MoFi Controversy

I've not followed it much but have noted a huge thread on the SH.tv forum. It's up to 649 pages as of right now.

The whole thing wouldn't mean much to me. I still prefer buying what I want on CD, so "digital" is not a dirty word.
 
I've not followed it much but have noted a huge thread on the SH.tv forum. It's up to 649 pages as of right now.

The whole thing wouldn't mean much to me. I still prefer buying what I want on CD, so "digital" is not a dirty word.
It's quite the article. MoFi went from calling the Phoenix shop owner a liar to admitting that they've been doing it for 11 years.
 
I've been in the midst of it, being in the "industry" and having just dug into the controversy myself (I haven't been online much due to all the other commitments in my life right now).

From a sound standpoint, it's a non-issue. Mobile Fidelity has been using DSD transfers (vs. PCM, which CDs and most high-res files are based on) for mastering the vinyl since 2015. DSD was developed by Sony and Philips as an archival digital format so, if used properly, it is more transparent than anything in the PCM format. (Don't get me started on how CDs sound. 🙄 )

And the kicker is that I doubt there is anyone, except maybe a few engineers who have access to the original analog tape and the DSD copy, who could tell the difference.

Before I get into why it's not as bad as it seems, I do admit that it was time that they came clean with telling everyone the sources for their vinyl masters. It was misleading at the very least, and deceptive at the worst, and that is what many buyers are upset about. Buyers presumed that "Original Master Recordings," emblazened across the top of many of their LPs, meant they were getting a direct transfer of the original analog tape, just like the did in the late 70s when MoFi was first launched.

But consider this. Nowhere in their marketing did they explicitly say that the LPs were mastered directly from original analog master tapes.

Now, as to the how and why? Most of this is described in a one hour video interview with Shawn Britton, Krieg Wunderlich and Rob LoVerde (who I've met at AXPONA) with the owner of The 'In' Groove in Phoenix, AZ. (And it was very gracious of these three to take the time to clear the air and fully describe their process.) Based on that video, here are a few reasons why MoFi has gone to mastering from DSD, in a nutshell.
  • Many studios no longer allow their tapes to be removed from their archives. MoFi is now able to ship their custom Studer deck and DSD encoders over to the record label vaults and do the transfer to DSD right at their facility.
  • MoFi can now cut titles that were previously off-limits. If an original LP was assembled from, say, two or three different master tapes, transferring the original two-track masters to DSD from these separate tapes allows them to compile the album digitally. (The studio would not allow them to cut and splice the original album together using the original tapes, in other words.)
  • MoFi can also cut titles where separate adjustments were made for each track, such as, with the Dolby calibrations that may differ from track to track. MoFi can now make individual adjustments on the digital copy and cut the fully corrected album to lacquer.
  • As I mentioned earlier, DSD is transparent enough that there is no change in sound when transferring the analog tapes to digital, so it's not like adding a generation of analog tape between the original master and the finished product.
  • Since MoFi also releases SACDs, they can simultaneously release the mastered DSD files to SACD (which is the digital format that SACDs use). So that saves them a step as well.
  • Not all MoFi records need to be cut digitally--they still have a complete analog chain for the times when they can work direct from a master tape. (Which is getting rarer as time goes on.)
In all cases, these changes now allow them to make a better end product, and also provide them access to tapes that studios have stopped loaning out to third parties for mastering special editions. So it's a win-win situation all around.

I will further admit (at the risk of getting into some hot water) that some of the apologists in the audiophile press are getting on my nerves. Many of them aren't getting the point that past buyers have felt deceived or even cheated. Yeah, we already know the records will sound just as good, if not better. A lot of them have to kiss up to the labels so they keep on receiving free promo copies of the records, so it's no surprise they're playing the apologist card big time.

It's not a big deal since I rarely buy new vinyl anymore myself, especially with the recent price hikes. These days I would have to really really really want a record to spend that much. And yeah, as much as I'd consider the one-step* pressing of Thriller that's forthcoming, I'm not about to spend into the three digits to get it, not when they're also releasing the SACD for $29.99 (and also because they're not releasing it in a 45 RPM set). As it might be the first time it is released without compression, the SACD should sound fantastic. But, count me out for the vinyl version...

(MoFi's "OneStep" pressings are made from stampers that are made directly from a lacquer master, vs. the intermediate metal parts that other pressings use.)

Finally, about the "Original Master Recording" banner on their records. Not all of their vinyl releases have that banner. The others say "Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab." Only tapes that they verify are "original masters" get the appropriate banner. If they cannot verify, or if there is no way to verify, they use the "MFSL" banner instead. This they have been clear about for many years, so it's not news--just a tip to pass along.

I haven't watched Chad Kassem's video response yet (he owns Analogue Productions, another label in the same business), but I know from speaking with him back in 2019 that some of the labels have gotten very reluctant to license out their masters in recent years, and some titles he has requested for a long time are either shot down or he's never been answered. He has been wanting to do a repress of the Bill Evans 45 RPM box even, as he said, "throwing a lot of money at them," and they never respond.
 
Last edited:
I have to say that I've watched (or listened to) a handful of these videos from The 'In' Groove and he really knows his stuff. A couple of his comparison videos cleared the air for me, such as trying to find the right early pressing of Steely Dan's Aja. He also has a great story about the time he purchased George Benson's record collection. (He even had an unreleased test pressing from the mid 80s of a Mobile Fidelity version of Give Me The Night.)
 
I have to say that I've watched (or listened to) a handful of these videos from The 'In' Groove and he really knows his stuff. A couple of his comparison videos cleared the air for me, such as trying to find the right early pressing of Steely Dan's Aja. He also has a great story about the time he purchased George Benson's record collection. (He even had an unreleased test pressing from the mid 80s of a Mobile Fidelity version of Give Me The Night.)
That’s right—-Benson moved to Phoenix a year or so before I left.
 
Makes sense that studio’s wouldn’t want to send out their original analog masters after the Universal fire, as well as a number of masters from 70’s to early-90’s albums were probably done on Ampex tape (as it was considered the top brand at the time) and have fallen prey to the sticky shed syndrome, so they might only get one pass after baking the tape so a digital file might be the only thing that would be available.
 
Back
Top Bottom