MoFi Audiophiles: Ahh, so digital is ok now?

[@musictalkwithjohn]

Absolutely! I made the mistake of getting caught up in the search for the best sound. My system is good, but it is far from the best. This video was a good reminder to stop the search and just sit back and enjoy the music. Thanks man.

[@RobertFithen]

Excellent! Thanks!!

[@gordonshumway7465]

These guys who have like 20 different pressings of DSoTM or Pet Sounds amaze me. There are less than 10 albums in my collection of which I own multiple pressings...and usually it's because I have a used original and got a nice 180g remaster or something like that. To each their own and I like a quality pressing, but some of this just seems overkill to me personally.

[@rodzalez3549]

Sound chasing is a rabbit hole. Just enjoy the music

[@budsmoker4201120]

Well put bud

[@joeygsaudiochannel3972]

This is the best F'in take on this "Controversy" I've seen. Mine was a 5 min. rant but yours is way better ! Subscribed !

[@RobertFithen]

Thanks!!

[@dmd7472]

What a beautiful refreshing take. Your humility is match only by your knowledge Rasta…also loving the pretentious British wine snob. hearing notes of Sussex.

[@rolyex1530]

MoFi just conducted history’s biggest double blind test. Involving thousands of record lovers throughout the world and lasting 7 years. Apparently everyone failed to detect the digital step involved. Several years ago Sony declared that because of age they would no longer allow any label to remaster the Kind of Blue analog master tapes. Maybe we all should have suspected that it was no longer possible to remaster from those old tapes.

[@RobertFithen]

And now we've found out it was actually longer than 7 years.

[@TimCB900F]

That's what is very interesting about all of this. The so called experts couldn't detect one way or the other . Audio engineers will tell you DSD is currently the best way to record music. Simply called progress. Best of both worlds.

[@joey1127]

@@TimCB900F AMEN! I have Windham Hill recordings from 1979 that were done on a Digital Tape Recorder...it's not NEW technology and I'm surprised at all these people upset that a recording made in 1981/82 has something digital in the chain on the remaster...I'm sure digital was used on Thriller at some point... Glad to see the whole Digital V's Analog argument is now officially over!

[@rickyblair8802]

@@joey1127 the problem with calling it over is what digital or what vinyl are you talking about? Or what players are we talking about? There are to many variables

[@rickyblair8802]

@@joey1127 your so wrong, I just listened to several albums some recorded digital some analogue and they were pure analogue. The analogue records were definitely better.

[@crunchyfrog555]

I don't know whether I'd ever consider myself audiophile. All I know is that I have some reasonable ears and qualified as an audio engineer. I dig analogue like anyone, but as far as remasters and anything goes, as long as it sounds good, I couldn't give a flying fuck whether it was analogue, digital, made out of toffee and sellotape. I honestly don't care, and always believe the proof is in the pudding.

[@RobertFithen]

Absolutely! Whatever sounds good to you.

[@moustachio334]

Audiophiles are idiots. Alan Parsons had a good interview on the topic of those morons.

[@ezzzraabarro9544]

I worked for MOFI for a decade. I would not trust anything the owner or VP do with releases. You should track down the dozens of employees who left or were laid off in the past 4 years. Nearly 25 people at the very least. Many who were "whistleblowers'

[@virginraydevito]

As many have said it's the fact that they straight up lied for years about their process, and have been caught red handed. Charging 60-125$ for digital records is a joke. What nobody seems to be mentioning is an obvious A/B test. Take an established "great" analogue rip like classic rip of who tommy, and run it through dsdd, then listen to them side by side. I doubt anyone on the planet will hear the difference. This would put the whole analogue vs digital debate to bed imo.

[@crunchyfrog555]

@@virginraydevito Yup, I mean you're not wrong about the marketing. A lie is a lie. But the double blind test would indeed, But that's the point with all hobbies - very rarely do the snobs want to put it to the test because deep down they fear they're wrong. I try to be as honest as I can where things like this are concerned because simply I'm only fooling one person - me.

[@pierreduchesne0001]

You got a new follower. The best video on the MoFi-Gate. Thanks.

[@RobertFithen]

Thanks!!

[@jeffbrown2982]

I've heard that years ago, some high-end audio magazine had a "blind" test where audiophiles listened to music on a system that was composed of tens of thousands of dollars worth of equipment versus a system that cost much less. Supposedly, the audiophiles couldn't really hear a difference. (There's an amusing short KZbin video put out by the Wall Street Journal called "Japanese audiophiles are going to extremes" ; one guy's apartment is so full of audio equipment that he has to move his couch just to open his refrigerator).

[@RobertFithen]

I've seen that KZbin video. He has to generate his own electricity because public electric isn't good enough? Is that the one? lol

[@NoEgg4u]

@jeff brown, without knowing each component in both stereos, who set up both stereos, the room that held both stereos, the room treatments in those rooms, and who the "audiophiles" were, and which magazine performed the test (and what qualifies them as "high-end"), there are just too many ways for such a test to be flawed. There is a lot of overpriced (supposedly) high-end gear. But there is also some amazing sound high-end gear. But the latter must be carefully matched with speakers and professionally set up in rooms with proper dimensions, and be (virtually) free of echos, etc. There are $5,000 systems that sound better than $50,000 systems, when the former is done right and the latter is done wrong.

[@manchesterexplorer8519]

Funny that you say that , During the 90's in my first apartment I ended up purchasing a Pioneer 5.1 receiver that was a $400 receiver on sale at the time due to Lechmere going out of business and ran A/B to 4 speakers with a CD player . The speakers were nothing great but the Pioneer if I recall put out 125w per channel . Anyways this set up sounded better than the $3,000 set up that I have now . Actually it blew it away .

[@bipbopboom]

I’m with you 100% Robert!! This is so much fun to watch unfold!! Don’t knock your “Rock’n’Roll” ears too much. It now appears that your ears and mine have more integrity and a better track record than the guys with the four inch thick speaker cables and thousand dollar styli. Cheers fellow music fan!! Jon

[@RobertFithen]

LOL Thanks!! Yes a lot of fun.

[@JBLClassic]

An audiophile system to me, is one that makes music like Helmet, Halo of Flys, Cows, Melvins and God Bullies etc. sound like I'm in a 1990's dirty nightclub listening live. not some stupid system, that looks like a peice of scuplture where the only thing that sounds good is Patricia Barber. ,

[@LowNoiseJasonSkilz]

Lets hope the audiophiles leave vinyl soon and prices can come back to eartg again. They can start overhyping CDs now.

[@goodknight37]

That Herbie shirt is amazing !

[@ronlaurence4572]

We were wrong in assuming that MFSL was all analog only because of the way the product was presented. It was a lie of omission on their part. But because of the packaging and more importantly the high price, no one thought to question these. They should lower the price since we know less work is involved, but this will not happen.

[@agarber1932]

And aso there is no longer such a thing as a limited run. They can make millions of copies if they want.

[@FleagleSangria]

One other thing, if the experts such as Fremer can hear the difference between digital and analogue so well, then he could save us the controversy by listening to a few and then let us know either "Oh yes these are digitally compromised" or "Nope, puuuuuure analogue" I call BS on him or anyone else being able, in a well mastered comparison, to be able to hear across the board the difference in a digitally mastered lp or analogue.

[@RobertFithen]

That's exactly what I was saying. If digital is so awful, these people should have been able to tell if something has a digital source.

[@Watcher4111]

If these Golden ear audiophiles can tell difference between bad, harsh digital and divine all analogue, they wouldve tell that these mofi digital vinyls are digital long Time ago

[@chauncygardiner9572]

That's the point. Why waste your time with a digitally sourced/mastered vinyl lp. Just get the dsd file on cd or otherwise. I would only buy vinyl from the pre-digital era.

[@FleagleSangria]

@@chauncygardiner9572 Because "mastering"

[@treperrys]

@@chauncygardiner9572 I don't think they can sell the DSD 256 file and DSD 64 is all that will fit on a SACD but I agree, if it's digital just give it to me digital. A vinyl record made from a digital file is the worst of both worlds.

[@williambellach6422]

The search for the best sound always makes for a great discussion. I have never been a huge mofi guy , mostly due to price and availability. I relate to your "rock n roll ears " comment . I am trying to understand why I would need a vinyl copy of a DSD recording rather than an SACD ? Especially when factoring in the price.

[@jnagarya519]

I remember "audiophile" from the 1970s. The good reviews of advertisers' products . . .

[@therevrockinrollin]

We will never be the same after MoFi-Gate. I just hope we are a better version of ourselves when it’s done and healing has happened. Don’t sleep on that MJ cassette - bet it sounds awesome.

[@RobertFithen]

I hope the change is for the better. I remember when I first got the Michael Jackson cassette thinking it was the best sounding thing I owned at the time.

[@puttyputty123]

I am a big fan of cassettes :D

[@musicgroovin]

I'm perfectly OK with an all-analogue cassette tape. I've kept my tapes.

[@JBLClassic]

This is what happens when you drink the jesus juice.

[@ezzzraabarro9544]

I worked at MOFI for a decade. Do not trust the owner or VP. Terrible work environment. Shady business practices. There are dozens of people who left that place who can vouch

[@cdedcec6092]

This is the most sensible video I’ve seen this week

[@RobertFithen]

Thanks!!

[@zackamania6534]

Nice STP No 4 poster. An UNDER DISCUSSED band

[@mattplummer764]

Saw a recent interview with Kevin Gray, arguably the most qualified audiophile there is, responsible for so many brilliant all analog pressings. He said something to the effect that if done well, no one can really hear the difference caused by a digital step in the chain. I like mike from the in groove, but there’s a lot of analog fetishisation and I feel he and others should own up to this - the end result is what matters, not the process imo

[@agomodern]

For record store owners, it could be about pushing sales, so that's why they go on and on about how great they sound. I started watching Mike's videos when he put the video out about buying George Benson's collection, but when I saw that these collections just pile up box after box and he doesn't do anything with them, I stopped watching. Again, new "audiophile" pressings aren't my thing, so I stopped watching him.

[@zackamania6534]

Mike from the in groove is one of the biggest culprits of this crap, which has lead to crazy prices in the secondary market and then new issues.

[@Roamany-Jones]

I respect Kevin Gray, but you cannot make the assumption that no one can hear a difference. He cannot speak for everyone.

[@SPAZZOID100]

@@Roamany-Jones clearly, no one could tell that MFSL has a digital step.

[@crazyprayingmantis5596]

If it's "only the end result that matters", then I have a number of products I'd like to sell you. I have "all natural organic" food that I sell at premium prices that actually isn't all natural or organic, but it tastes good and that's all that matters right? So once you discover that my all natural organic food isn't actually what I said it was, are you going to continue to pay the premium price for it because it "still tastes good"? I have a number of really high quality prints of really expensive art that I advertise as "genuine and authentic" and have a price tag to match, you shouldn't have any issues paying the premium price for them because "they look really really good" and that's all that matters right? Are you ok with being lied to for profit is what it boils down to, so are you still ok with being lied to as long as it "sounds good"? If so, reply YES And I'll send you my contact details

[@jamesguitarplayer1]

I’m only 25. I’ve never understood the hate digital gets, a great sounding record is a great sounding record no matter the source. Thanks for calling out the BS

[@Bizzle65]

You'll understand when you get a bit younger. Don't rush, let it come to you.

[@fcamiola]

Its all about the mastering imo. There are great analog masters, terrible analog masters, and the same for digital. I think most of high end audio is getting the correct EQ, which is accomplished through various component matching: loudspeakers, preamps, tubes or solid state power, cables, cartridges, DACs, etc., which is an expensive way to get a good EQ on your preferred music. I'm an audiophile myself, well rather a music junkie first, so I play the game too. However my system is reasonably priced (around $8k or so complete with both vinyl and CD).

[@omenoflaherty1294]

I feel like the ghost of Nyquist is just trolling the analog Übermensch.

[@TJRtheOriginal]

Enjoyed your video. The intention behind the Loudness (brick walling) Wars, was so that the label's artist music would pop more than the competition on radio. The Loudness Wars was the reason I started going back to Vinyl since the Vinyl version wasn’t over compressed like the CDs were........And yes (deep sigh) I made a video too 🤣

[@RobertFithen]

Radio processing would level everything out anyway. I always heard it was to be the loudest in the disc changers. Especially hard rock bands.

[@Hyxtryx]

​@@RobertFithen The disc changer theory doesn't sound like the #1 reason to me. If it's in a disc changer, then you've likely already bought it. That battle is over. It's for sounding louder on the radio, in clubs, in the supermarket, etc. A disc changer that's used to play songs over a "public address" system... yes, maybe those changers, but not the one in your home. Yes, the radio station will even-out the volumes, but with the brick-wall loudness going on in a song, it will still sound louder. And louder sounds "better" to the ears, which is why the volume level needs to be carefully chosen for blind listening tests. Also, I just thought of this... Wasn't there a time in the early 2000s around the iPod heyday, when the news reported that kids were listening to their fashionable new ear buds too loudly and were damaging their hearing? Somebody (Apple?) said they were going to start limiting the volume of their earphone jacks to prevent this. It didn't get talked about much after that, but I wonder if that didn't help spur more loudness war.

[@henrygandy3883]

Robert your diatribe ...is absolute comedy gold !!!!!!!!

[@jimk2000]

I have been buying music since the early 60's and have gone thru every format...vinyl...reel-to-reel...cassette...mini disc...CD etc. which are all now sitting in a storage unit because I no longer have room for all of that. So now I have ended up in the autumn of my years just listening to MP3's (Not even WAV) and I can't even tell the difference anymore between an MP3 at 192 kbps or at 320 kbps or 1,140. It is what your ears gets accustomed to.

[@WithScienceAsMySheperd]

ive been listening to MP3s since 1998 and you can hear between 192, 256, 320kbps quite easily. Metal, pop, rock... it's not as bad a listening to RealPlayer artifact-ridden soundbites bit you can easily hear the difference between MP3 cmopressions and a FLAC or a WAV

[@VinylSerenity]

This is CRAZY!!!!...on a side note I wanted to tell you that I reorganized the collection so no more records are outside the plastic sleeve....I think it was you and Mazzy that stated we never did that with records growing up and the vinyl from those is still good

[@irasthei2014]

I watched the second video and left a comment. I’ve just watched this, and I think you’re bonkers!! You should certainly try stand up. A great video!! Your take on this is the most hilarious!! In stitches

[@jnorten]

As a mixing and mastering engineer I can tell you that vinyl is certainly not the most accurate format, it's about being a pleasing format. A high end digital copy will always be a more accurate representation of what the artist was hearing, which does not necessarily make it a more pleasing representation. The flaws of vinyl are part of the charm. Digital won't replace vinyl, but they may live side by side and compliment each other again.

[@manchesterexplorer8519]

Digital definitely hits lower with the bass although I'm not really into rap or electronic /dance music so this has no effect on me . The high frequencies also hit a little harder on paper but my ears cannot really tell the difference as the human ear can only hear so much , my cats may notice though .

[@johnclintonmusicandmore]

great video you hit it right on the head out of all the mofi wars you killed it thanks

[@RobertFithen]

Thanks!!

[@RekkidTalk]

So MoFi has been selling box wine for the last seven years? 🍷📦👂🤣

[@RobertFithen]

They secretly replaced the gourmet coffee with Folger's Crystals.

[@jeffbrown2982]

@@RobertFithen You'll have to pry my Folger's Crystals from my cold, dead hands.

[@NateBouchard]

I did a shoot out once with a MoFi record and an OG. I couldn’t tell the difference. Maybe it was the Crosley I was using. I dunno.

[@RobertFithen]

Could've been the speakers, the tonearm, the alignment, the record conditions, how worn was the stylus, etc. etc. etc. lol

[@NateBouchard]

@@RobertFithen of course, it could’ve been the fact that it was a Crosley.

[@Luckywrench]

You and I share a lot of similar views about MoFi, why we turn records, and generally our outlooking on audiophiling in general. I enjoyed your video, and I laughed hard at your comment about your OG Thriller cassette being superior to the upcoming One step. Also FINALLY someone brought up the notion of HEARING and getting a little older. Nicely done.

[@RobertFithen]

Thanks!! Nice to hear from someone who actually got what I was saying. lol

[@sonidosanto]

Haha finally, the most coherent video I've seen of all this mess. Congratulations!

[@RobertFithen]

Thanks!!

[@SuperWarren83]

Both Cd,& Vinyl have their charm.

[@aboutsoundandvision]

With vinyl I would prefer all analog but as long as it is mastered well and the digital transfer is higher resolution than a standard CD then I see no problem with digital steps on vinyl

[@takeiteasy6154]

I love your honesty about vinyl limitations, unlike so many on you tube rubbishing good digital formats.

[@mariawesley7583]

"These are Folger's crystals?"

[@RobertFithen]

That's one of the first things I thought too

[@YnotNomis]

You hit it on the head when you said most people think of "digital" with Mp3 files and the whole loudness war which is why it got a bad rap. I convert to DSD files a year ago after hearing them as opposed to Flac and Wav files and I love it.

[@rydersrecordcollection2927]

I’m completely with you, it’s so funny watching people jump on the audiophile train and the rabbit holes some people go down. In my mind if it sounds good who cares where it’s sourced. To me vinyl is the process, the artwork, the feeling and the thrill of digging. Sound quality is an added plus. Great video and channel man, keep it up!

[@RobertFithen]

Thanks!!

[@AsTheTableTurns]

MoFi should definitely start offering the DSD download.

[@treperrys]

I don't think they are licensed to do that. Not the full DSD 256 anyway. They do sell the SACD with the DSD 64.

[@LowNoiseJasonSkilz]

Haha I love this. Audiophiles actually love CD quality now. I have no mofis out of my 8,000 records. I think Mofi has contributed to the overhype and overpricing of vinyl these days along with RSD. Its going to collapse some day in terms of these peak prices.

[@RobertFithen]

It's not really CD quality, but digital like DSD or Flac. I can't wait for things to go back how they were when it was a bunch of dorks like myself going through antique mall bins.

[@LowNoiseJasonSkilz]

@@RobertFithen hehe exactly. The audiophile snobs are getting their due finally. Lol

[@ezzzraabarro9544]

Time to carve a hole in your roof to let the rain come in🤣

[@MusicalHifi54]

I couldn't agree with you more! I not only have rock n' roll ears but also motorcycle ears where I rode several years without ear plugs. Needles to say there's no way I'm GOING To hear subtle differences or nuance soundstage and imaging differences lol. Oh and i was a mobile dj for ten years and was a band geek in school. My ears are not toast but they definitely ain't picking up "audiophile/mastering" differences. Yes I can hear some differences between good quality gear and records/cd's/tapes, but i can still enjoy it all. I just enjoy all the music, all formats, all "mastering' styles. I love vintage and semi-vintage hifi gear as well. I dig the looks and sound quality of it, but that being said I'm not super critical of it either. Cheers from Houston!

[@sidesup8286]

Great job on presenting this and giving it the humor it deserves. People paying $125 per record will always be the funniest thing to me through. If you don't have a piece of music you'd like but can't afford, you just listen to something else. Emptying your wallet isn't necessary.

[@RobertFithen]

Thanks!! There's always a less expensive alternative. I've heard lossless streams that sound better than some hi end reissues.

[@toneyisaiah3556]

I can do things with 125.00 than spending on an album.

[@toneyisaiah3556]

I don't have any Mobile Fidelity recordings.

[@toneyisaiah3556]

Which doesn't seem to matter to me.

[@leonhardtart7163]

Yes! CD AAD ADD and the most wanted DDD back in the days, especially for Classic (Deutsche Grammophon). BUT Vinyl is more about the EVENT to watch and listen. Sometimes a vinyl with a good late 1970s/mid 1980s amplifier SOUNDS super duper. Why? Because Compact Cassette (tape) was one of the main storage media. And it was totally analog. So the producers who want to sell there best products like Revox, Nakamitchi or even Yamaha and Technics or Sony focused on that. So if you want a very good and inexpensive HIFI System for both vinyl records and CD check this out and enjoy. Cheers!

[@RobertFithen]

I tried to put people back in the mindset of the mid-80's (if they were around then) when everyone thought digital was king and let's get rid of these old records. Seems like more of a style thing than anything else.

[@mymixture965]

Spot on, subscribed.

[@shpater]

I thank you for your videos about the MOFI issue. The MOFI case is a mirror faced in front of the Audiophile community that reveals the replacement of the main goal of a common audiophile which is the desire for a maximum/best sound quality reproduction with a race after the isosteric hard to get more expensive all analogue process. This has occurred without us the community stop to ask ourself or even worse, when a digital step added to an audio process is ruled automatically to be bad for the whole cutting process even it enables a (no doubt about it) superior one step pressing. no one is evaluating the whole chain. the word digital has blocked the thinking process of the total result. The question have to be asked why MOFI who undouble achieved a higher sound quality (as reported for the Abraxas release for example) had to be vague on the fact they are using a digital process in their updated sound reproduction process? is it because they want to hide a fact they are selling a much easy to produce and inferior "CD on Vinyl" product (the statement is just for the sake of discussion) and continue collecting money with higher profit from the audiophile "suckers"? or maybe is it because Audiophiles community, who their moto is judging a product sonic quality with their own ears will be too shocked to hear (Double meaning... 🙂 ) that digital process exists and add an advantage to the sound quality, in conflict with the community conception which automatically detach a "made from original master" when a step of a super high resolution digital copy is involved? If MOFI would have used a 2nd generation analogue copy, done by MOFI from original master, and not a DSD process, would the Vinyl community have accepted this step because the All analogue purity has been maintained? we have to remember that MOFI have replace the "Father + Mother" steps with a 2nd generation copy so there is an important improvement added to the process together with that 2nd generation added step. Why nobody talks about the total results? why focus only on one (important) added step? why nobody evaluate the 2 choice between a DSD vs a 2nd generation Analogue copy which MOFI has gone already for us? So the vinyl community has to first identify if the latest MOFI "one step" process has a total improvement of sound or not, comparing to any process MOFI has presented over the years, and comparing with other companies audiophile releases, of course also with price tag comparison. Last, I present you with the most shocking "Elephant in the room" which no one yet on all the MOFI videos so far has neglected to talk about: In case MOFI "one step" process is found to be actually the best audio quality and efficient way to cut a vinyl from an original master then it means that within the chain of cutting process, The DSD step has the maximum and better sound quality source for the vinyl cut process, better than the vinyl product itself. This has a huge impact on the vinyl industry, because the DSD (or other high res digital file format) can be sold and streamed with even a better quality than that of the best vinyl pressing there is. This means that audiophile vinyl format becomes to be in the third place of the highest audio quality possible (the second place belongs to an exotic, expensive and very limited in quantities direct Reel to Reel studio quality copy of the original master Tape) and 1st audio quality posible to obtain at home would become to be a digital file. This removes the carpet under the whole vinyl industry, or at least the audiophile vinyl industry, and this is in my opinion the real reason for MOFI ambiguity on the cutting process.

[@RobertFithen]

I just hope everyone still remembers all of this in a month and we don't go right back where we were.

[@vinylrichie007]

I haven't been able to sleep since this story broke.

[@RobertFithen]

I slept with a smile on my face.

[@chaunceyphillips64]

Put on a Mazzy video...always works for me.

[@vinylrichie007]

@@chaunceyphillips64 Good advice.

[@davidkipperman5218]

I like great sounding records no matter how it's made! 😎

[@demonsbutterfly]

DSD Files sound Magnificent. This whole MoFi episode is funny I need more chocolate biscuits

[@kniknayme9865]

I've got the rock and roll ears too. If its not scratched and there are no pops I am extremely happy!

[@WilSan74]

There is still the mastering process for the target medium. A great sounding song is one where the whole chain has been carefully considered. Once you have the song (whether tape, CD, Vinyl, streaming) then it’s up to you to continue that chain with great gear.

[@RobertFithen]

Whatever sounds best in the end result.

[@shimtest]

100% correct. the hi res digital online stores are going to make a killing now, and I'm here for it :)

[@thechronicnoizeco.6675]

Head Hunters…good album.

[@gordonshumway7465]

The most sensible video on this entire thing. I found it very amusing to watch all the analog snobs who talked about how great the one steps sound now feeling ripped off because digital may be in the chain. If it sounded good a month ago, what exactly has changed other than they're wrong about their anti-digital stance. Does the record now somehow sound worse?

[@RobertFithen]

Thanks!! This was part of my point. The song remains the same.

[@gordonshumway7465]

@@RobertFithen The other argument I'm not understanding is "it's not from the master tape if they use a digital file." If the digital file is from the master tape, how is that false advertising? I really think this is just a bunch of angry analog fans unable to admit digital can be pretty darn good.

[@moonbeamskies3346]

Excellent video. So true, so true.

[@richmoreno9938]

I’m stoked when I can find an awesome record in the dollar bin or for under ten bucks. As you stated, I’m in it for the experience and ritual as a whole; the album art, placing it on the turntable, etc. That’s enough for me.

[@Fontsman]

It would be good to hear the MoFi DSD transfers in high res digital format. If they are well done, they should be excellent.

[@machavez00]

I have a Yamaha TSR700 (RX V6A) 7.1 setup (virtual height speakers enabled) and it can play DSD256 from a thumb drive. I recently purchased a Sony 4K player that plays SACDs. I bought the new Animals 2018 SACD. I cannot hear a difference between the stereo mix and the Apple Digital Masters version. It’s 24/48 lossless streaming from my Apple TV 4K over HDMI. Apple has hinted that hi res lossless will be enabled on the ATV like the iOS/iPadOS devices (24/192). The reason I will still by physical media is that I have had albums pulled from my Apple Music library before. I have over 250 CDs. The (hi res)lossless Apple Digital Masters versions of many of these CDs sound superior. Those would be the earliest CDs that had quickie transfers done in the 1980’s. The last LP I bought was “Empty Glass”

[@SlickBlackCadillac]

In my experience, it is far less expensive to get amazing sound out of a vinyl setup over a digital set up. So a digitally made vinyl could make a sound more easily attainable to those who don't have a super DAC, especially one which handles DSD.

[@RobertFithen]

I had mentioned in the video, for it to work, there would have to be an affordable mainstream device the plays DSD. Without the vinyl, no worries of tonearm weight, magnetic coil, motor location, belt or direct, etc. etc, Digital= push play.

[@jakobole]

@@RobertFithen How about a double-blind test between DSD and PCM?

[@m.s.769]

You always make me laugh. Well done!

[@RobertFithen]

Thanks!!

[@sammyall9091]

Man you making a lot of sense! The only thing I have to say is I'm mid 20s an just getting into vynl, and the reason is just for a feeling of aesthetic hearing the cracle, its just an audio texture thing especially for sampling. Like for myself I get what your saying why not just but the digital and get the best version I can available. All comes back to the sensation of damn I did that from vynl

[@theflipside-vinylcommunity]

great point about the digital file

[@RobertFithen]

Thanks JC!

[@eugeniomirisola9384]

This is all very amusing… and humbling to those who have been arrogantly trashing any digital sound.

[@doctorwhom420]

The Grateful Dead have been releasing HD CDs of live shows for the last few years and they sound surprisingly amazing. I don’t feel the need to get those on vinyl.

[@LairoftheAlchemist]

Thank you for making this video. I've been having fun watching audiophiles back pedal and try to explain this away as they now have some egg on their faces after dumping on digital in the past, yet they claimed many of these, possibly digitally sourced, Mo-Fi's were amazing and now ...oops. It's going to be interesting to see how many people are willing to accept the possible reality that a digital sourced vinyl can sound really good or "gasp" even superior to an original analog version. I sort of collect vinyl but I just go for an original if I can find it and stick with that, I don't care if there is a Mo-Fi super high fidelity directors cut half speed version...I'll stick with my original, warts and all.

[@SticksTheJon]

Spot on! If the vinyl came from DSD then just play the DSD. I think I’m right in saying that DSD was actually developed for archiving analogue masters so this is the perfect use case. MoFi are still doing the audiophile community a great service by getting hold of the master and using top gear to digitise to DSD, they just need to be honest and stop all the BS.

[@justanothersciencenerd6907]

You make some good points. I don't own audiophile equipment, and I pretty much got off the vinyl bus in the 1980s. I have probably bought about a dozen vinyl albums since then. I certainly don't begrudge anyone who enjoys vinyl, for whatever reason: sound, packaging, whatever. Listen to what you like. Most of my listening in the time since has been CD, SACD, and Blu-ray (and digital files when away from home). There a lot of factors besides the release format that influence how the final product will sound. There are good and bad sounding records, good and bad sounding CDs. I've even got a Blu-ray or two that don't sound that great, at least to my ears. There are still a lot of people spitting venom about digital formats. It's fine not to prefer them, of course, but they can sound pretty fantastic (as these MoFi listeners would seemingly attest, since they were listening to digital masters on vinyl for years without knowing it). I've pretty much accepted that the only way a lot of these old tapes are going to survive the future is as digital transfers. Likewise a lot of old movies have been salvaged digitally, as the film elements are lost or have decayed.

[@DrWrapperband]

The first issue with CDs digital is the sample frequency and the quality of analogue reconstruction equipment. That doesn't apply to the MoFi digital if it is HF it would be better. However, the analogue recordings should be analogue on record.

[@RobertFithen]

I was more talking about DSD digital, not cd's.

[@schinaro]

Vinyl vs Digital is like being in an extra marital affair. One I love with a passion knowing it’s clean and reliable (Digital) The other I drool over with unbridled desire and want; turned on by the high price and the depths I can sink or swim into (Analogue) I am now a recovering meth head due to cleaning vinyl with methylated spirits. Life sucks when you love the Bee Gees

[@johntrembly2905]

Audiophiles don't listen to music. They listen to their stereos.

[@dustinshaver3173]

100%

[@ldesaes]

Best definiton ever!

[@teddyrasputin3850]

Your comment likely applies to some audiophiles. But what's an audiophile? Someone with expensive gear? Expensive to who? Is there a set price point? Someone who's particular about the recording process & production standards that impact sound quality? At what point does concern about sound and not just the musical arrangement make someone an audiophile? The categorization of a large diverse group by a simple intentionally insulting or dismissive sentence is usually frowned on for a reason.

[@tiredoftheentitled9009]

Totally agree. If the MOFI suggestion is correct then we should see lots of MOFI records selling cheap as the audiophiles (who didn’t notice the difference) sell off their MOFI records.

[@RocknRonni]

Good morning I like good sounding records if they're made well then mastered well then that's usually an all analog record. that's kind why I like records they're analog. If I want to listen to digital I will just buy the CD, it's a lot cheaper. We don't know what's going on with Mofi yet so I have no comment on that. I don't buy many mofi records so I don't have much experience for that product but, the Yes Fragile one step did sound very good to me

[@thierrydefrance7220]

Hi Robert, thanks very much for this video full of common-sense, at last. All this MoFI story is like a storm in a tea-cup but I was awaiting for someone who would point the most interesting part of it , which is that if a digital file is made with enough resolution, no one can make the difference with pure analog. Funny that the supposedly pure analog records all these audiophiles talibans have praised all these years were in fact vinyl copies of digital files. How ironic. I collect both CDs and vinyls, and more CDs actually, because they are much cheaper than vinyls which go up to ridiculous prices in France where I live. I love vinyls, as you say, the sleeve, the artwork, the liner notes, the format etc... and some of them sound awesome if you have the right cartridge, but I never totally bought this voodoo about the absolute sounding superiority of vinyls. Sure enough the first CDs which were made with a low sampling rate sounded like shit, but as you say if they can create a "lossless" digital format and create the system to read it : fair enough, that suits me fine. And when I buy vinyls, it's always used ones which I am sure have been recorded and mastered purely analogical. Cheers. Thierry

[@theflipside-vinylcommunity]

That Wine Story is crazy

[@YoungLPLovers]

I have to agree with you man. I’m enjoying the show from the sidelines. Perhaps if I had a $100,000 stereo system I could hear some difference (maybe???) but for a commoner like myself, the whole conversation is mute. Although, if I did have an expensive system, I suppose I’d also want transparency. Hopefully, for the benefit of the wine tasters, audiophile labels will become more transparent going forward.

[@RobertFithen]

I think people will demand some transparency. Like ingredients on packaged food.

[@jamesdwright]

Love the title dude. Says it all! AAA snobs eat humble pie!

[@tiborosz1825]

I collect both formats as well. I dig Iron Maiden releasing mediabook formats with do7ble CDs. I think if CD packaging was broader and detailed it would be appreciated more. Also CD players with an open top where the disc would be visible.

[@bikemike1118]

This whole issue is going to be the beginning of the end of the vinyl hype! Thank goodness!

[@RobertFithen]

I'm ready to go back to music fans and dollar bins.

[@Viniland]

"Brothers in Arms" is not fully digital. Some mixes were made in an analogue console, computers couldn't handle it back in the day. Book: Milner, Greg: "Perfecting audio forever". New York, 2015.

[@analoggrooves2491]

I'm fine with them running the tape to make a DSD to cut the lacquers and make the SACD as DSD as fare as I know looses no information and don't alter the sound.

[@themasterjinn]

Digital if fine in the case of records where the tapes are over 50 to 60+ years old. As long as they play back the tapes on the equipment they were recorded on in to the encoder at a high bitrate. It is often the ONLY WAY to preserve legacy recordings like Please, Please, Me and others. The tapes have to be baked for over an hour before they can be played, and often they may not survive the process after it's most recant use. Thus losing the recording & the tape FOREVER!

[@threeberryswi]

Two questions: although this is a very interesting development/topic and one that I will be following with great interest, Now that it seems, at least at some point, that most or all of the older music with be, in some way, delivered in a digital format, where can a person find/buy the best sounding CDs? Does this mean that even buying CDs is a bit fruitless and I need to learn how to stream my music?

[@RobertFithen]

Cds are probably over as far as sound quality. Professional streaming services are usually offering higher resolution digital files with Tidal being the best (from what I've heard).

[@grooveyerbouti]

I've stuck to CDs since roughly 89 mainly for ease of storage,and Queen had extra tracks on Akind of magic and the miracle,the only thing about vinyl I miss is artwork, still have few vinyl mainly singles but some albums. At the end of day I don't have too of range hifi only a ancient technics stack system which would horrify audiophile. Oh and yes I have 5 disc changer so one person does.

[@thesurfacespins]

Digital is Evil unless it sounds good by an artist I like. Another great video Mr. Fithen.

[@cytowing3353]

I used to have a bunch of MOFI releases but after a while I found that original pressings sounded better for the MOFI's released after 2000 or so. I sold them all a few years ago as I replaced them with OPs. I kept my older MOFI releases from the 80s and my MOFI of The Dark Side of the Moon as they sounded better than OPs or whatever else was out there, that I could afford. I figured they were just made better when pressed in Japan but now I wonder if it was the digital component of the later MFOI's. I have no idea.

[@zoltanszabo4242]

Bursting bubbles is just so much fun! :) To make things even more confusing, in the '80s far away pressing plants received digital audio sources in many many cases. Not saying that was the typical case or anything, but I am sure it happened a lot, and I assume it was the more convenient and safer solution in the second half of the decade. Speaking of releasing Western European or US recordings, an ex-mastering engineer at the Hungarian Record Company told me that they received digital sources from the early '80s, starting with classical music, followed 1-2 years later by pop recordings. If such a high tech solution was available behind the Iron Curtain, it makes you wonder about all the US pressings of European (incl. UK, sorry Boris) recordings, highly regarded Dutch, German pressings of US recordings etc. Japanese pressings? You sure they always received analogue tapes? :D Yes, in many case it can be evidenced that the USA sent plates to Europe. But in all the other cases, where the lacquer was cut on this side of the pond, who knows what happened? Even before CD was the primary medium, LP releases were very proud of digital recording and/or mixing, advertising it on the hype stickers. JMJ's Zoolook is one example, that Dire Straits another, which you forgot to trash this time. :)

[@RobertFithen]

Yes it is! Yes I did! lol

[@Vinylathome]

The emperor’s new clothes me thinks 😂 Great take on this new watergate..

[@harrysmusicroom]

It actually started with Michael @ 45 RPM Audiophile, then The In Groove but I could be wrong. I think your MFSL The Wall CD is probably digital.😉 I want the best sounding vinyl I can get, but I also have thousands of CDs

[@RobertFithen]

I use audiophile information mostly because I just want to avoid bad pressings. I used to really show off that double gold disc Wall cd years ago.

[@colortura]

I totally agree with you. Great video.

[@RobertFithen]

Thanks!!

[@joey1127]

I'm glad to see someone pointing this out. This die-hard ALL ANALOG crap in the 21st century is insanity. Most recordings done in the 1980's and later WERE Digital at some point. I'd be surprised that Thriller wasn't recorded using a Digital Tape Recorder or at least mastered on one. I remember buying hundreds of records in the 1980's and it proudly said right on the jacket, A DIGITAL RECODING! I have some Windham Hill recordings for the late, late 1970's that were DIGITAL!!!! So how could you have an ALL ANALOG remaster if the original utilized a digital somewhere...and SO WHAT, most ALL masters have been converted to a Digital master by now...for obvious reasons. I enjoy the vinyl I hung onto, but I far prefer SACD, DVDA, Blu-Ray...I mean, even the very best vinyl still suffers from Inner Groove Distortion, Tracing and Tracking Distortion, warp induced wow, God forbid the pressing is eccentric and it speeds up and slows down as the tonearm swings in and out...I for one, WII NOT be cancelling my pre-order of the Thriller SACD...can't wait to get it...digital and all! btw...I own a REGA P8 w/ Ania Pro LOMC cartridge...but even I wont go so far to say that is superior to SACD, DVDA, or Blu-Ray...once you hear music in Atoms, you'll lose interest in your 8-Track tapes real quick-like!

[@RobertFithen]

I remember in the Tom Petty documentary there was a segment about digital recording taking over everything and it was difficult to even find a studio to record analog.

[@danielwilliams1921]

You deserve more subscribers.

[@DeAudiofilosyLocos]

Great channel, just found it. A digital file still has to be mastered differently for vinyl and applied an EQ curve. Playing the record on your turntable with your needle is what makes it sound analog. The record is the music score and the cantilever the musical instrument. So digital master is irrelevant I guess

[@RobertFithen]

For me, it's also more the ritual and aesthetic of the record. The actual act of playing a record.

[@virginraydevito]

It has to be mastered differently because the bass tones can jump the needle off the record. Vinyl actually has an inherent disadvantage of CDs. All about the master though, format is irrelevant and I've said this for ages. Nobody can ever pass an A/B test of a digital recording of a vinyl record...

[@TimCB900F]

Absolutely correct!

[@MacXpert74]

I agree. I think the mistake that's often made (also in this video) is thinking that everybody always likes the 'technically best playback" or "most accurate to the master" sound and therefore should listen to digital playback, as this is technically superior. In reality however it's the coloring of the sound that the vinyl playback gives, that many people enjoy. Human ears don't measure things like 'dynamic range', 'frequency response' or 'wow and flutter'. Sound quality is a very subjective thing. We just listen to what sound pleases our ears the most. This doesn't have to be the technically best reproduction. Different people will hear and like different things. Because of this, you can't just look at the specs of a digital system and compare it to vinyl playback and say "well the digital specs are better, so everybody should agree this sounds the best". It's not that simple.

[@AsTheTableTurns]

Yeah, the MoFi guys talked about their 4X DSD transfers which are around 1000 X better than a CD. And the 1000 isn’t hyperbolic but an actual number.

[@AsTheTableTurns]

Blue Note offers that with their All Analog Tone Poets

[@ldesaes]

Fantastic video! I agree 100%

[@RobertFithen]

Thanks!!

[@marantzdantz9685]

Analog or digital source has never mattered to me. My Analog Productions Stereo Pet Sounds is incredible and that's obviously digitally sourced. I'm interested in the cleanest vinyl copy with a dead quiet sound floor. Sourcing unimportant.

[@puttyputty123]

@Nicholas Actually I believe the Stereo has a digital intermediary. It even says so on the site, and they have been transparent about it. And it does sound awesome.

[@marantzdantz9685]

@Nicholas No Nicholas. You are incorrect.

[@pranasvaicaitis42]

Subscribed. Your "style" of communicating is great, you point out precise aspects of this constamt digital vs analog war. I am for vinyl all the way, but digital sounds great. I recently almost decided to sell all vinyl but after some listening of only stream music found such experience less engaging, less pleasant regardless quality. So I'm listening to vinyl and canceled Tidal subscribtion.

[@johnbrentford5513]

They don't have unlimited access to these original tapes they get one shot, so they copy the tape to 4X DSD so they can get the best results possible. That is why MOFI sounds better than the original copies.

[@michaellynch4699]

It's what comes out of the speakers that matters!

[@agomodern]

And that is always based on opinion and preference.

[@RobertFithen]

Pretty much!

[@davidbagnall335]

Great Video ! Tapes do sound great ! We have all bought Beatles Records that look clean only to find a poor sounding listen. If Mofi make 40 000 copies of Michael Jackson's Thriller and it is one per Record Shop, that would make sense. If Limited to 500 copies only they would never be played and end up in a 50 to 100 dark Bank Vaults !

[@shpater]

Thank you for your video. I would like to focus on the old vs the new Mofi cut processes and its impact on vinyl comunity. We all agree that a Mofi "original master recording" is and should be a process where MOFI gets its hands on the original master, not on an unknown copy of that master. The DSD MOFI which is using is an added, new step, within the MOFI cutting process of Original Master Tape system. The DSD copy is then becomes a (ultra hi res digital) second generation source within the Mofi cutting process. should that be the only modification for Mofi cutting process than yes, it would be a degraded Vinyl cut process comparing with MOFI original Legacy cutting system. However, Mofi takes advantage on this added step to actually reduce the total number of degradating copying steps from the whole cutting process as per the following: 1) Original Mofi ( and other companies) AAA Process steps are: Step 1: master tape to lacquer (a 2nd generation analogue mechanical copy of the master is generated into the laquer) Step 2: lacquer to Father stamper (a 3rd Generation analoge mechanical copy is generated ) Step 3: Father Stamper is copied to be Mother mold (a 4th generation analoge copy is generated) Step 4: a Stamper is copied from mother (a 5th Generation mechanical analoge) Step 5: Vinyl Stamping (a 6th generation final analoge copy is pressed on vinyl) to summarize AAA process: A vinyl recording is the 6th analoge generation copy of the original master tape 2) MOFI "1 step process" comprise of the following steps: Step 1: Master Tape to DSD (a 2nd generation Dsd version of original master is created) Step 2: DSD to Lacquer (a 3rd mechanical analoge Generation) Step 3: Lacquer to Stamper (a 4th analoge Generation) Step 4: Vinyl Stamping (a final 5th generation which contains only 4th analoge generations copy of the master ) To summarize: MOFI single step process results in a 5 generation copy of original master recording rwhere 2 analogue mechanical copies of the sound are replaced by a single DSD copy . DSD copy of original master is to my understanding a much closer to original master quality (if not identical) than to any 2nd generation analogue copy alternatives availabe. 1) This is to my opinion a significant over all advantage to the cutting process 2) The Elephant in the room: The DSD step which contains a 2nd generation copy of original master is by definition a supirior version in compare witg the vinyl outcome which is a 5th ( practically 4th) generation copy of the original master tape. This means that the best posible reproduction quality can be obtain by a direct use of the DSD via streaming or a SACD platformd. Thanks and best regards

[@vfwhitehead]

Tidal Masters (MQA) is also a lossy format

[@RobertFithen]

Thanks for the info. Kind of suspicious how there isn't a lossless digital stream.

[@JoshuaWestbrook]

I’m a recovering audiophile and it’s glorious lol

[@djbryanladd]

I have no problem with MOFI. They sound good to me. That's what matters to me.