Mobile Fidelity - the digital step in MFSL vinyl debacle
- Thread starter windhoek
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-Audio/80s/Audio-1985-03.pdf#page=78^^^
THE DIGITAL TIME LENS--THEORY AND PRACTICE
Seems like the Vinyl version of an album might provide more (fake) surround sound than the CD version of the same album when fed to a matrix decoder.
~40 years ago, Mo Fi began releasing prerecorded compact cassettes, IIRC, they used an FM instrumentation recorder/player to store and play out a copy of the master recording to a bank of cassette recorders (I found this out years later, IIRC, Mo Fi was vague about how the master for making cassette copies was prepared).
Kirk Bayne
THE DIGITAL TIME LENS--THEORY AND PRACTICE
Seems like the Vinyl version of an album might provide more (fake) surround sound than the CD version of the same album when fed to a matrix decoder.
~40 years ago, Mo Fi began releasing prerecorded compact cassettes, IIRC, they used an FM instrumentation recorder/player to store and play out a copy of the master recording to a bank of cassette recorders (I found this out years later, IIRC, Mo Fi was vague about how the master for making cassette copies was prepared).
Kirk Bayne
jaysound55
New member
I own a large number of Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs Original Master Recordings from the late '70s, thru the 80s and into the early 90s when I (ignorantly at the time) finally gave up on new vinyl and began collecting CDs (including a number of MOFI's gold OMR CDs). Although it was implied that the CDs were mastered from the original tape masters in real time, it was very clearly promoted and was MOFI's major selling point that all of their (vinyl) releases were HALF-SPEED MASTERED! I have recently gotten a new turntable and decent cartridge and since I kept my vinyl collection in good storage conditions, I'm hearing my old records again for the first time in probably 25 years. I have listened to a number of my original copies of MOFI's OMRs and they all still sound fabulous. Crisp crisp high end with punch transients, a wide open soundstage and very quiet vinyl.
Sometime in the 90s or early 2000s MOFI stopped using the 1/2 speed mastering process and started mastering...HOW?
Is the mastering system they're using for their current vinyl releases an improvement? All the hype they used to promote for the 1/2 speed process implied that it had reached the absolute peak of attainable quality from the vinyl medium.
Any comments or BG info appreciated.
Sometime in the 90s or early 2000s MOFI stopped using the 1/2 speed mastering process and started mastering...HOW?
Is the mastering system they're using for their current vinyl releases an improvement? All the hype they used to promote for the 1/2 speed process implied that it had reached the absolute peak of attainable quality from the vinyl medium.
Any comments or BG info appreciated.
barfle
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
That was one thing that was soo cool about reel-to-reel tape. The two reels, turning at different speeds, was almost mesmerizing. Bits don’t do that sort of thing. Maybe a Wurlyscope would help.
I don't see what the big deal is. A DSD copy of the master is that big a deal? I'd expect a DSD copy would have advantages, such as long term storage, and the ability to make additional copies without loss. Those masters can include both stereo and multichannel versions. Now, if Mo-Fi would just consider those SACD buyers who would prefer a multichannel mix on the disc, as well as stereo...
windhoek
The Phoolosopher
I believe the issue has to do with transparency. MoFi can use DSD no problem, it's just that they have been for some time and someone at MoFi or Music Direct, the parent company, decided that the customer shouldn't know about it.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 24,454
SONY has been DSD remastering their current and back catalogue for years in an attempt to preserve the absolute Master Tapes which as we all know are privy to generational loss over time....which includes oxide flaking, stretching and print through!
So it was NO surprise to learn that MoFi was receiving 'carefully' DSD remastered copies of those analogue masters especially when more than 2500 copies were to be struck and in the case of Michael Jackson's THRILLER upward of 40,000!!!!!!
To be clear, those master tapes are sarcrosanct and the ability to not only capture a mirror image of those masters but be able to carefully alter any anomalies present to render an improvement in their sonic nature, IMO, is a POSITIVE thing.
And I believe MoFi has somewhat been straight forward in addressing this issue when they differentiate between ORIGINAL MASTER RECORDING and MASTER RECORDING in their LOGOS!
jimfisheye
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Messages
- 3,040
In a perfect scenario with a money-no-object analog system vs pro DA converter they should be literally identical. That vinyl pressing would have to be dead nuts on. High end pro DA converters are easier to come by than a money-no-object vinyl cartridge and preamp. So the digital system will usually have the edge for transparency nowadays.
Vinyl can truly compete with digital with high end gear. It's just that every connection and signal path needs to be really dialed in. Most people have never heard this. If any of the many variables slip a little the sound falls off a steep bell curve very quickly!
The first gen of MFSL vinyl were over the top great! (Circa 1977?)
The 2nd and 3rd gens were still pretty well done. Not quite the first gen though.
Those gold CDs were their big fall from grace. They tried a vinyl comeback a few years ago and those were pretty awful. A company called Classic Records was around about that time and they had the vinyl quality of the 2nd gen MFSL but arguably better mastering prowess.
Just my 2c from the titles I've heard. My turntable is pretty dialed in. HD digital is happiness and light!
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 24,454
JediJoker
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
They don't mix, nor do they commission new mixes, and they aren't set up for mastering any more than two channels. They don't release anything they haven't personally remastered, so that means no multichannel, even if a mix does exist. Don't waste your breath on this one.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 24,454
NOT to mention the licensing fee INCREASES if they WERE to add a multi~CH layer!
And yes, the few Multi~CH SACDs MoFi did release had to be outsourced to a remote mastering facility!
The only exception would be if the stereo mix is encoded for quad, such as "Mr. Drums: Buddy Rich & His Band Live On King Street, San Francisco" (SQ encoded).
windhoek
The Phoolosopher
I'm not so sure about the last part Ralph. I think that's what all the hoo-ha has been about. MoFi has been producing OMR vinyl for some time that has included a digital step i.e. they've used a DSD 'rip' of master tapes as a basis for the subsequent lacquers - either done by MoFi themselves or having received DSD files from a given label - but making no mention of it whatsoever. Indeed. they've gone to considerable lengths to spell out the rest of the cutting process with a view to misdirect the customer.
That said, it looks like they'll be transparent going forwards and any OMR that has been made from DSD files should be clearly identified as such. Well, that's the hope anyway.
Mr. Afternoon
Mixing Engineer & Artist
The Steve Hoffman thread has 350 PAGES of replies in 10 days.
Yikes!
Yikes!
PM: If digital audio products sounded as good as The Golden Bonana, this MoFi distraction wouldn't even be a topic of conversation.
They're never mastered the same, or at least shouldn't be.
Files for digital release can have exactly whats on the master copied to them.
Files intended for vinyl mastering need to have lots of special care taken to keep the "needle in the groove" so to speak. The below links explain a lot of the what and why goes on for vinyl mastering
https://www.gottagrooverecords.com/vinyl-mastering/https://www.sageaudio.com/blog/mastering/what-is-mastering-for-vinyl.phphttps://music.tutsplus.com/tutorials/mastering-for-vinyl--cms-29480http://www.ajawamnet.com/ajawamnet/Vinyl_Sucks_and_Your_Little_Dog_Too.html
Through several iterations of MFSL, the one consistent has been slight of hand marketing BS.
It always amuses me that people still fall for “the 70s/80s MFSL vinyl were great” because they’ve been conditioned to believe it. And that half-speed mastering is some sort of mastering fairy dust rather than a marriage of convenience for MSFL back in the day. By and large, the MFSL pressings of that era were generally surpassed by the original pressing and often many repressings because the EQ was often so hyped and phony sounding on those LPs. The vinyl itself was great though.
The only thing the current iteration of MFSL hasn’t hyped is they’ve been using DSD sources. Why the silence on that? Because they know it would have a negative impact on the bottom line - either because analog purists would pass or because some would ask why should I pay $125 for a one-step when you it dawns on you it’s no big to just cut another lacquer from a file when the stamper wears out. Or what’s so special about their $50 digital source records that often isn’t being done for $25 by major labels?
And ever wonder how MFSL was able to get so many great titles compared to other labels? Now maybe we know why?
The funny thing is even though the recent iteration of MFSL has been using DSD sources, by and large they’re making better records than they were back in the day…
As for the term “original master”, it’s often appeared to mean many things with MFSL going back decades.
With regard to the Lennon albums, is the stereo mixdown master of the first mix of an album really any more of an original master than the stereo mixdown master of a remix? Both are original masters. One is just the original mix master and the other is the remix master. To say they’re not both original masters is like saying the mono and stereo mixdown masters of Rubber Soul can’t both be original masters.
Mr. Afternoon
Mixing Engineer & Artist
Once I started using my equipment to listen to music and not the other way around, I went insane finding that majority of the music I liked was mastered horribly. Sometimes I feel that letting a puppy loose in the mixing room would have produced better results.
WHOA! I did not know this! But that explains why some young people prefer vinyl for their music!
Because it's not compressed to a brick.
MidiMagic
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2010
- Messages
- 2,084
I have several records that I also have on CD. Many of them have much more ambient content than the CD does.
I can think of several reasons why this was done:
1. The ambience was garbled by being down in the sampling mud and was expanded out.
2. The record company did a remix.
3. Someone at the record company hates ambience content and had it removed.
4. Vinyl surface noise sounds like ambiance?
