Audiophiles Audio-fooled: Holy Mobile Fidelity Mo-Fi Dumpster Fire!!

My thoughts on the biggest audiophile drama in years!
Link to Mike's interview with the MoFi engineers- • Mobile Fidelity - Inte...
Some product links are affiliate links which means if you buy something we’ll receive a small commission.
We have owned and used every product we recommend
Kicker speaker to Line level adapter amzn.to/3D2ghyB
Recommended Subwoofers with high level speaker inputs
$250 10” Polk Subwoofer (with speaker level) amzn.to/3qp74sL
$100 6” Acoustic Audio (with speaker level) amzn.to/3d0YVaR
12” Polk Subwoofer (with speaker level) amzn.to/3DmBnaZ
Recommended Bookshelf Speakers
Klipsch B100 bookshelf speakers amzn.to/3xk9dd6
Elac Debut 2.0 speakers amzn.to/3LeI4y4
Klipsch RP-500m speakers amzn.to/3DuRROi
Recommended Turntables
Audio Technica LP60 Great entry-level “fully automatic” turntable for under $150 amzn.to/3eAPC1B
U-turn Orbit Plus- Skylabs favorite new turntable with a 3 year warranty for under $350 amzn.to/3delM2H
Recommended Phono Cartridges
Grado 3 series- Made in Brooklyn NY since 1953 amzn.to/3L9t8B7
Ortofon 2M Blue amzn.to/3d9fBNw
Recommended Phono Preamps
U-turn Pluto- awesome little preamp for under $100 amzn.to/3RHm01k
Parasound Zphono- excellent choice if you want to try moving coil cartridges amzn.to/3RJ31TY
#vintagehifi #vinylrecords #vintagestereo #marantz #pioneer #sansui #stereorepair #turntable #recordplayer #skylabs #skylabsaudio #skylabsiowa

[@adamwilson1691]

All these years it never even occurred to me that people were buying these for the process rather than the final result. I'd always thought people were spending a bunch of money because the record just sounded that amazing.

[@UberPilot]

What they know now, is that any title that’s done by Analogue Productions in the future will beat the MoFi. The Muddy Waters and SRV are examples.

[@adamwilson1691]

@@UberPilot Do you mean the sound quality?

[@contemporaryhomeaudio]

The people that were really hurt are the speculators and flippers...that's a good thing.

[@Thecatdrums3]

Or the fake audiophiles that could always hear the difference which is why they choose no-fi 😂

[@NateEll]

And folks who paid a real premium for a bill of goods they never got

[@scootb7400]

As an audio engineer, it’s been an interesting development to me. Most “audiophiles” listen to music from the late 1950’s-1985 or so, which makes sense because those were the days in which all recording & musical equipment was analog. However, by the early 80’s most recording studios had begun to employ at least some equipment using digital technologies (reverb units & time-based effects, synths, etc). By the late 80’s the ADAT had infiltrated soooo many studios as a recording medium, either as the only recording device, or tape machines were often bounced to ADAT for mixing because it was viewed as a more stable (ie: less flammable and brittle) historical medium. So while I’ve always been intrigued by the more streamlined manufacturing processes of the MoFi products (removing extra production steps) I’ve never personally bought into the idea of an all-analog process is inherently superior. I also suspect that in the near future companies like MoFi would have an increasingly difficult time sourcing music that is of interest to a broad enough consumer base that was made exclusively using analog equipment.

[@skylabsaudio]

Great points! Thanks for sharing. I am not sure if digital audio has killed the majority of modern recordings. Or if "cut and paste" via Protools, Autotune and Beat Detective are more to blame for removing the "good flaws" from music.

[@vintageaudioemporium]

As someone who mixes music, and deals with analog tape daily with conversion, I can see why the DSD step was added. Analog tape deteriorates, a DSD copy of the master is best possible resolution “save” of a master in time before deteriorating more. Most music recorded after 1983 has some sort of PCM stage in it and I wouldn’t be surprised if there was tape noise reduction done in PCM before “up sampling” to DSD. End of story, it’s the mastering engineers ears that count and what people are really responding to positively or negatively when they listen to a piece of music on any format

[@skylabsaudio]

Yes. Agree 💯

[@machavez00]

The Plangent Process is discussed in this video. Errol Garner’s masters were rescued using the method. kzbin.info/www/bejne/hajMnWyefa-VnqM

[@stevengagnon4777]

Music to my ears. I've been using cassette tapes for a long time and still do ( KZbin tapes well). The one thing I learned a long time ago is that CDs made a far better recoding than a vinyl album. I was able to get the full dynamic range out of the tape that way ...providing CD was mastered well. Adding the noise and distortion from the vinyl to the tape was the biggest draw back for a cassette. So it makes perfect sense to use a digital copy of a master tape as opposed to making another tape copy of the master , your point about how tapes degrade over time is certainly true and I hope that digital copies were made a long time ago. I like my old albums and I like my cassettes , but the noise and distortion is certainly present and undeniable. So I would only have hoped that the sorce for these vinyl records were passed along as digital and the original master tapes remain in the vault. The whole idea that these tapes were being pulled out of vaults and being physically handled to transfer to another tape is pretty nieve .

[@paulwilliams6593]

Excellent video. I totally get the comments regarding the mis selling by Mofi and the selective truth on their behalf however I am a massive Yes fan and I have every version of every release they ever made. I have the Mofi One Step copy of Fragile and it sounds tremendous. It is definitely on par with my mint UK first pressing of this album. I also read a very intelligent thought on this subject by another audiophile collector who posed the question "is it now time to come to terms with an inevitable digital step in any new audiophile vinyl process ?"...... as long as the digital file is as high res as technology allows at that time then we audiophiles will surely have to accept and embrace this. Many original master tapes are now over 50 years old and degrading fast (if not already degraded). It will have to be this or nothing surely ? ...... as long as (of course) in future the manufacturers are TOTALLY transparent on what the full process is. If the One Step version of Fragile included a digital component then the final out come and sound from this release still blew me away. Perhaps its now time for us to accept the inevitable.

[@MsKalachakra]

I just know that I like to collect records and CD's and if this mess brings prices down, that would be awesome.

[@artmanjohn2]

If a DSD "Clone" copy of the master tape is made and used, I agree with you, it really doesn't make any difference in reality! A "perfect copy" of the master is like having the original except it's one that won't wear out. There's a good chance that some of the MoFi albums so many folks love and enjoy today might not even exist in the first place of it weren't for the DSD cloning in the mastering process. Something to think about. That's some of what I picked up from Mike's interview with MoFi.

[@carljung9230]

"if". digital conversion is lossy - how can it not be? you are not getting a perfect copy with dsd.

[@rui1863]

@@carljung9230 Any copy is lossy including tape. DSD is the closest thing to an analog signal in the digital realm; once it captures the master tape it's a copy that can be replayed without any further loss; not true with the master tape as every play alters it -- so a DSD copy is a perfect copy.

[@johnpayne6860]

Just ran across your KZbin channel today, ended up watching every one of the videos, maybe missed a couple but I'll catch them later. Really enjoyed the point of view. Good luck to you and the other technicians, hard to find decent repair shops, very few left. I'll keep watching and sharing.

[@Ren_Ezon]

Not only that: DSD are hardly editable. So it's pretty clear that they also converted the files to PCM for cleaning, editing, etc. and then reconverted to DSD or just cut the records from PCMs . So it became a One (Million) Step(s)

[@musicman8270]

I actually have a SACD that was mastered in DSD.

[@Ren_Ezon]

@@musicman8270 Which one? And in what Audio editing software? because Sonoma and TEAC are pretty poor when compared to what Audition and the others can do to PCM. Meaning, no cleaning, no declicking, no healing, and so on

[@SPAZZOID100]

Evidence???

[@Ren_Ezon]

@@SPAZZOID100 ask Mofi lol

[@vintageaudioemporium]

Bingo

[@pastywhite6669]

There are 2 issues here. 1. the real or perceived fidelity issues. 2. the deception. The organic food analogy is perfect. Some people may think organic tastes better. It's subjective. But to be sold organic that is NOT is a big problem.

[@gregoryhausinger1114]

Good video. A couple issues. 1. A dsd recording is far more than capable to faithful and accurately record a master tape from the Era in question. 2. From what I've heard with my ears and from the "content providers" is that Mofis albums sound fantastic. From the silent vinyl to the recording itself...until they found out it has digital in it...now according to 45rpm and vinyl zealot Fremer, they are now terrible. 3. I love music for music. Be it Album. CD, mp3 or streaming through my phone. These words sum it up. The music on this compact disc was originally recorded on analog equipment. We have attempted to preserve, as closely as possible, the sound of the original recording. Because of its high resolution, however, the Compact Disc can reveal limitations of the source tape Spin on you crazy diamonds

[@jefffoster3557]

And this gets to the crux of the issue. Many perceive that digital is bad because of this very reason.....it reveals the shortcomings of analogue tape. Same with vinyl in masking the shortcomings of one's system.

[@joebloggs8636]

It's the price,the price,the price..that they charged the consumer....c'mon, it's so obvious....they lied ( or glossed over)..the process and the buyer's paid for their "sins".. I love MoFI for the most part.i have 7 albums and I dig them ..BUT....c'mon.

[@karfan2290]

Their edition of Dark Side Of The Moon came out in the early 80's, and it was all analogue, just like every record back in the day.

[@joey1127]

also, MoFi recorded over the ORIGINAL with their NEW Master. Much to their surprise, Pink Floyd liked it better because the MoFi engineer at the time was able to remove the clicks that had been there previously that Parsons couldn't get rid of do to technology limitations. Little bit of history.

[@380stroker]

I'd tread carefully with that statment.

[@patricknicolucci5073]

I have many MFSL from the 70's they sound great, I don't care if they use digital to record the newer ones also sound great that is all that counts.

[@Another_Audiophile]

It’s not about sound quality but money. The one step for 120-150 dollars make sense if it was all analog. With the DSD transfer there is no way to justify that price and that’s where it boils down. As you said about the organic food. Anyway, they did that in purpose and knowingly.

[@traildoggy]

These 'experts' should have a wine and listening party with the wine connoisseurs who can never consistently pick their fabulous vintages once the labels are removed. They can have a grand time complimenting each other's taste.

[@skylabsaudio]

You're 100% correct.

[@danab7472]

As a lifelong vinyl listener, over the past year I have been loving my FiiO R7 streaming DAC so much that I've barely played any records. The inky black noise floor, the massive dynamic range, and the onboard PEQ that lets me deal with some of the nastier room modes that I have to contend with add up to what I perceive to be much better SQ. I still love vinyl and I never set out to "go digital" but to me it's just sounding...... better. Add to that the fact that I'm on a budget, and I don't have enough cheddar to properly tweak / upgrade both my vinyl and my digital setups. Choosing one over the other is a matter of economics as much as preference. My $ has been better spent on building up digital. Five years ago I would have screamed out loud at the thought of that.

[@antonioaugusto808]

THE ISSUE IS NOT QUALITY BUT ETHICS!! MOFI should have included the digital step on their advertisings, and must include now! If not they are misleading their costumers!!

[@sugarbone-cage8497]

Mofi Gate is the best DSD promation campaign😅 ever for a digital audio format (thanks to Mofi). So much fun also to watch historical shootout videos like eg Mofi vinyl records (supposedly analog resourced then) against Music on vinyl records (digitally resourced) with the result (haha) „Mofi is much better because it is analog“. I also think that all reissue labels need way more transparency considering their hype sticker information such as „recorded from analog tape“.

[@SPAZZOID100]

Hardly ANY say “cut from the original tape” for a reason. It ain’t done that way anymore.

[@continentalgin]

I would just like to see a video of a mastering engineer giving an in-depth science lesson on state-of-the-art mastering. If a DSD step is actually beneficial and not a bad thing, a science video could explain that. Mastering is a technical area a lot of collectors and audiophiles make assumptions about, but are we really very educated on it? I'm not, but would like to be.

[@skylabsaudio]

Agree 100%

[@VIDSTORAGE]

If they would have said at the start that using dsd files mastered from the master tapes to preserve the tapes for the future preservation would have been accepted by the customers

[@ssks1979]

In the old days Telarc recorded and mastered in their digital system and then pressed vinyl. It was a good thing. Then came the CD, so Telarc and others had a jump in producing new and re-released music on CD, and that was an even better thing in my opinion. I still have both forms from those early days of my life. Today I find vinyl way too costly no matter how the mastering was done. And the random quality of pressings is frustrating. So I've decided that it's better to invest in quality CD playback equipment. There's lots of good used sound systems needing a new home when their older owners pass on. Half of my rig is from such sources and soon enough my day will come too.

[@sammyboyee]

Telarc had some great engineers there...

[@andrewlittleboy8532]

The copy of DSOTM in the thumbnail nail was 100% analogue, they aren’t the same company now as they were then and DSD wasn’t invented until '99.

[@robertweinmann9408]

Yep. I've got a UHQR version of DSOTM that I got straight from MoFI through their "Original Masters Society" in the early 80's.

[@DrOz-007]

The main argument here is one of cost. The customer is paying top dollar for Mofi, double or triple the cost of other releases, expecting the full effort required to make AAA records. Using digital is much more convenient and saves production costs. Using this argument alone, Mofi have been highly disingenuous.

[@williamtm1965]

"audio reviewer was praising MoFi records and snubbing other records which had a digital link in them". Kind of reminds us of those wine snobs who can't identify cheap wine in a blind test.

[@Thecatdrums3]

Like a film critic that trashes modern blockbusters but loves Armageddon

[@SgtPnkks]

Or the audiophile gear snobs who claim they can hear the difference between a $500 usb cable and a $5 USB cable

[@williamtm1965]

@@captainkeyboard1007 reference was to wine testing

[@captainkeyboard1007]

@@williamtm1965 I am sorry I misread your comment. My comment has been replaced. Thank you for tapping or typing to me. 👍

[@sammyall9091]

Yall seen that video they pranked them snobs with the same wine in 4 different glasees but all, were the same cheap wine.

[@talktomenowxbmc]

Good points. Digital music is on different level right now.

[@shadouk6737]

Good observations. Most records pressed these days probably have a digital link. The only way to avoid this if you're a purist, is to spend more money on original pressings.

[@tturner12341]

Which I have a lot of MoFi releases on original copies. I know all the new releases I buy is DSD. I don’t care.

[@voccsaycee30]

True that MOST records pressed these days are at least cut digitally (actually, almost all records of the past 20 years are recorded and mixed digitally as well) but it should be noted that anything mixed down to analog tape and mastered at Bernie Grundman Mastering, be it in the 70s or now, is cut all-analog (as I was directly told from an employee). And that's actually quite a lot of records, including tons of recent remasters. (I look for Bernie Grundman Mastering before I look for MoFi or any other audiophile name...and then it also sorta helps to know how the album was recorded, because digital has been almost as common as analog in high budget albums starting in the late 70s)

[@texasbassranger]

@@tturner12341 Agreed. I've repurchased my entire collection from reputable DSD sites and couldn't be happier. I have come to suspect the quality of remasters from master tapes. The degredation is beggining to become telling. Besides. through a quality DAC, well....my ears just don't care.

[@markorchard2272]

Great analysis. However, music companies are compressing the sh*t out of most digital archives (probably to save $$$$ on storage costs). Listen to most CDs/'Best Of...' albums today and then listen to a 1985-1990 original! Night and day difference. Simply listen to an original 1967 recording of a Doors album..... you will not hear better TODAY! I have just got the Japanese import CD of The Who's 'Who's Next/Lifehouse' mixed by Glyn Johns. The 1971 demo track of 'Mary' is sublime!!!

[@paulcrowder]

When I buy an all-analog record, I’m contributing to keeping the craftsmanship of the analog process alive. It’s like if you bought what you thought was a sweetgrass basket by a Gullah basket-weaver and then find out it was made by a machine in a Chinese factory. It’s still the same basket, and maybe the factory-made one is technically superior, but it’s not the craft you chose to support.

[@jalander8817]

As a South Carolinian, this example hit close to home. 🤠

[@puttyputty123]

If they put in the work and said "hey guys, we need to take a digital step here because of this and that with the master", I think most people would be fine and even excited. Most people haven't heard DSD (though didn't they say DXD in the interview, but states DSD on the webpage?). I would have still bought some MOFIs if I knew, but not all. A lot of people buy because Mofi was a "trusted" brand. For me Mofis are hit and miss, some are great and some not so great but usually not as good as Analogue Production. I tried pure digital for years, but for me a lot of it never sounded right. Maybe time to invest in DSD?

[@skylabsaudio]

Agree! A little transparency would have gone a long way. Will be interesting to see if they can get their reputation back.

[@benjaminsavage4204]

I would actually be interested in the whole Tape > DSD > Vinyl, product. If it were a separate product. There could be a new category of vinyl, 'Digi-Vinyl', AnalogueVinyl and original vinyl. Would be an interesting challenge - how to get the best sound.. But they've shot themselves in the foot.

[@johnvillano3024]

Agreed. I too am one Mofi consumer that has not been totally happy with all my Mofi pressings. Some are great and some don’t sound good at all. It is very disappointing. I can honestly say every single AP pressing I have is an absolute killer sounding record. I am not as big of a collector as I am sure most of you are, but I bet I have about 2 dozen Mofi and about the same from AP. I am hitting 100% satisfaction rate with AP and about 50% with Mofi. With those percentages, it is hard to convince me that digital is where it is at? Having said that a a lot has to do with who is doing the mastering. AP uses the Masters of the art, Bernie Grundman, Kevin Grey just to name a few. Maybe Mofi can get some of these guys to come back and put their golden touch on some of these killer titles?

[@paulcrowder]

You can invest in DSD, but you’re not going to get recordings in 4x DSD they use to create the lacquer, nor will you have a DAC that matches the quality of MoFi’s when they cut the lacquer. A rather modest vinyl setup with vintage equipment might give you a better experience than playing back digital through your own digital setup. At least that’s been my experience.

[@YnotNomis]

I switched to DSD256 files only along with a Dragonfly RED DAC and have enjoyed the sound quite a bit. It's the best I ever heard a digital file sound like "analog" than any PCM file like Flac or WAV files.

[@TheJoelSwaney]

I have asked 5 of my local store owners if anyone has been selling MoFi more than normal and all have said "no". In fact, most didn't even know of MoFi-gate.

[@skylabsaudio]

lol, very interesting! Thanks

[@jissanhuq3792]

Exactly. If anything they’re even harder and more sought after now that more people are going back to or getting into vinyl. I wish i could find people selling their records for less than retail lol

[@tbobmann229]

The problem is that consumers found out after the fact..or after the purchase..they should have come clean instead of misleading consumers..

[@leo.girardi]

AAA. I thought a Mo-Fi dumpster was the empty refrigerator boxes behind a Best Buy...

[@sidvicious3129]

Just come out and say it, I believe the reviewer you are speaking of is Michael Fremer, who left Stereophile magazine and is now at the Absolute Sound magazine. Mike from the ingroove did a good job and Fremer was pissed that he wasn't asked because he would have asked harder questions. Mike from 45rpm asked this question first and it was regarding the Michael Jackson Thriller, 40,000 copies. Mofi would have gotten away with this if they had kept the number down to 3000-5000 copies. Mike from the ingroove picked up on this after Mike 45rpm asked the question. Mike 45rpm is actually hurt by this because he made recommendations based off a lie and he is changing his practices to now buy originals to compare the remaster too. I have always been a believer in originals first. I have Mofi records, but I have only one that I paid full price for and that was the Miles Davis Kind of Blue. I did pay full price for the Miles Davis Kind of Blue-UHQR, the Craft Recording of a Miles Davis Record and there is one more UHQR that I own, that I can't remember right now. I would say, I own 10 one-steps that I bought used, non over 90.00 and one mint minus for $30.00 and other regular Mofi pre one steps, about twenty that I might have paid between 15.00-40.00 used prices and some Mofi cds and hybrid cds. Will I sale my Mofi collection, no, but I do understand why people are pissed and you are right, they look stupid now and Mofi was deceptive and credibilities have been damaged. If you are a true audiophile, it's not about a format, it is about the music, the equipment and format that you own is just a means of getting you there. I love all of the formats, cds, streaming, reel to reel, cassette tape and vinyl. I own them all and there are some recordings on all of the formats that sound good and some that sound like crap. The Kevin Gray version of Marvin Gaye record is better sounding than the Mofi One-step and now I know why, maybe. I have noticed this with other One-Steps. Mofi better get ahead of this or it will get ahead of them. My Santana Abraxxas that I bought is a hybrid sacd/cd, for $30.00, because there is no way that I would have ever spent 2,000 dollars on that record or any other recording especially with what we know now.

[@lextek.]

This (to me) proves my long held point; "golden ears" are not so golden when their assumptions and praises for some particular product, that they in MANY cases have held for years, suddenly crumble into an ash heap when they find out it's not quite what they thought. I have witnessed a "double blind" test, meaning neither the listener or the tester knew which active amp was A or B, nor could they see them. A direct to tape recording of a small classical ensemble was the source. Both amps were being fed from the same pre-amp Everything had been carefully level checked. After the test was concluded and decoded so it could be determined if a listening subject was actually listening to amp A or B, the results were what I expected. Amp A was Phase Linear. Amp B was the power amp section of a 30 watts/channel Lafayette receiver. The decoded results were 50/50. Thank you so much golden ears.

[@Maki-zf5wm]

So called golden ears often reject blind tests. Well, this has been their involuntary blind test and they proved they were unable to distinguish analog from digital 😆

[@lextek.]

@@Maki-zf5wm Yes Maki, my point exactly.

[@DorianPaige00]

@@Maki-zf5wm They actually might be able to tell. One has a huge noise floor and a little of rumble.

[@Masticator93]

Theres a good video I saw about this. I think its Rick Beato. He did an A/B test with a trained musician. With just PCM and MP3s and the musician even was about 50/50 on just those.

[@skylabsaudio]

Rick Beato is the man. Gonna go watch that.

[@HAL-no9ht]

DSD makes no "clone". It's not a copy but a signal conversion of original analogue masters. DSD files sounds different anyway from a direct copy made with analogue studio equipment which remains closer to the original. So the real question is: why Mo-Fi introduced two conversion steps (remember that DSD must be transformed again to analogue before to be cut) in their cutting process even when not required? My opinion is that this choice is somehow functional to the mastering and the sound they want to put in the records rather than the needs coming from large production numbers. Mo-Fi never explained how they manage those DSD files, what is the purpose of their mastering consolle and details of their custom lathe. We didn't know anything about critical steps which affect the final sound much more than a single transfer to digital. They have revealed far too little of their way to work and haven't clarify anything.

[@Thecatdrums3]

After seeing all these video and hearing nothing but people in the vinyl community talking about how you can hear the mo-fi difference, it just further solidified my feelings that most people I see talking about records and films online done know Jack! I always went with what had the full soundtrack or album on vinyl and if it wasn’t available I’d go tape than cd. Analog sound is so vital to why wax sounds so good on turntables. I have plenty of albums that aren’t from the original analog or tape masters but you can tell the difference. Digital doesn’t have the impact analog sound yields. Compare the pcm audio from a laserdisc to the Dts-hd ma from a 4K disc and than that score on vinyl is a huge difference. Digital is worse but if that’s what the original master is, especially with modern music I get it. Main reason I buy old releases is for those pure original transfers and stuff like this further proves why it was good I looked for what I wanted. No one is making a honest living anymore and it’s because they are incentivized to lie or mislead us like this whole debacle for money. Especially with how people buy whatever they want nowadays, it just set themselves up for this.

[@1cookgs]

I agree that Digital Recording Technology has vastly improved over the years. Personally, I find vinyl to be too delicate, too easily damaged. I grew up with records and I am happy to get away from all the fuss involved with playing them.

[@jakefiersing]

Kevin, your conclusion, that analogue purists may judge different on digital in the future is quite logical on the one hand. On the other hand if this example of behaviour will be seen as a strategy to change people's judgement over something they reject principally, that would be a really vicious developement. Disrespecting people would be recepted as the major success promising strategy to overcome your opponents. Looked upon clearly this strategy is nothing less but COERCION.

[@Luq-John-Bro]

Great video...would agree most of your points towards the end of the video. Surprisingly..if it really sounds so good....so whats the problm😁

[@erickrohn88]

I am a fan of whatever provides the best quality listening experience. If the use of digital media makes it better quality, then good for the listener.

[@manolokonosko2868]

It is possible that master tapes, especially those of very popular albums/artists, have been used over and over through the years in order to create backup tapes for export to pressing plants in other countries, or at home to create lacquers for domestic sale, have deteriorated over the years, and this is why Sony or other labels are no longer willing to lend them out, even to corporations such as MFSL/MoFi. Since the latter is not willing to go out of business, they had to settle for digital dubs made and provided by the record labels. In addition, bands who own their own master tapes, such as Pink Floyd, are going to release their albums on their label, hiring the best engineers in the field to provide these remastered albums to the public. The business is changing, and MoFi had no choice but to go along with them, however, they should have been open about it from the start and this foolish act of hiding the truth has cost them decades of hard work as their credibility has gone to the toilet. What about those people who paid big bucks for releases they were led to believe were from the original master tapes? If MoFi won't give them each a free album per unit bought under deception, or some type of compensation towards future purchases (voucher, discount coupon), they can expect a class action lawsuit. Even if they win they will have spent tons of money on lawyers, and their credibility still shot. Don't blame the engineers. Blame the executives.

[@danielanderson8502]

I own a few “Waxtime” records that speculated comes from “digital” master. It doesn’t bother me because it gives me time with my turntable listening to music. I own a few MoFi pressings that I haven’t opened yet but I’m sure I’ll enjoy them

[@HAL9007]

Good review. Sums it up nicely. I have two question: (1) Hey MoFi fans -- Do you actually compare your MoFi "all-analog" LP to "regular" LPs of the same performance, and can you tell the diff? Do you do BDX? (2) Hey MoFi -- are you going to release a list of all those records which were "tainted" by the DSD step? The lesson for me -- I love my DSD even more. (1) Pure DSD files from Blue Coast Records., nativeDSD, Octave Records, 2L, etc. (2) Or playing the DSD layer off SACDs. My digital playback system sounds as good as any TT setup I have heard. You need good equipment -- streamer/player, SACD player, DAC.

[@brucesmith5426]

I haven't bought a Mo-Fi recording in around 3 decades. I don't know if they used any digital in the process. Even then some were dreamy while others were not to my liking. With the tapes they age slowly at first. but after 20 years they go downhill quickly. Just listen to what sounds best to you no matter who puts them out.

[@j.t.cooper2963]

I gave up on vinyl in '83 and have never looked back with any regret. I have 40 year old CD's that have thousands of plays over the years and still sound as good as they did in 83. I bought over 300 CD's over the last 3 years because people were just dumping their entire CD library to buy vinyl that is digitally sourced. 😂

[@hotwax9376]

What bothers me isn't the use of DSD; it's the fact that MoFi lied to their customers for so many years by making them think that their mastering process was all analog. I never bought from them before because they didn't keep the original labels on the reissues, but now I'm glad I did.

[@skylabsaudio]

Yeah, I think a lot of people agree with you! Thanks for watching!

[@seand67]

Bring on the used MoFi copies......I'll buy a few for the low low 🤣

[@jissanhuq3792]

Lolol yeah not happening. In the rare instance the 10 people who would care so much do that, they’d be gone in milliseconds

[@ralex3697]

It won’t change the pricing. The older MoFi releases are not digital, still very pricey

[@d.d.5633]

Maybe this is the reason why I’ve always found Mo-Fi masterings to sound harsh.

[@Hifi1927]

The price premium is the issue

[@David_Hirsh]

A better analogy than your organic food one is being a vegetarian and buying vegetarian food from a company you have trusted over the years, even though you pay a premium, because you believe in their mission statement to never have any animal products in their food. Then one day you discover everything they make has meat in it, but they didn't include it in the ingredient list. Once they are found out, they say, "We didn't say anything because we believed our products tasted better with meat, and that the customer would be better off even if they didn't know."

[@JohnSmith-qi6co]

The problem obviously is one of MoFi's decision to communicate the way they did. Had they started out with audiophile community messages about how super SUPER fine-grained DSD is and how using it would help protect the original tapes, the reviewers and customers would have become educated enough so that the whole mess could have been avoided. Let's try to get the message out about DSD--all else being equal, the DSD is so finely detailed, it's impossible for any distortion to be introduced with it. You could get more distortion by changing the temperature of the room a degree or two when running a tape in the process chain. I think I'll go to someone's house and move everything one atomic radius to the left and ask if they see anything different while trucks are rolling up and down the street!!!!

[@musicforfun5350]

Like you, I'm not an analog purist nor am I an audiophile. I'm a music fan and collector. I appreciate when a record sounds good to my ears and that's my bottom line. Of course I understand the shady aspects of what MoFi did and the uproar over that is justifiable. However, it doesn't change the fact that many of their releases have drawn high praise because of the sound quality. Will this situation result in prices of MoFi vinyl being lowered somewhat? It would be nice but I doubt it. Now that the cat's out of the bag, we all have the choice to buy or not.

[@voccsaycee30]

The industry should get back to selling SACDs or DSD downloads...or DSD streaming (if that's a thing). I'd much rather hear a straight DSD file or an SACD than a dirty, filtered copy of it on vinyl. I personally pretty much only buy records pressed in the 70s and before or records cut by Bernie Grundman/Chris Bellman...or maybe some records where the labeling is very clear about an AAA chain, like the Abbey Road-mastered Beatles in Mono releases. I rarely buy anything with vague descriptions -- "Mastered from the original analog tapes" means jack shit to anyone who has any knowledge of recording. To me that always most likely meant, "copied from the original mix reels to 24/96 digital or DSD and then mastered onto a computer for editing and disc cutting." ...so I'm not terribly upset about this news because I only blew $ on one recent MoFi release -- the 2012 Cyndi Lauper "She's So Unusual" reissue...which I listened to once and felt it didnt sound any better than the original pressing. The good thing about this "crisis" is that audiophile snobs are gonna mellow out some, ALL record companies (not just MoFi) are going to have to label their vinyl mastering info more clearly from now on, and hopefully the big majors will start taking a little more care and consideration with the whole "all-analog" thing while they're pushing shit tons of digitally recorded AND digitally cut Adele records at Wal-Mart.

[@johnstuartsmith]

It was really tragic that SACD never caught on. Sony/Phillips put so much effort into selling CDs as "perfect sound forever" that the electronics industry couldn't get the message across to consumers that there were formats newly available that were obviously so much better.

[@JFMatte]

What also bothers me a lot, is they made limited pressings, which would have been inevitable because you can't make many stampers from the master tape with their "One step" process. Was it with the intention to make beleive that they were indeed transfering for the master tapes ? With DSD there is no such limit...It's when they annonced they would make 40 000 copies of Thriller with the One Step process, no way it could be done without a digital duplication

[@26Jorgeb]

Here we are 9 or so months after.I guess MOFI has done a good job with their damage control.Right now, most vloggers are still promoting their one step products like nothing happened.I guess they have succeeded in hypnotizing the vinyl community once again.

[@TheMumbaGames]

I like my mofi albums the handfull that I have. They sound good to me, i'm happy.

[@uselessoldman7964]

The joke here is no matter what, all re-released versions probably come from the same source, those original master recordings, the only difference is there remastered by someone for a specific media platform, CD DVD Vinyl. If you take a DSD copy from a tape machine it should be 100% accurate, however if you copy from tape machine to tape machine you are adding in potentially extra colouring from the second machine so its again potentially NOT 100% accurate. Mofi take a copy and apply mastering so as to take full advantage of their higher grade plastic vinyl over mainstream labels who potentially use cheaper thinner vinyl. SO when anyone claims one record sound better than another its all down to two things, the quality of the pressing and the mastering. The source they are using is almost certainly in all cases, the same.

[@LifelongMusicJunkie]

I am not a vinyl only user, as I have many FLAC files and a few DSD files that I play on a DAC. But having the original album and a 192/24bit FLAC of Van Halen 1 (for example), the DSD means I would not bother to upgrade anymore to a Mofi version. I recently bought the Mofi T-Rex and I did not have that on any other medium, so I can still buy Mofi. I probably won't pay $100 or $125 for aa One-Step DSD file, when the DSD file is only $25-30 from download sites.

[@davidchaddock5358]

Even that's way too much because it costs them fuck all to copy and download to a huge number of people.

[@carlosgoncalves4243]

Hello... Where are the audiophiles' golden ears? I just bought two records from MoFi one or two years ago and I realized that sounds like my SACDs version, so I didn't buy any MoFi anymore. MoFi records comparing with my old records MoFi sounds kind of bright, like digital... I think audiophiles' ears fool them too...

[@hangarsacto]

I get the idea that having a digital step in the process isn’t as “pure” as not but what if having that step in truly makes the end result actually truly sound best?

[@bcarlyle7741]

Personally, as a vinyl fan, I've got no problem with preserving original master tapes with high resolution digital backups. That copy will be available long after the tape has failed, will play back more consistently than successive analog plays, and if done correctly it won't have the brick-wall decimation filtering needed to capture at, say, 44.1 KHz. I don't think records need to be all analog, they just need to be done with care. But if it was my hobby was to collect pure analog recordings, then I'd be pretty mad.

[@skylabsaudio]

💯

[@cirenosnor5768]

We can’t keep running the masters. At this point, they’ve already deteriorated Saying that the analog purists have been calling the MFSL pressings the best versions not knowing they were digital is irrelevant. Saying it’s going to be hard for audiophiles to back track isn’t true. There’s no reason for audiophiles to be quiet for a while It’s like this: MFSL is capable of making great sounding digital records. HOWEVER…we have nothing to compare them to. The people who say shit like “see, the records were digital. You liked them and couldn’t tell the difference” are WAY off base. We never compared a digital MFSL version of a pressing to a all analog version of the same title. The only way we can see if a difference can be heard is for MFSL to press both a DSD and all analog version. THEN see if we can hear a difference. Considering that people have preferred what are true all analog versions of a title to DSD MFSL versions probably suggests that people *are* hearing differences Another factor nobody seems to be talking about: many of the MFSL titles now in question were also cut at 45rpm. THAT alone will improve sonics and explains why people like the 45rpm MFSL’s: better dynamics, bass, etc. regardless if it’s DSD and being compared to other pressings that are cut at the in general inferior sounding 33rpm

[@tiborosz1825]

I think the problem is audiophiles said it sounded better than the original which was analog. Do in essence..they preferred the digital version while claimong the warmth and depth of vinyl.

[@madcrabber1113]

I am new to the "audiophile" albums and want to ask if Mofi advertised albums as being all analog and instead used some digital in the process? I stopped listening to vinyl way back around 1990 in favor of the ease of cd. I recently got back into vinyl and am so happy that I kept all of my 300 or so records as the current pricing structure is quite chaotic compared to what it was way back in the 70's and 80's when my records were purchased. I bought a few records and sacd's from Mofi and Analog Productions recently to see what all of the hype was about. They all sound great to me but in comparison to most of my old records they aren't that much better to the point that I feel as if I am somehow missing something.

[@SPAZZOID100]

2nd hand prices have not budged yet. Doubt they will.

[@MBinDenver]

So now we know that everything that says 'Half-speed mastered at Abbey Road' is digital too... Miles Showell loves his process, and everyone loves it too... but oddly enough there isn't a backlash for these digital pressings like there was with the MoFi crowd... there is no indication that they are digital, you have to go and dig around... so they aren't 'lying' but they're not telling the 'truth'... while I'm avoiding these digital pressings as much as I can, and if a reissue appears from a band I like or even an album I already have that is done from the master tapes in all analog chain, I'm buying it, and always glad I did... just getting sick of the vinyl resurgence being fed by digital audio pressed to vinyl instead of CD's (which are dead?)

[@edd2771]

I know what you’ve got behind your back. Records…more new all-analogue records…

[@RobertKohut]

Dastardly deed!!

[@paulbrookes413]

I dig-it!

[@Old_Sailor85]

"Organic" food can be a joke, too. You may be surprised what can be considered organic.

[@AndyMillerPhotoUK]

Thanks - but the idiots will ignore you. I only care what the music sounds like when I play it on my system in my room. The Mofi OMR copies I own simply sound better than every other copy I own. Job done.

[@Threemicsrecords]

I've heard few years ago ago, that the mastering engineers in late 70's and early 80's, used 14Bit Digital Delays to know, when to add 2 second of silence between songs! Go and 😂listen to your analog LP's now.

[@380stroker]

This is true. The only true AAA records are from like 1950's and prior. But today a small amount of mastering engineers use an analogue delay, which means most of the vinyl records are digital. LOL! Anadialogue did a video on this recently on his youtube channel.

[@Threemicsrecords]

@@380stroker I think people confuse analog sound with analog recording. Digital recording is more than capable to record characters of transistors and tubes or types' hiss (if someone is into it). Having said that 14bit digital deley is not that bad if you know what you are doing.

[@chrisrees7054]

Oh 180 gram (remastered) vinyl is also a buying option. Maybe they cracked under the pressure?

[@eddievega1100]

So a lp that cost my 4.99 back in the 70’s and late 90’s . Sounds just as good or the same as a $40.00 mofi recording? 😱

[@ralex3697]

If MoFi was 40.00 that would be great. These are 100.00 - 125.00

[@musicman8270]

I have some vinyl mastered from PCM and its pretty obvious. On the other hand I have some that were well done. I try to get stuff from an analog master tho.

[@380stroker]

Reminds me of the 90's when i used to record my cd's to cassette tape. Recording sampled music to an anaolg medium. Really stupid.

[@PimpinBassie2]

There is going to a reckoning with the "wider soundstage" and "more detail" (which they claimed to hear in these "analog" recordings) audiophiles who are now backtracking like crazy.

[@crazyprayingmantis5596]

They lied for profit, it's that simple. But some people say "it doesn't matter, as long as it sounds good" Some people are ok with being lied to and ripped off it seems. To those of you who say it doesn't matter, I've got some premium bottled water to sell you. It still tastes good, so "it doesn't matter" that you'll be paying a premium price for my tap water right?

[@Beeraltar]

I think those people are usually talking about the digital step and not the price.

[@crazyprayingmantis5596]

@@Beeraltar Yes the digital step doesn't matter as long as they're letting everyone know about it, but I'm talking about the people who think it doesn't matter as long as the end result sounds good

[@dkeener13]

they didn't use digital because it was cheaper or easier. they used it because it was better and more transparent as a transfer medium from the source tapes. they "ripped you off" by giving you a better product.

[@crazyprayingmantis5596]

@@dkeener13 So why did they try to hide that they were using it? I have no issue with them using it and i don't really care about their reasons for using it. But I care about them lying about using it

[@dkeener13]

@@crazyprayingmantis5596 on the marketing end I think it's reasonable to say they lied by omission. they let the voodoo practitioners run with the idea that their product was undefiled analog. They also knew a large segment of their target audience are the easiest marks on the planet, happily spending thousands on power cables, interconnects, etc., so of course they want in on the game. A hundred bucks for an LP that actually sounds phenomenal is a tiny infraction compared to what these people get hoodwinked for on a daily basis. Mofi sells a $400 LP paperweight on their site. Which seems crazy, except other "high end" companies sell ones that cost thousands. Don't hate the playa hate the game.

[@mondoenterprises6710]

Basically, it is a high end quality pressing.

[@dkeener13]

I think your "two groups" are accurate, but I would cast them a little differently. 1) consumers. I would say speculators. the people who pay $3K for Abraxas and wouldn't dare drack a rock through it more than once or twice just to say they did. the people who buy all these 1-steps before they come out with the intention of selling them later when the price rises. that's who is hurt by this. people who bought them to enjoy (consume) them don't enjoy them any less. 2) writers. I would say BS artists. people who made snake oil claims about analog and digital and have been exposed as frauds. if these folks are upset it's a good thing IMO.

[@Zockopa]

Well,its the usual consumer fraud.

[@james-p]

If they're going to make a DSD copy, why buy a vinyl pressing of it? I'd rather just buy the DSD!

[@sloboat55]

MoFi broke the heart. OCD Mikey hurt the butt. Dig your vid.

[@joey1127]

I still don't get the big deal. Most master have been converted to digital some time back AND they've been using digital tape recorders since the late 1970's (looks at the back of some of those Windham Hill records from the late, late 1970's). I think the whole Acoustic V's Electrical recordings argument is so tired. Once you hear your favorite recording in Dolby Atmos, you'll wonder why ANYONE is still playing vinyl records!

[@texasbassranger]

Just sayin'

[@DrNoahBoddy004]

It’s little more than ‘The Liars Club’ and it’s as comparably disgusting as the ever-present format wars spurred on by Digital’s Corporate Greed! High-End analog wasn’t broken. Dolbies B, thru S as well as encoded/decoded DBX worked JUST FINE!! I’m working myself to a blood boil (I gets on my nerves, that bad) I’ll step back from this soapbox, a moment!

[@DethFromAbove1985]

If they mislead people they shouldn't have. But their process is totally fine with me.

[@robertyoung1777]

Manufacturers should be honest with customers buying their products. Record pressing is unregulated so it’s the “Wild West” in terms of quality and process transparency. MOFI appears to have had perfectly good reasons for using the processes they chose but no reason to be misleading about those processes. All I’ve said is my opinion.

[@zergbong]

this "controversy" once again proves that vinyl folks are just not normal. at the end they hate the fact that they like the sound of something digital.

[@mikehirsh1896]

R.I.P. Mofi LOL I always thought MOFI WAS DOO DOO

[@Jermeister12]

Imagine the Rock (who always cracked me up) saying this 2 the Millions & Milllions FINALLY SOMEONE WHO I S NOT A DUMBASS 😀😀 Talking about the Mo Fi bs like it was a national friggin incident 😀You're a straight up dude 😀😀Thanks

[@louissilvani1389]

One thing for sure it’s nice to hear that digital has come a long way In its early days it was horrible.

[@SPAZZOID100]

Not sure about that. I have cd’s from 1986 that sounded incredible and still do.

[@alexanderjones9766]

Not necessarily. Listen to Ry Cooder's album "Bop Till You Drop", recorded digitally in 1979. One of the best-sounding albums I've heard.

[@Peter-ii4xq]

It proves that most people only think they have excellent ears and know how music has to sound. What Conservatory did they study? What experience with live acoustical instruments do they have? Let me tell you: NOTHING! I have and I did. I can garantee people get fooled by the business industry. They want only one thing: your money.

[@mikehirsh1896]

One thing that has driven me mad is a Mahavishn Orchestra box set where the entire Central Park concert was remixed to MP3 and that was the purpose and wow out of a pair of speakers wow did it sound like shit.... And the whole thing with mixing to Mp3 and then taking those files and being unable to convert that amazing concert remixed to wave / CD to where you can;t even hear any separation just only on headphones... It's like this giant mess of a sound on a CD but was originally released for a MP3 market and one would think the opposite like take those 16 multitrack analog tapes and mix them correctly to a higher format but I guess they didn't see this as a CD release .. Because anyone could tell if they had decent speakers how mess of a sound it is..

[@SPAZZOID100]

How many labels would actually let their 1st generation analog masters out of the building to a 3rd party to master from? These days?? Not many.

[@DZigas11]

After we know that there is a digital step in the analog process, to me, the most interesting question is: what do the subsequent analog steps add or not add to the sound? Why not keep the reproduction chain all digital and stay "truest" to the source? Is analog just a better reproduction process, downstream of the digital master? No right or wrong answer here, IMHO, but if this episode forces reconsideration of these playback fundamentals, it has served a good purpose.

[@skylabsaudio]

I have heard amazing all analog records and amazing "cut from a digital source" records. A well made, well produced and well mastered record sounds amazing to my ears regardless if there is a digital link in the chain. Some music I prefer digitally and some I prefer on vinyl. For me, it depends more on the music rather than the source. For just a couple examples, I think aggressive metal and dance music (dub step- electronica) sound better digitally, however, blues, jazz or any stripped-down organic music I'd prefer analog. Agree, no wrong answer.

[@DZigas11]

@@skylabsaudio Thanks for the reply. What fascinates me is "why"? Why should one kind of reproduction downstream of a digital master favor one kind of music or the other? For example, on blues, jazz or stripped down organ music, is analog faithfully conveying some warmth in the digital master that is lost if it is full digital playback? Or is it just adding some warmth as an "artifact" not in the master? Again, this is just high-concept stuff - end user satisfaction is really the only metric that counts.

[@rui1863]

Analog is the best way to edit/mix DSD files otherwise to edit it in the computer it must be converted to some form of PCM... i.e. DXD.

[@jefffoster3557]

I tend to agree on the certain styles I don't mind on vinyl. And I think the reason for it is that jazz doesnt require as much spectrum in reproduction as other styles like classic rock. It is interesting to me listening to great producers such as Rudy Van Gelder speak about how he despised the medium of vinyl because of the way you had to craft the music to make it work. And that is my biggest complaint.....how artists had to manipulate their own art to fit a medium that left a lot to be desired. Imagine some of the gems we would have today if folks like Chris Squire had digital means back in the day.

[@primeanalogrecords]

I love that you said there are “vinyl purists” that are going to be quiet for a while! All the while Chad over at Acoustic Sounds has capitalized and smelled blood in the water and raised his prices! Ridiculous! Me, I’m working on getting the cleanest OG pressings I can since those haven’t been monkied with by remastering ect! I did several videos on my channel about this! I’d love it if you check them out! Great video and hopefully it makes people sit up and take notice!😅

[@skylabsaudio]

Will do! Thanks! I actually talked to Chad an hour ago or so. He's a really good dude.

[@tiborosz1825]

MoFi CDs on vinyl for $150

[@mysock351C]

I think the only take-home here is that audiophiles know next to nothing about audio. The only use for records really is as a physical media. They offer no additional benefit other than being lossier than digital and a medium that easily degrades with time, and unless you like popcorn not one of those attributes is euphonic in any way. Can they sound good? Of course. But they have no specific benefit other than being something you can physically own and hold. That counts for a lot, but the only relevant parameter should be that the source material is of the highest quality possible, and that doesn’t mean it’s purely analog only or any other nonsense people dream up to artificially generate sales that would not otherwise exist in saner areas of consumer goods.

[@Error2username]

It sounds great, So whats the real prob? If you look, youl find hints about the digital chain on the CD version, from mofi.

[@crazyprayingmantis5596]

I have some natural spring water from the French Alps I'd like to sell you at a premium price (it's really just my tap water) But "it tastes great so what's the problem"? Do you see what you're doing when you say, it sounds great so what's the problem? You're saying you're ok with being lied to for profit

[@Error2username]

@@crazyprayingmantis5596 I dont come and slap the cxxk out of your mouth when you work?, same with mofi, and they do it well, just like the tapwater.

[@jissanhuq3792]

@@crazyprayingmantis5596 your constantly being lied or led for profit. As others have pointed out the darkside of the moon record here used as thumbnail n example have no connection to the digital process, yet it’s being used. Go figure

[@wildman1978101]

I only click on this because of The Dark Side being displayed so prominently, now Im interested in listening to it. There are audible track starts and stops littered all over this album and as far as I know they can only be taken out digitally. If that is still the case and these are still present I would consider this an inferior mastering. Im gonna poke around the torrent sites, there is no way that I am going to buy this album yet again.