steps AAA and 4XDSD of Abraxas for instance to. Obviously one cannot hear something and compare that has not been produced. Bill Evans Sunday At The VV One Step, we do not know what an AAA One Step compared to a 4XDSD because there has never been a 4XDSD transfer of that title to a One Step process made. (Analogue is the last step in the Mofi 4XDSD One Step process btw). So we cannot know if this “if only all these titles were done in AAA, then they would sound good” mantra that many speak is true. And from what I gather is is pretty much impossible for them to sound like the originals anyway. Scenario number two… But if you mean could sound better like the originals, I wouldn’t be so sure… I spoke with Bernie Grundman about why he could not make the Classic Records Led Zeppelin reissues sound more like the three dimensional, warmer/tubier fresher sounding originals because I didnt like that hyper detailed and rather overwhelming more sterile sound of the Classic Records versions. His answer was basically that it is impossible to replicate the machinery and engineers that were involved. This is another reason that reissues on lp many times do not cut the muster to the originals. “Advancements” in electronics which do include digital components btw and the impossibilty of mastering engineers ability to replicate that exact sound. Again, nothing to do with digital.
I don't have any of the original Dylan records, but I do have several of the Dylan MOFI's... notice they weren't in this stack; I kept them, because I find them quite enjoyable and don't have anything to compare them against. So I'm not sure if the originals are better, but I'm satisfied with what I have and it's not worth the effort to source originals at the cost and frustration when the stripped down nature of Dylan shows pretty well with MOFI's approach. I think the Dylans and Santana were the only ones I kept. In all the other cases I've tried, I prefer all analog versions. MOFI still lied about the source of the Dylan, though, hence the judgement, so it's good they still offered refunds for those who wanted it.
“The best” and “The one” are the most subjective terms ever. Too many variables in the equation. The DSD step has precious little to do with the sound of that stack of records. We just analyze everything to death anymore. When I was a kid in the 80s blasting a well loved copy of whatever I was lucky enough to have in my small collection on my cheap Kmart Emerson record player is the gold standard of feeling for me. There’s no audiophile pressing or $10,000 cartridge that’s going to give that back to me. Hopefully there are kids out there experiencing the same thing. They’d be thrilled to have that stack!
Part Two:
Many reissues lose alot of musicality and tonal quality. For instance, the Rhino-Hifi series has been this for me and many others. Brother it is not the digital step in these. Kevin does these all AAA. Yet they are harsh and way way detailed, not very musical sounding. Ironically his “From The Original Mastertapes” japanese Blue Note series sound terrific. You would swear they are analogue. But they are not. They are digital transfers. So there you have digitally sourced mastering on vinyl, yet they are praised highly and go for big bucks now on the secondary market.
So why do the Mofi lps (or any reissue) sound inferior?
The reason a Mofi sounds bad is due to a few things or combinations of:
Poorly recorded in the first place and the hyper detail reveals the warts more, poor source (the mastertape is worn) or the mastering is wonky. It is usually the latter. Has ZERO to do with the hi quality digital transfer that Mofi did with these. Digital does not taint the sound. That is a total myth. Digital to analogue converters and further technology has improved substantially. The entire process has. At least 5 mastering engineers that I have spoken to attest to this. Digital transfers are here and be thankful that they can make a hi-quality digital transfer that is pretty much indistinguishable from the mastertape. Why? Because it preserves that mastertape for the future when the digital process is even more improved.
You mention the originals have more “Presence, realism, dynamics..” All tape freshness and mastering descriptions. Zero to do with digital transfers. The “nuance and detail” that we are hearing more in reissues has also to do with “improved” mastering chains. I call it killing the frog. You lose musicality when things are taken too far. We think we want to hear exactly what is on that mastertape. After hearing mastertapes, I would not say that we do. What we want is realism balanced with detail without killing the musicality.
Point? This mindset of “digital is harsh etc” or “digital is the culprit of why this sounds sterile and cold” is absolute nonsense. Not necc. quoting you and no offense but yeah.
Conclusion:
Why a record sounds great or not has to do with how the record was first recorded, produced, the freshness of the tapes and finally mastering.
Sometimes reissues get it right and the stars align with all the positives of tape freshness, production and good mastering decisions. It is a case by case basis.
Most likely what we do not like about the Mofi’s many times is the mastering style.
Another example:
The Cars S/T Mofi does not sound like caca because of a digital step. Why? Because the SACD sounds great and the Mofi lp sounds muddy. Why the difference? Well, for one two different engineers. If digital caused issues then why is it the SACD hybrid Mofi of this title sounds great?
The Layla album sounds inferior no matter what. That would be an example of poor production. Now put that with a mastering chain that is more highly resolving. Guess what you get? Hyper detailed warts. But again has zero to do with the digital transfer tainting the sound.
Had you ever listened to Bitches Brew before? It is kind of a grating album anyway lol. Free jazz and all. Love the album but if that is your first rodeo with the album, yeah for many it can be a shock and grating. Took me a minute to warm up to the style and material.
“Tapestry” Are you aware of how this album was recorded? Hardly has any midrange. Thats the way Carol wanted it. It has this flat kind of distant eeriness to it and that how she wanted it recorded. Its a dumb album for an audiophile choice period. Beautiful music but the more it is under a microscope the more the production, for better (artistic choice) or worse (artistic choice again), stands out.
The Muddy Waters for those who have compared the Mofi to the AP has pretty much been that the latter is way better. So Im not sure why you concluded that the Mofi was close. They sound very different mastering wise. But to each their own.
Everyone of your examples of being disappointed in are either due to the original production or the mastering choices or advancements in technology that allows for this hyperdetail and clinical sound.
AAA will sound better?…
Go and purchase one of the Rhino Hi-Fi series and place it against the best original. That hyperdetail and overseparation/clarity that leaves musicality and tone to the side is present. And most if not all are AAA. Nothing to do with digital. Me no likey the sound of most of those bright bastards. A couple are good though. Devo for instance.
Back to Mofigate…
Again, if it is a principle issue, I get that. No ones likes being lied to. But people are way off thinking digital is to blame for bad sound or great sound. It is who and how skilled they are at using the digital and the digital transfer process that is the issue.
One more…
The reason the Joplin Pearl sounds better on the old regular 45 than the One Step is not due to simply the pressing. It is a completely different mastering process.
You say you dont buy these to flip yet state these Miles Davis etc lps are going back because the market tanked.
Sorry that seems a bit contradictory. Nothing wrong with investing. But that is technically the same as flipping. You bought extras and even records you dont even like to make a profit. Thats flipping partner. No judgement but that is what it is. I flip records sometimes too. Though I don’t purposely purchase mutliple copies to do so. but if I did, no shame in capitalism in my book. But yeah, we are pretty much flippers. Lets be honest here, is it really the lie and moral highground the reason for returning these or the fact that you’re investment didn’t work out play somewhat into this? Yeah.
Ok now, hang on a minute, you thought the Mofi sounded great of Kind Of Blue but then the AP annihilated the Mofi. Ok. But WHY did the latter sound better? Why does the Mofi sound all the sudden disgusting when you thought it sounded great before you heard anything else? And if you had kept the Mofi and never got the AP, would the Mofi eventually sound not great but disgusting? lol …dude.
I can tell you why I didnt like the Mofi. Goosed up bass. Though they said that is what is on the tape. If it is, then do your job and master it better without the overwhelming bass. But I didn’t have to have the AP or any other copy to realize that the Mofi Kind Of Blue was not my cup of tea.
Do you kind of see what I am presenting here in all of this?
Audiophiles, and I am one, can be kind of full of caca at times. And sometimes have no idea what they are talking about “What it is (what is causing me not to enjoy these Mofi’s) is because its not pure analogue” is one of those times. There are plenty of great sounding 4XDSD transfers to vinyl and plently of crap sounding AAA to vinyl. And vice versa.
Case by case.
Friend, you are quite a bit younger than I am so you are going to be an audiophile for longer. That means guess what? 10-15 yrs from now most all reissues on vinyl will be digital transfers. (And surprise, most already are.)
Its the intial recording/production, freshness of tapes, source and mastering that are key. Nothing to due with a very good 4XDSD transfer.
Return away but realize what is causing you not to not to like these Mofi’s. It aint because it is 4XDSD transfered.
Dig that shirt and killer system btw! 👍🏻
From one insufferable audiophile to another 🍻
You should write a book
@@crazyprayingmantis5596 I think this is his book EDIT: I can't believe I read all of his tripe,my bad.
@@johnbravo7542
Yeah you have issues if you read all that. 🤣
Year and the dude never said that the digital was to blame.
Just that he wasnt connecting for some reason.
I agree with you, they claimed to be all Analog at the time and people justified paying 3 times as much for the album just because we thought it was 100% all analog, I rathe buy MOV its digital and the best Digital source for 3 times less and Sound better than mofi in my opinion
They never claimed to be all analog
@@scottwheeler2679
Yes they did
I think you've pretty much summed up how alot of us feel. Great video.
If they sounded good to you and you were happy (like most Mofi’s people) until you discovered the digital link in the chain, it goes to show what a mind game this whole digital/analog argument is. If it sounds good, enjoy! People need to squash their mental machinations and just enjoy the pure listening experience. My Mofi’s sound as good as they ever did in spite of that ‘ole demon digital.
Did you watch the video? I talk about how generally they never sounded that good to me, I was disappointed with most of them (except the few I note), which is why I bought "so few". Yeah, "this stack" is 20 records deep, but when you compare that against all the records I have, even audiophile pressings, it's really not that many. This video was more about why it was deceitful and the right choice to offer a refund/return.
@@daveydonut When I said “you” I was referring to people in general who spoke well of Mofi’s records and then went bananas when they learned about the analog link in the chain. I realized that you in particular weren’t crazy about them to begin with. I always thought they were overrated.
It’s NOT ok for companies to lie to us. They deserve to be exposed and punished. People have a right to their biased opinions when it’s their consumer dollars being spent.
Can you show us a RUclips video posted prior to finding out about the digital step where you express dissatisfaction with MoFi? A stack of 20, priced in total in the 4 figure range is not indicative of disappointment
They never lied in any of their promotional material. There were a few private emails that misrepresented the records as all analog but unless you personally got one of those emails you weren’t lied to
I was commissioned to cut 7inch 45 rpm records from 79-91. The tapes i received just completely eat most of the consumer releases. I'm glad that I kept many of the test pressings. It gets better than most of what consumers and audiophiles can get their hands on. Digital "can" get extremely close but your observations are true and very well explained.
Many CDs suffer from very poor talent in the transferring process. A CD of vinyl can be tragically good actually but it's not the same.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I know it is difficult to explain the difference between listening digital and analog. Both can reproduce the sound correctly but quality analog has a different feeling, space and presence that is difficult to express. Keep the videos coming :)
Yes indeed, my feelings exactly.
Sorry but it has zero to do with digital vs analogue. See my earlier post please.
Great to hear your experience on this matter. I didn't get in on the return offer and they just sit on the shelf with a couple of exceptions. Keep at the videos! Thanks for the mention!
The new MoFi fucked up big time.
You might as well buy DSD CDs since that’s were the vinyl is sourced from and you won’t have the inherent surface noise!
I come at this from a similar perspective to jazzydog below. I have a large collection of sixties/seventies rock and so called 'Prog' eg. all King Crimson, all Genesis and you'll be interested to hear Al Stewart! I saw all these acts multiple times and bought their albums as they were released - I'm the fussiest record collector, and returned faulty discs til I got a decent pressing. My collection has been looked after, and is mostly still in pristine condition. I've had an abiding interest in HiFi too...my systems along the way typical of the equipment of the period eg. Quad electrostatics, various valve (tube, in USA!) amplifiers, Linn Sondek, various arms and moving coil carts.
Although an electronics engineer by trade, I eventually opened my own (classical, my main interest) record store (later CD). I have a vast Lp and CD collection now I've retired, and have now had the time to listen carefully to some of my duplicated copies and compare different pressings. I have, for example 5 versions of Al Stewart, 'Year of the Cat'! I was alerted to the possibility that 'audiophile' pressings are not necessarily worth the outly with the Simply Vinyl release pressed by EMI. I have a first generation copy bought the day of release and the Simply Vinyl is overbright to the point of 'glassy' and has a 'fat' bass that is impressive on first hearing, but I easily tire of it. If you can find a copy, buy an original first pressing of Al Stewart's 'Time Passages', also produced by Alan Parsons, this knocks spots off subsequent 'special' pressings (and CDs....the Qobuz mastering is very good though!).
Track 1, Side 2, 'Almost Lucy' is one of my test tracks when I audition equipment....but I always take that first pressing.
No time to talk about classical vinyl.....but needless to say my pristine first pressings are unfailingly preferable!
Our musical interests sound quite aligned! Prog Rock is most certainly my goto, with the likes of King Crimson, Pink Floyd, Can, and Gabriel era Genesis my favorites. Unfortunately, I'm just too young to have been able to acquire pristine original pressings of these favorite albums on release. It's a near impossibility getting clean original pressings these days, even when I've paid premium dollars to get them they're usually noisy as well (and I ultrasonic clean everything). I was able to get them around the year 2000 when no one was buying vinyl, but not in the last couple decades. So I have gravitated more towards the reissues, hence here we are... but what you say aligns with my experience as well. Just because it's an audiophile label that doesn't mean it's good. That said, I have yet to this day heard an Analogue Productions 45rpm LP that does not beat the original. In fact, I suspect Chad won't release it if it doesn't beat the original (to his ears). If you're a huge Genesis fan, you owe it to yourself to at least try one of those new Analogue Productions Atlantic 45 reissues that came out this year. They are truly revelatory. But yes, by default, audiophile label doesn't mean better than OG. Clean OGs are almost always a safe bet.
I also split my listening pretty 50/50 between classic rock/prog rock/blues and classical. Well, actually, for me it's pre-classical. Baroque, Renaissance and early music (I've had season tickets to Portland Baroque Orchestra for 29 years). For the performers I like, it needs to be done on original instruments and there just isn't that much vinyl for what I'm listening to. Alia-Vox releases everything recorded in DSD on SACD, and their recording engineer is incredible, not to mention having some of the best musicians from around the globe. The recordings are wonderful, even if digital (I find DSD so much more organic sounding than PCM). So for my "classical" listening, it's almost all SACD, simply because that's how it's recorded and released. I'm not a fan of large scale orchestral works post Mozart, which is what people love so much from those LPs from the 60s.
@@daveydonut I'm so glad in your reply you mention attending live concerts...and acoustic ones at that - I've spent a lifetime going to concerts...both amplified and natural acoustic - my classical concert going being really the key to the appreciation of sound in the home. Going to my favourite concert halls (I now live in the country, but near one of the best chamber music venues in the UK) gives an insight to what something 'should' sound like. Otherwise, although something may sound 'impressive', my question is 'is it accurate? Your comments on only having the MoFi (I'm not a fan either!) leads one to a jaundiced conclusion - one I've often made myself! But hearing a Steinway Concert D in a sympathetic space, and then coming home to my music room and playing a well recorded instrument is a test few comparisons with just another record can match. Live music's the thing.....recorded music is a wonderful other thing!
I returned mine too. The sound was not natural and quite fatiguing.
I used to be a “analog only geek” until I played records that I loved thru my DJ wife’s high end digital mixer. Now I am a believer in analog to digital preamps.
Some digital sound amazing, some sound terrible. Some vinyl sound amazing, some sound terrible.
Even the best digital doesn't sound "analog". One can't get apple juice from an orange.
@@olaniyi570 i did not say it sounded analog I said I thought it was good in it’s own way. When you do the Analog to Digital conversion at the preamp stage you really lessen the opportunity for unwanted noise to be added to the signal.
Would like to hear more about your stereo system, looks amazing.
I think you’re nuts! They must have sounded good to you as you kept buying them Right??? Freaking out about digital over analog is crazy You kept buying them right???? Must have sounded good for you Right??? Nuts!!
See the other comment I just left... I covered this in the video. No, other than a couple, they never sounded good, that's why I bought so few of them. ~20 records is not a lot. Each time I was disappointed, which is why I gravitated towards other labels. Without doing multiple comparisons, it's hard to tell if I didn't like them due to their mastering, or perhaps the original source just wasn't as good as I thought it could be. Since I trusted the label, I assumed it was the latter. Once I actually did the comparison (again, I didn't have multiple copies of these records, because I hate being redundant like that... I just want to hear the music), with the lie revealed, there was one obviously glaring difference in mastering that could contribute to the sound quality. I say in the video, I'm not saying the digital IS FOR SURE the reason... but what is for sure is these records don't sound realistic. Again... I covered this in the video, you just heard what you wanted to hear based upon your pre-existing opinion on the matter.
@@daveydonut I have some One Step Mo Fi that sounds wonderful on my system! Still wondering why you kept buying them if you were constantly disappointed by them I think a lot of the audiophiles make too much if there’s a digital step Digital done right sounds great!
@@davepounds8924 I too have MoFi One-Steps that sound wonderful! The Santana Abraxas is amazing! And I'm not saying the MoFi records aren't GOOD. They are GOOD. They are very clean, nuanced, and detailed. This is why people love them. I just don't think they sound realistic, or as good as they could once you DO put them up against other all analog pressings. I wasn't doing that, which is why I kept buying them. They were good... just not great, and not worth the constant hassle of trying to find clean OGs, as I was lead to believe by the marketing that these were better. I fell for the marketing. Once I did compare them against original pressings, I realized the OGs were actually better. That's all... not that the MOFIs are terrible, just that they weren't worth the premium, and it indeed bothers me that they lied to us. There's a reason they lost the lawsuit. It was deception, and there's a reason they deceived. I agree that digital done right sounds good... I've just experienced that if you can get all analog done on good equipment, it's better. That's all. It's my ears telling me that, not the knowledge. And it's generalities here... case in point, Abraxas.
He attributed it to system tweaks gone wrong. He clearly said that his brain was telling him that on paper, the mofis should sound better, but they just. Sometimes, it takes time to figure out what's really going on.
His brain was lying to him
Make more content please. Like your no nonsense approach.
Great video. Got to say you are a pretty good communicator for someone with less than 25 subscribers when I watched. I am familar with the Mofi story and it was interesting to hear your take on it. I can understand the feeling that you don´t want to AB stuff all day long, you just wanted to get the best version in terms of ´emotional connection ´. I am with you on that. My position is slightly different In that I have mostly first/early pressings of my favourite records mainly because I bought them when they came out in the 70s onwards. I have bought a couple of audiophile records to obtain the definitive version. These include MoFi One Step Eagles Desperado, Analogue Productions Genesis- Selling England... and Lamb lies down on Broadway, Rhino Hi- Fi Yes Relayer. My general opinion on them - they all sound clean with a low noise floor but slightly different rather than better. If better in parts, it´s only to a 5-10% degree. Also I realise I can ´t be doing with the upy /downy all the time of 45 rpm or even 33 rpm records spread over 2 discs. It´s not the exercise of moving to turn the album over which no doubt is good for me, it´s the break in immersion that kills it for me. Anyway to sum up, I find I want to play the original /early pressings more than put on the hifi copies I have obtained. The hifi copies are fine but i am more emotionally connected to the originals.
Considering pretty much all recordings made these days are digital, I assume when you purchase LPs, you only buy original pressings or re-releases of older recordings that are guaranteed to be sourced from analog? If you buy any current artists, do you only buy CDs or hi res files?
Yes, these days certainly if I'm buying LPs where the source was analog tape, I generally always make sure they're original pressings, or if they're reissues I confirm it's cut from tape. But I say GENERALLY. I'm not saying digitally sourced LPs are all terrible. I'm not saying that at all. But I will say, in my experience, every single pure analog LP I've compared against a digitally sourced LP has won. But when I don't want to do the whole buy 10 OG pressings just to find one that's actually clean, sometimes I'll buy a digital LP if the reviews are good. For example, I love the band Can. Original LPs are bloody expensive, but they have reissued them on digitally sourced LPs. I also have all the SACDs. I like the digital LPs better than the SACDs, and I love the music so much I listen to them... but I know they don't sound great; simply good enough because I don't want to pay hundreds for the originals. That band isn't popular enough to get the whole audiophile pressing, but if they did, I'd be all over it. And I don't really listen to any current artists... I do listen to a lot of modern recordings of Baroque music, though, and for that my only option is SACD, and I like those too... a low noise floor is more critical for baroque music than rock. But again, based upon my experience, I'd expect a pure analog LP of baroque music would also sound more realistic. I do have some baroque LPs from the late 1970s that are stunning.
Like most things in life everything is not always the same - some original pressings sound better than reissues, sometimes not, some modern recordings on vinyl sound awful, many sound great, some cd's sound better than their vinyl originals but mostly not, some audiophile pressings sound cleaner than the originals regarding surface noise but the trick is researching each album on its own merits and finding them at a reasonable price, you have to be open minded.
So glad to hear your experience with DS Making Movies was the same as mine as everyone in my hifi circle all think im crazy as they all love those MoFi DS pressings and I agree with you 100%
When the 2009 digital Beatles masters were put on 180g vinyl I barely made it to the bathroom throwing up. I emailed Capitol asking why they hated the Beatles.
Ugh I literally just bought the Santana album (Mobile Fidelity) $79 bucks, now I feel like a sucker. Should be arriving in the mail soon. Thanks for the info/video.
I actually think Sananta I and Abraxas sound pretty good on the MOFI digital LPs (as I state in the video). That said, I have not compared them to the originals. Since these Sanantas sounded so good, I did go ahead and buy the Caravanserai that was just released (with the 10% coupon I got from the lawsuit from what I kept, like the aforementioned Santana). Caravanserai was disappointing in all the typical MOFI digital ways... no presence, no sense of realism of the instruments, and really just quite a boring presentation. So... that one I would not recommend. The MOFI Santana III is somewhere in between... I suspect not as good as a clean original, but still offering pleasure. The presentation of the Caravanserai I really didn't enjoy and doubt I'll listen to it again.
@@daveydonut thanks I appreciate the response! Take care!
nice Oracle Delphi turntable in background. I had same in beatiful gold plated version.
I know it looks very cool, but are you able to move your turntable and amps away from the middle of the speakers, I found it sounds a lot better especially the imaging.
I have certainly desired to put everything on the side, because I have heard the same... I know it would likely be better, but this is still one of the best imaging systems most people that have listened to it have heard.. and I'm one of those folks. In order to move the equipment from between the speakers I'd have to get significantly longer speaker cables, which is a significant monetary investment I'm not currently desiring to make. But yes... I'm sure it would sound better.
@@daveydonut If you are getting great imaging as it is then no need to change. Enjoy your music.
How did you get Mofi to accept the return at this time? I thought the return time from the lawsuit expired already?
Help me please, i want to return mine!!!
Well, I did post this video three months ago. The return window did indeed close on August 15th. If you bought any of the records from musicdirect.com or mofi.com, you should have received a notice in the mail back in late 2023 that you were a member of the class in the lawsuit. I'm surprised you did not! Sorry you won't be able to return yours...
The Dire Straits albums from Love Over Gold onwards were recorded and mixed digitally. The original CDs were DDD, so good luck in finding all analogue releases. 17:28 17:29
Love Over Gold was their last analog recorded album, actually. So every single Dire Straits album I showed here (and returned) was indeed recorded in analog. They would not have been eligible via the lawsuit for return if they were digitally recorded. You can (now) even find that directly on MOFI's listing for their digital LP of this, where they write, "1/2" / 30 IPS analog master - Plangent Processed - to DXD to analog console to lathe." Love Over Gold is one where I compared the MOFI directly to a first pressing on Quiex II vinyl (which is indeed all analog), and the first pressing absolutely annihilates the MOFI in every regard... larger soundstage, finer detail, and far more realism of instrument placement and vocal presence in the room. Same with all the other Dire Straits analog recordings I've tried. Brothers In Arms was actually the first Dire Straits record recorded digitally... and in this case, the MOFI sounds better than the original, to me.
@@daveydonut Ah! I stand corrected! My original European CD has DDD on the back cover. My best sounding Dire Straits vinyl are Half-Speed Mastered Editions from the 80s. I think I have them from the debut to Love Over Gold.
“This is an emotional transportation machine / time machine” - very well said! “Air in the recordings” - agree - Looking for recordings with a pulse!
Dave - Hallelujah! I find I am in the same vein of audiophile as yourself. I collect Albums (have for over 50 years) but only artists that I have a reasonable belief that I will like. Most importantly I am looking for the best pressings I can afford to get. (especially not that my Turntable/system can reveal such sound quality) I like those collector LP version comparison videos because I can then hunt down the best version (Lots of first pressings from the artist's country of origin seem to be commonly the best). I have several older MoFi's and I don't think any of them sound interesting or particularly satisfying. I don't get the appeal. I find Acoustic Sound versions to be MUCH more satisfying and captivating. They often are the best pressing I can get of a particular album. And PS. I completely concur with your preference for Scotch with your vinyl listening experience! I'd like to hear more of pressings you do like and why! Keep up the good work!- Matt in L.A.
Have you ever tried ultrasonic record cleaners to remove those static noises pops and clicks etc. that cause you to return some of your records to DISCOGS.
It is August 15th (the last day to return your DSD records), and I still haven’t received my return shipping label from Mobile Fidelity. Very frustrating.
what's the speakers name ?
The ''I hated the sound so I bought loads'' argument is laughable. But I agree about the MOFI Year of the Cat LP - priceless.
I'm not sure if you watched the video, but I probably have thousands of records. Having ~20 MOFI records hardly qualifies as "loads". The point was, I wasn't comparing against the originals, because I didn't have them and I trusted MOFI based on their original work, but was always generally disappointed with the sound. But I'd try again with future titles, and was generally disappointed. I covered that. It wasn't until I bought some originals of these same titles (I hate having multiple versions of records, since what I want is to listen to music, not "collect") and did more comparisons that I realized just how disappointed I was, and how much better I could have done. But yeah, 20 digital MOFI records is hardly loads vs. what I have of Analog Productions, or records in general.
@@daveydonut ''loads'' your word, not mine.
@@daveydonut You honestly don't like the mofii Dylans
@@juliosanchez95 of course not, now that he knows they were cut from digital.
@juliosanchez95 @scottwheeler2679 I addressed this in a different reply, so I'll copy and paste the relevant part here:
I don't have any of the original Dylan records, but I do have several of the Dylan MOFI's... notice they weren't in this stack; I kept them, because I find them quite enjoyable and don't have anything to compare them against. So I'm not sure if the originals are better, but I'm satisfied with what I have and it's not worth the effort to source originals at the cost and frustration when the stripped down nature of Dylan shows pretty well with MOFI's approach. Again... I have nothing to compare them against. My opinion and desire to hold them may be different if I heard analog versions. No comparison has been done, though.
💯percent agree with you on the MoFi comments! I do buy and enjoy Analog Productions pressings over anything else out there, however lately the majority of what I received from Acoustic Sounds is poorly pressed: warped and/or off centered, even the UHQRs. I had several replaced by contacting their support team but I’m getting really tired of it, I want to buy, pay the premium and enjoy, not go back and forth until I finally have a decently pressed copy. With UHQR, what’s the point of paying for the flat profile when the record(s) are warped. I shouldn’t have to use a screw on record clamp to flatten the record to listen to it. The inserts mention quality control as one of their steps in the process - really? Reputation is like trust; hard to earn, easy to lose.
We get what we accep.
If we keep buying sub par products they'll keep producing it.
You and I like the same music. Your amp/ pre is the heart of your system that creates engagement. Get a vintage receiver or separates like Marantz or Sansui with tone controls and a loudness button and thank me later. New gear sucks for the kind of music we like. Vintage gear was voiced for 60s and 70s rock and soul and new gear is made to measure flat (not necessarily to sound good and most lack ability to contour the sound to your liking. Do this and you'll be so engaged both digital and analog will sound amazing. The key is the old gear brings out the needed bass and midbass.and is sweeter sounding. Quality was better then and many new amps sound flat, boring, dry and analytical. Much old gear was supremely musical!
@davidwald2938 I definitely do understand your sentiment and totally agree it's not about how equipment measures. I take a hybrid approach. All of my front end electronics (phono stage, pre-amp, output stage of cd player) are tube based, using NOS tubes from the 1950s. They all have shunt regulated power supplies so are very clean but have an incredibly rich, organic sound. I do have a modern(ish) power amp that provides limitless power (1100watts) into speakers that go down to 7Hz, at -3db, so I'm certainly not lacking bass quantity or precision. The NOS tubes give me the lushness and realism and the SS amp gives me the drive I like. I've definitely explored the vintage route and I am very satisfied with the path I have chosen; I have a beautiful blend of musicality and nuance. I have never heard a stereo that places you with the musicians quite like this. This could likely be the content of a new video.
I am a huge Analogue productions fan. I do like the MOFI vinyl I own but I stay away if possible. I also have the Maestro cartridge.
LOL I could have told you you were wasting your money way before you bought, literally ,into the "audiophile" hype.
No sympathy for Any of you
As P.T. Barnham said , " There's a sucker born every minute."
Not any Mobile Fidelity sound great. Even the true analog ones sound terrible. Boosted highs and boosted lows. Very unnatural sounding vinyl neatly packaged to deceive you.
Analogue productions do superior work.
I absolutely agree that this is false advertising. You are perfectly entitled to return them.
However, I doubt anyone could practically do an analogue source. You'd either end up with variances in pressing as the masters wore out (as of old). Or you'd end up with unreasonable costs.
I doubt anyone can tell the diffrence aurally anyway.
The fact we now have the capability to 3D print vinyl records yet is not happening is such a shame. We could have an endless supply of AAA copies into the future.
You do understand that 3D printing is digital right?
@@scottwheeler2679 well a 3D printed cup is not digital it is analog it is physical. The 3d printer isn't going to print cd pits in the vinyl. It will print the analog Soundwave using a digital machine. A car with a computer file injection isn't suddenly no longer an analog mechanism after the digital clink in the chain. The wheels don't roll in 1s and 0s
@@puglife6291 Absolutely it's sourced from digital. All 3D printers are digital machines that print from digital 3D files. There is no such thing as an analog 3D printer.
When the Kevin Gray 25 dollar remaster of YES FRAGILE beats your 150 MoFi. Good for you.
I didn’t send any of my Mofis back, but maybe I should have. Could’ve had more money for Analogue Productions titles.
Maybe you could get some of their titles cut from digital sources. Yeah, they were doing it too with zero disclosure prior to “mofigate”
@@scottwheeler2679 very few AP titles were digitally sourced and they were already transparent about it in the product descriptions. I think the only ones I own are Steely Dan Two Against Nature, Roger Waters Amused To Death and the stereo 45 of Beach Boys Surfer Girl.
@@christophercowles2553 show me any ad predating Mofigate where Analog Productions discloses those were digital sources. I have old ads of those LPs where there is zero mention of digital.
@@christophercowles2553 They only disclosed the fact that some of their LPs were digitally sourced after Mofigate.
Suddenly starting sounding bad?
All these same comments... did you guys even watch the video? Not suddenly started to sound bad. I was never happy with most of them all along. I know I say "thousands of dollars in records," but I have thousands of records... buying ~20 of my favorite records on an audiophile label, when I'm an audiophile, is not very many. I have hundreds of Analog Productions records. It's not a coincidence that I gravitated more towards that label. Yes, I kept trying ~20 times because those early all analog ones were good, so I trusted them, but I was never happy with the way these sounded. I say that in the video. That's why I bought so few of them. The comparisons (once I did them) truly validated that point.
@@daveydonut fair enough, but why keep buying if the first two or three sucked? I have many 80s discs from digital than are expansive with tons of air, sounds more like lame mastering than a high res digital intermediary step.
@@daveydonut yeah, we watched the video. You were blown away by the one steps, bought a stack of them for 4 figures and now you are sending them back because you found out they were cut from digital and they just don't sound good enough to keep anymore. Did I miss something?
@scottwheeler2679 Clearly you have poor comprehension skills and your bias is showing. I was not blown away by "The One Steps", plural. I was blown away by Santana Abraxas.. the first One Step, so I bought the next several thereafter, without comparing them to originals. And I was always disappointed with them. I said that in the video (as well as the other ones I was always disappointed in; I talked most about always being disappointed in the Dire Straits from the beginning, not just after I knew they were digital). In the few cases I had an original (the only case was the Stevie Ray Vaughans), I liked the other version better, which is why I ONLY bought the ~20 I did vs. hundreds of Analoge Productions records. Once I actually did the comparison (yes, AFTER knowing there was a digital step), I found that they sounded inferior. I also clearly stated at the end of the video that I don't KNOW that it's the digital step, I just know that the MFSL records don't sound as good as the all analog ones I have, and that they don't sound realistic as the all analog ones I have. AND... they deceived us, says a court of law.
@@daveydonut ah, when all else fails ad hominem. But you bought the "next several" for over $100.00 a pop and was "always disappointed" and had no reference to compare them. But you kept buying them. That sounds like a repetitive act of stupidity. But it also sounds like revisionist history typical of audiophiles that had their all analog egos exposed. There's no problem with my comprehension. You are obviously butt hurt because you found out there is no magic to all analog vinyl and your audiophile ego got slammed. Instead of dealing with that reality you made it about a deception that never happened. By the way, if we are talking about reading comprehension let's examine yours. Please show us where any "court of law" tells us they deceived us. If your reading comprehension was competent you would know that nowhere in any of their promotional material did MoFi ever claim any of their LPs were mastered all analog. Go back and read the material again and try to comprehend it. Not any of their albums contain any claims that the album was an all analog mastering.
Great video!
It’s completely unrealistic to expect that record companies are going to replay 40 to 60 year old analog master tapes. They are growing old, and some are likely in danger of shedding or other damage in continuing to pass them through playing steps. Thus the digital step or steps comes to the fore. Some people are screaming for Apple to issue the Beatles’ Mono vinyl box yet again, all AAA. Not Happening without digital now! Just dream on! Apple will not be playing those increasingly fragile master tapes anymore! Too bad, So sad!😢
I guess you have never heard of the Blue Note label or Rhino HiFi or Craft OJC; there are a lot of all analog reissues happening right now.
It doesn't seem like you're familiar with what happened here? The labels weren't sending MoFi existing digital files. They were letting MoFi come to the label and digitize the tapes themselves. And regardless, there are still plenty of all analog reissues from other labels.
They just released an all analog mono Revolver in the deluxe box set.
do u have ur sacd. playee. looks amazing setup maybe u need to enjoy the music and. the equipmebt about mofi. in austrlia. its double the price. have few from 80s. good video
Your daddy must be very rich
I’ve been telling all my vinyl friends that 99% of all Mofi records sound inferior to other pressings. I think it’s the choice in the mastering that was part of the problem. 1st iteration of Mofi they insisted that Stan Ricker use half speed plus that ‘smiley face’ eq. Fast forward to current iteration of Mofi, that Krieg Winderlich is pretty much a shitty mastering engineer, making bad mastering choices. The Steely Dan catalog which was released by universal, was mastered by Bernie Grundman to dsd, then cut to vinyl sounds very very good indeed. So there! So it does not mean all records cut from dsd sounds bad. That means the mastering engineer has a very big part to play to make or break the sound quality! 😅
Part One:
Wow, is this Mofigate thing still going on?
I doubt any of this will change your mindset of “digital made my Mofis sound bad” but if you care to read…
Hmm, the old MFSL Yes, Crime Of The Century and White Album annihilate the originals? If you say so :) Id ask which originals, their country of origin and runout groove info of these you were comparing.
I get that you do not want to buy ten copies of a title. Perfectly understandable. I also understand the hyper detail if modern mastering to be an issue. It is for me also many times. I get it. More on this later.
As far as Mofigate…
If you feel deceived and lied to, I absolutely understand that moral decision. And you and others who consider them liars I hope you all stick to your guns and never ever purchase another Mofi product.
However, and I don’t mean to nitpick your statements but what I don’t understand is this thinking:
“I am returning these after finding out they do not sound as good as they could”
How would one know that these could sound better?
Two scenarios…
Concerning strictly these One Steps:
None of us can determine that unless we have heard that which hypothetically could sound better. We can’t know what something sounds like unless we have heard it and compared. We simply do not have One Steps AAA and 4XDSD of Abraxas for instance to. Obviously one cannot hear something and compare that has not been produced. Bill Evans Sunday At The VV One Step, we do not know what an AAA One Step compared to a 4XDSD because there has never been a 4XDSD transfer of that title to a One Step process made. (Analogue is the last step in the Mofi 4XDSD One Step process btw). So we cannot know if this “if only all these titles were done in AAA, then they would sound good” mantra that many speak is true. And from what I gather is is pretty much impossible for them to sound like the originals anyway.
Scenario number two…
But if you mean could sound better like the originals, I wouldn’t be so sure…
I spoke with Bernie Grundman about why he could not make the Classic Records Led Zeppelin reissues sound more like the three dimensional, warmer/tubier fresher sounding originals because I didnt like that hyper detailed and rather overwhelming more sterile sound of the Classic Records versions. His answer was basically that it is impossible to replicate the machinery and engineers that were involved. This is another reason that reissues on lp many times do not cut the muster to the originals. “Advancements” in electronics which do include digital components btw and the impossibilty of mastering engineers ability to replicate that exact sound. Again, nothing to do with digital.
My classic mofi albums sound remarkably non-detailed.
The mofi Dylans smoke the originals
I don't have any of the original Dylan records, but I do have several of the Dylan MOFI's... notice they weren't in this stack; I kept them, because I find them quite enjoyable and don't have anything to compare them against. So I'm not sure if the originals are better, but I'm satisfied with what I have and it's not worth the effort to source originals at the cost and frustration when the stripped down nature of Dylan shows pretty well with MOFI's approach. I think the Dylans and Santana were the only ones I kept. In all the other cases I've tried, I prefer all analog versions. MOFI still lied about the source of the Dylan, though, hence the judgement, so it's good they still offered refunds for those who wanted it.
A First-World problem!
Mobile Fidelity was given what they paid for - Very high definition audio digital files
They weren't given digital files. they travelled with their gear and did the transfers themselves.
Dude I think it's your cables, they are just not "Python like" and you're picking up all the EMI pixies that ruin your experience.
WTF?!
Purports to be an audiophile, but clearly doesn’t care about HIS audiences ears by recording youtube videos with a microwave ,
J/k kinda lol