Jump to content

Subjective, Objective, Mo-Fi. Video.


Ar9Jim
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 8/16/2022 at 10:12 AM, jjptkd said:

There's a thread going over at the Klipsch forum I guess from what I've gathered anyway is that Mo-fi advertised and even marked up the prices

 

After listening to the posted thread of actual law suit it seems to hit the highlights pretty well.  The Mo-Fi response from their president doesn't address the main issue.

 

Every day the analog masters sit in their vaults and collect dust they also degrade. Computer magnetic tape has, over the years, suffered the same exact fate. If you wait long enough the bleed-through from where each of the wound layers touches the inside adjacent layer will also 'print through' and eventually begin to 'pollute' other portions of the tape. That's why you must exercise mag tapes or you will lose them. These master tapes are all going to continue to shed particles for a long time and eventually they will sound like mush. They are turning to dust in the long run and Mo-Fi  has known that for a very long time.

 

The Mo-Fi president is right in believing that making noisy analog copies of noisy, aging analog tapes is folly. I agree, he is absolutely right, but this is not about proper archival methods. Its about what people thought they purchased and how that was communicated (or not) to the masses. 

 

Although I don't agree with the emotional-damage-claim woo that's stated in this suit, there is much to be said about unjust enrichment of millions of dollars going to corporations that have employed deceptive or misleading advertising. 

 

Edited by straylight
  • Thank You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dammit, I would like to exercise those tapes!!!!  I think that is a good point. From my experience in the quest for great quiet dynamic recordings, i am really mixed about the Mofi product after spending lots on their work.

  • Thank You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dunno..., 

 

Seems to me that stating common knowledge..., like "tapes degrade over time." isn't MoFi's responsibility..., doesn't everyone over 40 years old know that audio (and VCR) tapes degrade?  And, to make excellent recordings on vinyl, from master tapes, something technological has to be applied?

 

I had a private meeting at AXPONA 3 years ago with the One-Step engineer working on the Yes album.  I'm connected on LinkedIn with him.  He didn't hide the fact that the ONLY thing a logical person could conclude was to produce these records required using "tools and technology that addressed 20-40 years of degradation."  (Yes, I'm oversimplifying - because it doesn't matter - to me.)  Was it proprietary?  I don't know - but it could be, and I don't care.

 

I'm not one to pick nits - because, in the end, the records sound damn good.  I knew they were pricey - but the great sound was worth it.  And, well, I have better things to do with my time.  Seems some people posting ad nauseum on all these forums with limited understanding and/or hidden agendas connect the dots in a way to feel "wronged."  Isn't this an audiophile version of a "karen."  (Not unlike the non-listening-to-how-it-sounds-folks over on ASR.)

 

Perhaps a better response would be to develop a competing method, cut operational cost, and use capitalism and a competitive response to MoFi with a competing product that lowers consumer prices?  (Just one thought that comes to me on this.)  Instead, the karen's start criticizing...

 

Like I said, I dunno, I did read the lawsuit, and YMMV. This is one of only a very few posts I've ever shared on this subject..., I keep it simple.  The rest doesn't matter because "these MoFi albums sound damn good."  And that's good enough for me.  I hope they don't stop producing them, or some court ruling doesn't side with karen, and affect their satisfying a market who likes what they have done. 

 

A good philosophy: Everyone should be careful what they ask for..., they might just get it, and the collateral damage to others, that don't see it their way - that never turns out well. 

Edited by AndrewJohn
  • Thank You 2
  • Love this! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All good points.

 

Should the penalty of this law suit be so severe as to choke off the source of those delicious sounding recordings...perhaps only a jury can decide that. But there are others out there making good recordings if you look. MoFi is not alone in this endeavor. And if they explain their preservation steps as a necessary digital manipulation then at least they are being honest about their process and the marketing of said process.

 

The only claim in the lawsuit that does not hold water is that the digital conversion that was done for preservation has somehow compromised the dynamic range of these analog ecordings. That's absurd. Even the best Studer recorders of the 60s and 70s had at best 90 db or 95 db of dynamic range. DSD and other modern  PCM digital recording formats are on the order of 120 db. So if you use a digital capture format with greater dynamic range than the analog original you DO NOT degrade it, you preserve it.  

 

But at this point you can no longer claim your product is still analog...it is not, even if you make an analog LP pressing from it. 

 

Back in the day of early CDs they were all labeled definitely with three coded letters like AAD or ADD or DDD to tell you that the 1) source, 2) mixing and 3) mastering were done in either analog or digital domains. 

 

Edited by straylight
  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, straylight said:

All good points.

 

Should the penalty of this law suit be so severe as to choke off the source of those delicious sounding recordings...perhaps only a jury can decide that. But there are others out there making good recordings if you look. MoFi is not alone in this endeavor. And if they explain their preservation steps as a necessary digital manipulation then at least they are being honest about their process and the marketing of said process.

 

The only claim in the lawsuit that does not hold water is that the digital conversion that was done for preservation has somehow compromised the dynamic range of these analog ecordings. That's absurd. Even the best Studer recorders of the 60s and 70s had at best 90 db or 95 db of dynamic range. DSD and other modern  PCM digital recording formats are on the order of 120 db. So if you use a digital capture format with greater dynamic range than the analog original you DO NOT degrade it, you preserve it.  

 

But at this point you can no longer claim your product is still analog...it is not, even if you make an analog LP pressing from it. 

 

Back in the day of early CDs they were all labeled definitely with three coded letters like AAD or ADD or DDD to tell you that the 1) source, 2) mixing and 3) mastering were done in either analog or digital domains. 

 

DO NOT degrade it, you preserve it.  Could not agree more. Same with video. 

 

If audiophiles thought the master tape was being reused and thereby consumed, I'd hate to be the guy who got copies near the end of the production run, when the tape was trashed. No doubt Mo-Fi is guilty of making the highest quality records they could. 

  • Thank You 1
  • That Rocks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps the lawsuit will serve two purposes:

 

1) Provide a refund path for customers who are dissatisfied with the product

 

2) Enable Mo-Fi to continue to make recordings and preserve their craft

 

The judge should throw out the emotional-damage-claim bunk and only award a reasonable penalty as required

 

Other countries have criticized our free society and rule of law, but many in this country also believe that  although we live in an imperfect union it is a least better than those who have no such courts or system of laws to settle disputes in an equitable manner. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be interesting. Will it boil down to a misrepresentation, or will the complainants need to prove they were somehow sold an inferior product? Actually they were sold a product that is too good, it would seem. Can they say what Mo-Fi  did is technically inferior? It seems it would be easier to prove that the Mo-Fi product is too good. The words re-issue, re-master, will be key. Guessing this is a legal repeat of something in the past. 

  • Thank You 1
  • That Rocks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Proving an inferior product seems like it may be very difficult...hey everyone has their own idea of what may be inferior...there is no concensus really. 

 

Much easier to prove misrepresentation. I also think they were sold a superior product, but the digiphobes among them will probably never admit it.

 

  • Thank You 1
  • That Rocks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mddawson said:

The controversy surrounding MoFi and what Paul (PS Audio) thinks about analog vs. DSD.

 

 Don't always agree with this guy but do on this Mo-fi should have been straight up but don't think this will sink their ship or that it should. There's going to be some hurt feelings and few might swear them off entirely but I believe the majority will see the wisdom in what they're doing and eventually go back to business as usual. 

  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, mddawson said:

The controversy surrounding MoFi and what Paul (PS Audio) thinks about analog vs. DSD.

 

No duh..., "there's no other way to do it..."  Love this.

 

People who don't know..., (audiophile karens) show who they really are, every time they open their mouth (post a permanent statement on social media).  

 

I sure hope the Judge is qualified to realize this, about Audiophilia, from the perspective of both the people and the technology...

  • That Rocks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AndrewJohn said:

 

No duh..., "there's no other way to do it..."  Love this.

 

People who don't know..., (audiophile karens) show who they really are, every time they open their mouth (post a permanent statement on social media).  

 

I sure hope the Judge is qualified to realize this, about Audiophilia, from the perspective of both the people and the technology...

Exactly. Its just hard to comprehend anyone believing their copy was directly responsible for wearing out the master tape on their behalf. Even for $100+ or whatever they cost. Personally, I'm a digital sources, combined with tube amps guy, so the analog source topic doesn't pertain to me. 

 

Its says "original master recording" but its not a tape, its not even the same format, so how literally should it be taken? Its a pressing. Its not the master tape that you are buying, obviously, it would seem, since its a record.. I'll bet the lawsuit results in nothing other than a waste of time and resources.  

 

 

MoFi_UD1S_Michael_Jackson_Thriller_33_Render_Box_Cover_c6c4410b-4597-4057-834f-f9a0dd26e185_800x.jpg

Edited by Ar9Jim
  • Love this! 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Ar9Jim said:

Its says "original master recording" but its not a tape, its not even the same format, so how literally should it be taken? Its a pressing. Its not the master tape that you are buying, obviously, it would seem, since its a record.. I'll bet the lawsuit results in nothing other than a waste of time and resources.  

 

 I don't know I mean you have to expect that a lot of people don't know how any of this works-- likely the judge won't know. Imagine some unknowing customer sees this Mo-fi album for $150 at a store and it says "original master recording" and right next to it is pretty much the same album made by someone else that doesn't say that for $45 and the customer "pays extra" for what he believes is the original master recording even if its ridiculous to believe that it is it says it right on the cover. I think a judge would have to look at it from the laymen's point of view and intent of advertising-- I think the fact that so many audiophiles were fooled for so long not just the average Joe does not bode well for Mo-fi.

 

 

  • Thank You 1
  • That Rocks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at this scandal.. Original Master Recording used again, and its on a CD this time... OMG how could Mo-Fi mis-lead me in this way? I'm obviously a victim here and somebody better answer to me, with the blood of their company pouring on the ground at my feet.. This is zeros and ones. Binary, OMG.. How could they have sold this to me, without properly educating me first? They are liable to me.. Just being sarcastic to point out the stupidity. 

 

Everyone looking to be a victim and a bunch of sites looking for click bait to elevate their own imaginary integrity. 

 

Looking to be wronged by some company, government, you name it.. Its a sad state.. Poor me victim mentality and sites using them for lots of clicks at Mo-Fi expense. Just opinion.

 

Now, should we start a class action lawsuit against Mo-Fi because my CD isn't analog and the master recording in the 1960s was analog? It clearly say "Original master Recording" on this CD but it not analog..    Come on audiophiles, really? The "Karens" as AJ said, will be looking kinda dumb.  Just a thought.

 

"Thinking is difficult, thats why must people judge" Carl Jung..

IMG_1350.jpg

Edited by Ar9Jim
  • Thank You 2
  • That Rocks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do notice the CD says Analog-Analod-Digital, though.  That now seems to be invalid, and could go against them for that lawsuit.  

 

Odd they would do that, given the true background.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jjptkd said:

Wow it says 1973 on the CD-- they were way ahead of their time I didn't know they made CD's back then! 

he Dark Side of the Moon is the eighth studio album by the English rock band Pink Floyd, released on 1 March 1973 by Harvest Records.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ar9Jim said:

he Dark Side of the Moon is the eighth studio album by the English rock band Pink Floyd, released on 1 March 1973 by Harvest Records.

 

That was my poor attempt at adding some humor into the discussion.. 

Edited by jjptkd
  • Thank You 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mean its not made in 1973? I thought my copy was special. They sold me a new CD instead of made in 1973. More deception. I ordered vintage analog CD damn it, no excuse for this..   Just being sarcastic and having fun with it guys.. I don't know, it sounds great.

Edited by Ar9Jim
  • Thank You 2
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see nothing dishonest with MoFi.  Some seem to, but I don't expect a US Gov't style "book" of details (what some are calling the "whole truth") when I buy music..., I trust my ears.

 

I'm pretty sure (hoping so) that the judge will throw this out, and win one against the "karens" to serve us all.  

 

Too much precedent is defined by these "victim" lawsuits - everywhere, not just audio...

Edited by AndrewJohn
  • That Rocks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, ChrisTFM35 said:

Blue Note uses tape for their all-analog Tone Poet series. There is no digital in their vinyl workflow. Check out this video:

 

 

 

It's all fine and good.  There's plenty of room for many players in the "reissue" market... 

 

BTW, this is nothing new..., Remember all the different pressings, some with even "coding" in them..., way back when.  I have a pile of DBX-encoded LPs that only play back correctly (and quite nicely) through a DBX encoder....

 

If history is any precedent..., these DBX encoded LPs (and other pressings like them...) from the last 30-40 years have just gone through the roof.  I used to buy DBX LPs at the local record swap meet for $3 a peice..., in the last 4 years or so, they have gone hyper-space prices..., the swap meet around here has one vendor that focuses on them alone, selling them for $20 on up, per LP.  $20 will get you a junk LP..., 

 

And, the decoder units needed are also going up in price.

 

...just sayin' that this "event" may well be very good for MoFi in the long run.  Good for them !! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...