Well here it is folks... It looks like Mo-Fi was using digital masters to make at least some if not all of their vinyl. I love the heck out of this as it totally bolsters my position for Playback Designs in a huge way..
Опубликовано:
15 июл 2024
Поделиться:
Ссылка:
Скачать:
Готовим ссылку...
Добавить в:
Мой плейлист
Посмотреть позже
Комментарии : 303
2 года назад
To be fair to the “vinyl guys” as you call them: if see Michael Fremmer’s video or Ludwig from 45 RPM, the complaint is less about the digital process and more about lying to consumers. Most of the vinyl guys admit that MoFi records are among the best sounding … period … however MoFi has not been transparent about their process and mislead consumers into believing that the use an entirely analog process. That’s it. so it’s leas about if it sounds better or worst it’s really about transparency and honesty
It’s about lying of the vinyl guys …that vinyl sounds best…which it can not because of technical restraints alone. Not to mention random pressing and often times bad recording! That’s it!
Digital rulz! Every time die hard vinyl guys say what sounds better is now moot. Now the argument becomes even more skewed that what you get with vinyl sound is influenced by the arm, carriages, needles. All this could be considered coloration, an addition to what (in this case) a DSD file. Micheal fremer probably knew about the vinyl DSD thing out of professional courtesy. That’s his product/market gain so he’s got a vested interest to keep that hush hush. Why is everyone in the industry named mike!!?
There used to be a joke that if you were at a party the 2 people you would not want on your table were an Insurance Salesman and a Politician, can I now add an Audiophile .
Great video Mikey! 🎉 I discovered your channel because of listening to Jays audio lab videos 😊 Two great guys and i like and respect your honesty and being direct and transparent . Big respect!
Is this bump up from a sacd or any other file in the league of an pure 4XDSD? Remember this stuff from the scale-up times 720p to 1080p or 4k and in the end it always was the best way to use a native panel with a native source, I mean the 1080p native was better as an upscale of 720p, same with 1080p to 4k, native 4k is better, small small details but sometimes noticable, often clearly noticable. Taking the file to 50 megahertz sounds interesting too, normal downloads or sacds are working to 24bit/192khz, is that the correct compare-parameter? Oh and THX again for all your knowledge you are giving us for free, it already improved my knowledge about this stuff bigtime, still much to learn but you have to start somewhere and if you start with the knowledge of someone like you we really go the shortcut, saving a lot of time
So I'm new to all this digital stuff and I have quite a few SACD's and on the back I see DSD logo.. Can someone explain this with out being to confusing?
On the flip side, I'm wondering the importance of "pure" DSD? As you said many digital productions are converted to, or straight up recorded in PCM, since that is supposedly an easier format to manipulate (as in mixing and mastering). Then it's converted back to, and distributed as DSD. Is there a parallel between "Analog" Vinyl turning out to come from a digital master and DSD files or SACD's turning out to originate from PCM recordings? Does this conversion back and forth between formats degrade the integrity of the DSD? Is this a point of concern in the high end digital domain?
Absolutely there is a parallel. Its very similar/same. The importance to pure DSD is there is a very different conversion process. its single bit (DSD) vs multibit (PCM) Multibit has more non-linearities in the process so is best avoided altogether in my opinion, and in many others opinion, seemingly including Mo-Fi in this example. So if you are a DSD purist, you want no PCM non linearities formed anywhere in the chain (as I understand it) .
@@OCDHIFiGuy O.K. , Andreas Koch is the king of dsd audio - but i belive , that Alex Peychev from APL hi fi also knows very good what's going on. Anyway, they were very likely colleagues at Sony.
Mike runs this channel to promote his business. He has a lot of knowledge and experience. Much more than most other RU-vid reviewers. Take Jay for example. He does not even have basic understanding of how the stuff works :). Some of the younger guys on RU-vid are learning but have a long way to go. So, back to this video. I used this video as an example today of how facts can be twisted in a direction someone can benefit from. Everything Mike said sounds perfect, but it’s only scratching the surface. If you dive deeper, a lot deeper (and I won’t have time to write such a long post) things are a little different as they are presented. First, he has a pretty good digital rig. His analog rig - as far as I can tell uses old electronics (making some assumptions here, sorry if this part is incorrect). There is no Flux Magnetic heads with cables out of them going directly to a Doshi head amp or any of that stuff. So, those master tapes can sound a lot better with better electronics. The electronics on most reel to reel decks are similar to the electronics of other vintage equipment. He does not use vintage Technics amps for example. They are not high-end audio. Second, he is making it sound like digital mastering sounds better. No, that’s not what the MoFi said. The extraction of the master tape takes a lot of effort, and getting this part done right is more important and much significant sound quality wise than digital vs. analog. Some albums are on multiple master tapes that need different calibration. And sometimes even tracks on the same tape need different calibration. So, that is impossible to do in realtime. This is where extracting this to digital first makes it a necessary evil. Extracting the master tape to DSD does not make things better. Analog to digital (DSD) convertors have their own side effects. They are close to the sound of the master tape but not perfect. It’s actually best to bypass that step and not digitalize at all (like many of the great sounding vinyl records are done). But short of that, quad DSD is the engineer’s best friend. Mike said that vinyl is lossy and master tapes are the best analog source. I agree with that, but it’s not that black and white. Master tapes are difficult to preserve. Their sound quality can degrade over time. An unplayed master tape can degrade over the years, while an unplayed vinyl record is less likely to degrade. As such, a degraded over time master tape can sound a lot worse than a “lossy” vinyl record. And there is also the electronics. A master tape played on crappy electronics may not sound as good as a vinyl record played on good system. On that note, yes, vinyl is lossy. But digital is noisy. Very noisy. I am not talking about pops and crackles but that digital noise that digital equipment produce. It’s noise that exists in all digital equipment (some are less, others more noisy), and you don't know it's there until it's gone. So, again, that’s not black and white either. Some lossy vinyl may sound a lot better than digital. And it does. And vice versa of course. Mike has done a comparison between his master tape and a DSD recording of the master tape. I do remember seeing a video about that. I bet DSD sounded pretty good. A direct DSD recording from the master tape will sound pretty good on many DACs, not just the one that was done by the DSD inventor. In fact, converting DSD to analog is quite a simple process. And it’s pretty logical. You don’t need to be the DSD inventor to implement that logic. The problem is that when you go to Qobuz or Tidal to stream digital, none of the music there is quad DSD recorded directly from the master tape by the best engineers on the best equipment after careful calibration for each track. No, you don’t get that from streaming. And no, Mike's favorite DAC will not make the crappy and compressed PCM files sound like master tapes. Not even close! So, if that's what you thought when you watched that video, think twice. When that day comes (having direct master tape to quad DSD recording transfers), we can probably all get rid of our analog rigs and just listen to digital. BTW, there are some amazing direct DSD transfers available for purchase, and they sound phenomenal. But as of know they are a lot less than the number phenomenal sounding vinyl records. Hopefully we’ll start seeing more of those direct DSD transfers. But there is another problem. What if you listen to let’s say Jazz from the sixties. We need to find the master tapes and record them to quad DSD. But are those master tapes still available or lost? Is it clear which master tape is the original? Sometimes the closest “master tape” we can find is a copy of a copy of a copy (and yes, each copy degrades the sound quality). And then has that master tape been preserved properly? And does it sound as good as it did 60 years ago? In many of these cases, you may discover that an old “lossy” vinyl record just sounds better. We can change the future but we can't change the past. Here is an album - Oscar Peterson - We Get Requests. Find me a digital version that sounds as good as the analog. You won’t. You can’t. So the misconception from Mike’s video is that you just go and buy Mike’s DAC and everything will sound better than analog. Wrong. It won’t. The album mentioned above won’t. And I can probably pull another 50 vinyl records from my record collection that you can’t even get close to with digital (no matter what DAC you use). And those happened to be some of my favorite albums. On the contrary, I can also find many albums that sound better on digital (with or without Mike’s favorite DAC). Sorry to call this out, but Mike Is trying to take advantage of a hot debate on the Internet to promote his stuff. The reality is the DAC has very little to do with the vinyl vs. digital argument. It does not matter who designed the DAC and who invented DSD. The great vinyl recordings will still sound a lot better than the crappy digital versions of the album and vice versa.
I have both Oscar peterson album versions. On lp and cd, they both sound great just different. The lp`s first tracks are indeed very very good. BUT the sound gets worse the further you go to te middle of the record. You can hear that the cd is an old conversion of anolog masters. It`s aging. However many new lp`s these days sound only different from their modern cd equivalent. That because it`s all digital like everything today.
@@brugj03 AP 45RPM release? It's way better than any CD or digital version I have heard. No comparison. It also has a couple of tracks per side, and they all sound incredible.
@vaskoplodiv, to take things to this excruciating level sucks. It ruins the fun. So I keep my message simple and cover broad strokes. Nothing beats the DAC & Streamer I sell for $27K all in (preamp, DAC, Streamer) And YES, this DSD DAC can not be rivaled by another guy that knows "how to implement" DSD, and I have $500 challenge open to anyone that can. Please, try me... What means something is how close we get to the live performance, so shortly Ill have a video of recording to DSDx4 and we will compare the live performance to DSDx4.... It renders Vinyl useless for anything other than nostalgia and fun... as it should be.. and Doshi isnt that great of a Head amp bro... and I DO Have Flux heads on my STUDER A80 not in the video, and the onboard electronics DO have upgrades and wiring straight off the head block and JEFF ROWLAND who started at AMPEX will be engaged to make MY Head pre... no TUBES needed... You spend a lot of time to show your knowledge, but you make a big mistake in both assuming and underestimating my level of knowledge and action. Peace !!
@@OCDHIFiGuy You missed the main point. It's the recording that matters, not the format or the DAC. You are trying to make it sound like if people buy your DAC, they will get better sound. This is far from true. Most of my favorite vinyls sound like crap on digital. I don't care what DAC you are using. They are just bad recordings and will never sound as good as the vinyl version unless someone does a much better job remastering them. They are compressed as hell, flat, dull, etc. I would love to own a mastertape of these recordings! And I am sure it will sound a lot better than vinyl. But it's impossible to even touch those mastertapes. In this case, the second best media is vinyl. Yes, vinyl, not digital. But don't get me wrong. There are many excellent digital recordings that either don't exist on vinyl or the vinyl does not sound good. Those sound much better than vinyl on any decent DAC. And again, it does not even have to be your DAC. It's obvious you are doing all this stuff to sell more DACs. "You don't need a preamp with my DAC". "Vinyl is BS", "I am here to tell you the truth", "No one else exposes this stuff" (not exactly your comments, but those are the type of messages you are trying to convey). It's a good strategy, and I hope you sell a lot of DACs. You are carefully using your knowledge to preach to the people who know less and win their trust. But you know what will be cool? it will be nice of you to expose the entire truth, not just the bits and pieces you benefit from. One of these things that you don't want to expose is that the crappy compressed digital files don't sound as good as the excellent work and craftsmanship on some vinyl records. That if people heard "satchmo st james infirmary" on a 45rpm single and want to get that level of quality, your DAC, as good as it is, will never sound so good. It's not a problem with the DAC. It's just that the digital recording is horrible. Some DACs can do little magic, but turning a horrible recording into a master tape level recording unfortunately DACs cannot do. I am sure you know that very well given all your level of knowledge and action. Be honest and expose the entire truth, not just the stuff that helps you sell more. With regards to your comments about your reel to reel deck, that's cool, and I did appologise in advance and said that there is some speculation on my part. I don't care about Jeff Rowland, though. I am yet to hear anything from Jeff that I like. I know you appreciate his work a lot but to me his stuff is just expensive mid-fi.
@@vaskoplovdiv Well written, too much BS like this going around trying to ridicule people that basically doesn't exist to further own agenda. People thought a mostly analogue vinyl production sounding analogue, and was told it was analogue and it turns out having a digital intermediary. Really? Is that even newsworthy, and shouldn't the story be a company pulling BS. Audio industry is so rotten with people attacking each other, furthering own agendas and trying to conform you to their idea what is right or wrong instead of just having fun.
Mikey you took me down the rabbit hole so I did tons of research. It's insane how much guess work and engineer personnal audio perference goes into making vinyl and the lacquer cutting. If you are spending hard earned money on this hobby there are great videos on the making of vinyl people should watch.
I LOVE vinyl, but I agree with you 100%! I always found it funny that so many people are against digital. I am sad that MOFI lied to their customers and hopefully this revelation will result in some action and changes
Most of these jealous cheap digital cd owners are saying they like digital vinyl, when actuality they hate vinyl that they have never heard a record in their life.
I bought a recording studios vault collection. This is not the point though, these are for reference and collectability and archival purposes. Id rather listen using my digital rig...
And for all analogue guru's , from day of DSD 1bit stream as sound record it was known that such signal can be play direct to speaker without any conversion just to be higher voltage. speaker driver work as analog filter same that is used in all DAC's to give you analog output. Such system work as 'current amplifier' and speaker driver are driven by current, not voltage. Long ago I Try it and it work. And yes I'm master of Engineering and audiophile.
Thank you for setting this straight! The fundamental of your thinking is correct. You want the best? Go to the source! The creator. The best engineer. The literal file that came out of the studio. Digital is the best way to reduce or possibly eliminate any loss of quality. The mastering engineer pushed export on his computer and created the file. THATS THE FILE YOU WANT. BIT EXACT. Don't run it though a single piece of equipment. Don't convert it from digital to analog. ANYTHING will introduce an error be it the technical limit performance of the A to D or D to A converter or whatever else in the chain being used. Vinyl is so many steps away from the source, not to mention its fundamental technical limitations OCD guy mentioned that the engineers KNOW ABOUT and do things to reduce! Look into what a phono pre amp does, it changes the signal! That is its literal purpose! It corrects the slant of information on the vinyl to frequency response flat again. You think there isn't losses there!? Error? Variations depending on the electronic circuit used?! This is not pure! Its pure garbage!! This is simple logic and research. And not even much of it! Throw out your vinyl, save your money and enjoy the music instead!
Hey Mike. As always brother. Thank you and enjoy. Greetings from the Netherlands Limburg Maastricht and of course continue with High-end. Peace and love and of course coffee beans..... ✌🏼🌍😘💯%
Just found you and sub'd great explanation, I've thought for years the Japanize SHM and other Japanize cd's sound better than most albums but that's my opinion especially with a good DAC!
Great video Mike! A few thoughts: 1. This is not the only time that MusicDirect has been involved in the manipulation of analog. They are one of the dealers for Sweet Vinyl which makes the SugarCube. The SugarCube essentially takes the signal from the phono preamp and runs it through an A/D converter which then uses circuitry to remove hiss and pops from vinyl. Then it runs the resulting signal through a D/A converter and out to your preamp. I have one of the original beta units, though I haven’t used it in a while. 2. Besides BAT and Mofi, I am curious to know what other audio related companies MusicDirect owns? Please let me know. 3. Has you ever compared the MPD-8 to the Tambaqui? Are there any reviews of those two DACs out in the public domain? Thanks. Regards from Chicagoland!
As someone who has one of the beta units (I assume they were likely improved post beta), what are your thoughts on the effectiveness of the Sugar Cube? If one inherits, say, a large collection of web worn but essential albums, such a unit could offer further life to those albums, and increased enjoyment to a user - if the A2D and DAC sections are of high quality. I assume the Sugar Cube has a bypass function, to effectively remove it from the signal chain of the vinyl being played is in more listenable condition. As an analog lover and an enjoyer of digital playback, I don't see a downside.
@@gregvoth3903 the SugarCube is effective and yes it does have a bypass function. It again brings into the discussion of the issues with digitizing vinyl (which may already be digitized!).
Understood. I can only share that I used an MSB Pad 1 converter to make 24-96 files from my handful of SACD discs and have not heard any odd anomalies when playing back those files. Concern about digitizing records that were digitally mastered might be unwarranted.
Mikey, I was just watching and listening to one of your videos about DACs from about a year ago and I was absolutely "BLOWN!!!" away by the sound of your amazing system. You are a true credit to the audiophile world, with all the wisdom and knowledge that you share with all of us. I do really appreciate you and what you do. Keep it up.
nice way to miss the point of why people are pissed... they are pissed because they paid a premium price for something that led them to believe it was cut from analog, no matter the sound quality. But nice info.
This is not what's important to ME. I know this industry is full of shit all the time every day... you guys don't as much but this helps to support many of my videos calling the industry out. Now you know I'm not just bumping my gums. The best takeaway for ME and my Tribe is that MoFi chose DSDx4 as archival quality for the masters. This supports my pitch about PlayBack Designs dominating the DAC market... I KNOW the Vinyl dudes have been getting taken for a ride for a long time. Why do you think I don't do it ?
Of the 1/4" two track's you show, most would likely be submaster or safety copies? More likely one to two generations from that? 1/4" two tracks are seldom slaved during the final 2 channel mix down. Maybe a copy of the cutting master?
@@OCDHIFiGuy Just realize that they would not be running 1/4" halftrack machine in sync with their 1" halftrack Ampex or whatever during master mixdown as that technology did not even exist in the day. Any 1/4" half track would be at best a copy of that 1" (or whatever) master 2 channel mix. And even those would be few and far between. Most of the retail RtoR tapes were at best dups of a copy of that. But even as subs from the 2channel mix master that would be incredible!
For me the Bottom Line is even with the Best Turntables and Cartridge's with the Finest Ultrasonic Cleaners, Master Cut Vinyl is still gonna have pops and hiss! The Future is is in DSD Domain! Mikey, Stick it to the Misdirection Guys! Keep Telling it like it is! ✌️
Mikey completely nailed it here. It`s all about the quality of the sound. Enjoy it and don`t botter about the proces. It just doesn`t matter. And as he says vinyl is lossy too.
I do think it is about MoFi not being transparent and then charge a HUGE PREMIUM for their One-Steps or even their "Original Master Recording" branded LPs. Got everyone in a tizzy. Nobody has complained about the sound quality , that I know of.
@@ptg01 Yeah,well. Today the discussion is about the used record machine ( which is i heard of absolute impeccable quality). Tomorrow it will be about the used cables or power conditioner. Anyway mikey nailed it because he did not expose Mofi he exposed the religious vinylists.
Mike, the issue is not that MoFi made these LPs from DSD. Many people collect vinyl that are cut from digital and they sound amazing.. The issue is that MoFi was charging a premium for their products. People were paying top dollar for a product that was supposed to be cut from the master tape. The issue is MoFi mislead consumers. I have not problem with digital but be honest and charge accordingly.
Yes but Mike is pointing out to something that crushes the whole believe and knowledge of the LP religion. That's the point he's making he don't really care about LP and the whole thing as fare I know.
To me it looks like most of the vinyl community are mad because MoFi is selling their LP at expensive prices in a desiving way. Many vinyl enthusiasts listen to digital and vinyl. The quality of the vinyl also plays a big role. There are going to be LPs that will sound better than digital and vise versa. The trick is finding which sounds best for you.
@@rcarloz it's not about fellings or believes.. you can go to church to believe... And if you think you are on the right way but if you don't know it's like that.
So the Playback Designs MPT-8 does "only" the reading and sending to MPD-8 and then it gets further worked on there? Would fit into that "transport" only put the data from the disc, the magic of the dac will be done from a different system. So Playback Design can use this copy-protected signal and send it over to their dac? I guess because they don´t use HDMI or something, or have ALL connections this copyprotecting stuff? The MPT-8 is really expensive if it "only" is a transport, even the Luxman D-10X which has it own DAC is 5k cheaper, but I don´t know if it is the best way to handly the signal. I would go via analog out into a Integr.Amp and I don´t know it this Amp wouldn´t tough the signal that is coming in. In your design the MPT-8 would send the raw data over the best connection (fibre) to MPD-8, the dac would do its magic, taking advantage of its output section and sending directly to the poweramp. There would be an chance anything could put their "dirty fingers" on that signal. Sound great to me. Oh boy, that would be a priceeee chain, ~22k for the transport (which is a lot IMO) and ~30k for the dac which is ok when we consider what it does incl. the output section. Still would need an poweramp in this chain and I guess something that would fit into this source chain would also be in the 15-25k league. Against that would stand a Luxman D-10x with 17k, a 590AXII for 10k and I could still use a phono line because, I like turntables. Sure putting a phonopreamp in the Playback Design chain wouldn´t be impossible I guess. I think this gear would also be very good, no idea if I could hear any difference between them, it certainly would cost a lot less. Also could save some money on the Luxman D-10x and invest only into a cheaper but good transport and putting a Naim streamer with a great DAC into the chain for the digital handling, analog directly to the amp then. What a great timing of that M-Ffi revelation, directly before I was investing in all that stuff
MPT-8 and MPD-8 combo is for those that will accept no shortcoming whatsoever. It is a world class SACD/CD transport and streamer & its not "pricey" for high end buyers. Its in fact a HUGE savings over the alternatives such as DCS or MSP for instance where the DAC alone is $80K .. Im not a Luxman guy ... sore they are a good piece, but I prefer the Rowland Integrateds made in USA.. $10K and $48K including DAC and soon streamer.
If you mean "pure DSD" as 1-bit SDM, then the Sonoma workstation modifies that when editing. It actually uses multi-bit processing (3-5 bits) for many of the editing functions like level changes and fades. These cannot natively be done in 1-bit. Other than simple direct DSD recordings, basically everything else has been through a multi-bit process. There's nothing to fear with current Chinese DACs like Topping, SMSL, etc... The DSD processing internally is done very well these days by ESS and AKM components especially in the last year. I'm sure Playback Designs is fine, just more expensive, and hopefully they improved the noise floor from the MPS-5.
Even a 44.1/16bit dub of the best analog source you can find is going to be a near-perfect copy. I owned a Nakamichi DRAGON cassette deck for years and spent hours and hours recording on that machine. I loved it. Fast forward a few years and I wanted to give digital dubbing a try. I thought you had to buy a digital interface for that but my nephew told me no, your motherboard will have a built-in analog to digital converter. Okay, but my motherboard was an off brand, and even if it wasn't, the AD converter is just some random, off the shelf item, certainly never intended for critical listening. Probably mediocre at best. Still, I gave it a try. Eagles, Hotel California DVD-Audio disc, Pioneer Elite player, analog out to my computer, 16 bit, 44.1. Perfect recording. Walked all over my old Nak.
I do exactly the SAME thing to my OTARI! The tape DOES add some distortion to the sounds and, for whatever reason, the tape (sourced from DSD) sounds more pleasing in BLIND tests. All of my audiophile friends say the same thing!
There is no such thing as digital. When you record digital and play it back it is still playing analog at the final stage. Regardless of the source being digital all music is analog
Very Good! Some vinyl freaks really are blinded and out of their mind….knew that before but thanks for putting in in context, Mikey 👍🏼 …but vinyl is so hip these days that people pay hundreds of dollars for a simple LP …just crazy!
I love vinyl, but it is in no way the "best" play back media (if by best you mean "best replication of the master"). But it's not about "best" it's about sound. Vinyl sounds different. Some folks love it's different sound.
Because the outside does not spin faster than the inside. A vinyl record is a solid piece of vinyl. The motor that spins it, spins it at a constant angular velocity. The outside has a faster linear velocity than the inside, but the angular velocity is the same. When the recording master is made, it is cut in exactly the same way the record will be played, with a constant angular velocity. The recording goes at the same rate all the time. What is true is that because of the different linear velocities, a given frequency will have a longer physical wavelength cut into the vinyl on the outer part of the record than it will on an inner part of the record. Also, LP has wider frequency response than you might appreciate, well above 40Khz.
That's funny I thought that was odd news about MO-FI. I know some newer records ( not MO-FI ) are even cut from the CD ( not even from the DSD nor older masters )
Once upon a time : On the 1st day they said “ let there be Music “ On the 2nd day they said “ let there be electricity “ On the 3rd day they said “ let there be vinyl “ On the 4th day they said “ let there be shiny vinyl players and expensive cartridges “ On the 5th day they said “ let there be coloured vinyl “ On the 6th day they said “ let there be boxsets “ On the 7th day they were tired of a weeks work , all the effort of setting up the turntables ,cartridges , heavy boxsets , dedicated cables ….and then ….they said ….f*k this all…..let there be digital
Isnt the seventh day of the week that people are supposed to be worn out from working on vinyl, That God appreciated these vinyl workers by honoring then with a day of rest. On the 7th day they were tired of a weeks work on vinyl & disobeyed God, & said I wont work, I live in the US, the land of the free. Let there not be satanic cheap unnatural flourescent digital light.
all MOFI releases during the digital age-- all from digital files, we felt all sound fantastic...but its not worth the price we paid cause making from digital files are way cheaper than from analog...we need refund.
Even coming from digital most albums sound better on vinyl. I think it's an EQ thing during the mastering but hey it is what it is... vinyl sounds better 90% of the time (or more).
Never jumped on the MoFI bandwagon never saw a reason to upgrade my already excellent sounding early pressings with exorbitant priced MOFI.. I stick to vinyl for older stuff like jazz early rock etc and all new music I stream via tidal.
I found this video odd. Even Michael Fremer, who is a total vinyl head, records vinyl to digital to be played via digital. I have a Legacy Audio Valor speaker system which uses a digital pre-amp, and have both vinyl and digital sources, so everything gets converted to digital prior to getting to the speakers. I find both vinyl and digital sounds great, but it depends on the recording. My LPs are almost all from the 80's. When I play a lot of the streaming versions of these, I have found the direct transfers to digital to be lacking. However, I have also found digital remasters to sound closer to the original vinyl than the original transfers did. When this happens, it kind of makes you wander about the transfer process itself. As such, I tend to prefer streaming for modern recordings, but vinyl for older recordings, as I do like the significantly lower noise floor of digital. However, for the older recordings, I prefer the sound of vinyl, even given those flaws, due to how bad the digital transfers can be in comparison.
Not sure whats odd, perhaps you can be more specific. Your first sentence means nothing unless we know why Fremer does that and in what context. For instance if he records vinyl to digital that came from a digital recording of a magnetic tape, that would be comical. Why not just listen to the digital recording of the master tape eliminating the vinyl step altogether. If you are saying because the EQ from the vinyl step adds "juice" to the recording, then weve got issues. The system should not need this. To me, the depth in which you lay out the analysis of the recordings would take the fun out of it for me. Its honestly the last thing I want to think about while trying to enjoy music.. Once a system achieves a certain level, there is no recording that ruins the experience. im not saying everything sounds amazing, just that nothing is bothersome due to its recording.
@@OCDHIFiGuy I remember watching an interview with Fremer. He has a lot of records, and records those records to digital, and then listens to his digital recordings. It does not seem that he records directly from master tape. The vinyl I have is mostly from the 80s (purchased in the 80s). There is a certain "weight" the comes with the sound and sometimes more 3 dimensionality. When I play the same track from Qobuz, it loses the weight. In some ways, it might be similar to what some people say about tube amp sound. Tube amps may have more distortion than solid state, but there can be something about the sound that people prefer, even though there is more distortion. Of course, with audiophile stuff "Ignorance is Bliss" seems to apply. If you have one level of equipment, and have never heard anything else, then you may think that it is the best. While it might be the best one has experienced, it may not be the best. I have been through multiple experiences I this. If you only listen to digital, you may hear those old tracks and think that it was the best. There is nothing that prevents you from enjoying it. However, if one first heard the vinyl, and then hears the digital, one will feel that something is missing from the digital. That has been my personal experience. I don't care whether it is digital or vinyl as I have both sources. I tend to enjoy the sound of one more that the other in some cases, and vice versa in other cases. It just appears that you are trying to put down vinyl as much as you can, to rationalize why your choice in digital is best. There is absolutely nothing wrong with saying that you don't like vinyl because of its inconvenience, or even that you don't like the noise. However, it seems that you talk about "allegations" about MoFi and then try to use that as justification as to why vinyl is bad.
digital is the future...Spending 200k on a turntable makes no sense to me. A record only has 70DB of dynamic range a CD has 90 DB. I had a turntable it it sounded nice but wasn't as accurate and it was a big pain in the ass. I sold it.
When I first heard that MoFi used digital masters, my reaction was, 'DUH!' The original analog master tapes to many of these albums are 40 to 60+ years old. They have to be digitized to preserve them. I watched a video from the MoFi guys who make the archival DSD copies of the analog masters: they are not "finished" until they have a DSD copy that is indistinguishable from the original analog master tape. Regarding the Playback Designs MPD-8, It's MSRP is $24K. I'll have to pass on that one.
Yes, you are correct... They bought a MPD-8. My reference DAC for the last 3 years.... ;-) Ive got other great performers starting at $2K (NOT made in China)
Get over it. If digital to analogue mastering is done properly (i.e., 4X DSD) and you do not get too analytical with the mastering, it works fine, and you get excellent results.
My vinyl and CD wall looks more atractive than that master tape wall. Sure, those tapes are the real deal, just not the best looking ones. For me collecting vinyl and CD's is not about the sound, it's about having the original format people in wich people got to know an artist for the first time, LP's in the 70's and 80's and CD's in the 90's and 2000's.
That sounds like you collecting movi clips from Instagram that where copied from RU-vid movie trailer and than you proudly speaking out like some religious beliver.. dude.. I respect it and it's also interesting but the fact is something else. And I think we are called audiophiles because of one reason.
@@magicfields101 I think all what I have sounds good, I'm not an audiophile. I just don't care about audiophile expensive versions of classic rock and jazz records I already have. Those are not my favorite genres. Looking for noisy, messy, imperfect versions of punk, post punk, metal and trash and latin rock records. That's the shit for me, not an audiophile version of a Carole King or Billy Joel record I got for $2.00. I respect if you like that kind of thing, I can see the appeal of that, is great music, just not the most exiting type of music.
@@MsKalachakra ok if it's like that you are wrong here and on the wrong discussion an topic. You should watch the video again and try to understand what it is about. I mean the video is there and I hope you understand English not only by words I'm mean also the context.. and also nobody including me cares what you like dude. You also should not do false assumptions what I like or not.. you are getting totally of topic
@@magicfields101 Not talking about you, I'm talking about what MoFI fans like. It's so obvious, they like to hear again the same old classic rock albums in a new remaster, how I know that? just look at their website :) I was just makin a joke about how those tapes look, of course I know they are the shit, the real deal, the real holy grails and very very valuable. Also what I like is what 80% of record collectors like. How I know that? just look at the prices of classic punk, metal and post punk albums. Ok you don't care or know about that, I understand.
I PLAY NOTHING BUT MOBILE FIDELITY LP's. They don't wear out after 4 plays like other records. I'm looking at my bedroom system now. It's got a record player on top, sharing the chassis with a cassette deck above the on/off switch and an opening for 8 track tapes at the other end of it. The record player, amp and tape decks all share the same circuit. Lately when I been playin' these Mobile Fidelitys, which are the only ones I play since they don't seem to wear out after' 4 plays like the others, they been sounding sort of.... like....uh....kinda.....hard to describe....sorta..... oh wait. I see some lint on the needle. That could be it. Wait, I'll just flick it off with my finger.
Why not install a vinyl record playing chain in your current system and compare, live, with us, your friends and custumers ;-), how they differ in sound and so on...that would be interesting!!
Mikey has the even better analog version for many records, why installing another analog medium which is not better? He has a point IMO, Mo-Fi does produce great sounding records and if the archive of their 4XDSD is good enough for them its good enough for me. Sure you might catch a even better sounding record, it all depends on who did the work and with what source, but how many hours do you want to research for 1 record what the best version might be? If acoustic-sounds does a complete new pressing of the master and working month on that product, and reaching a level which is even better as the DSD version Mo-Fi , you might have a chance that your vinyl sound better. Older versions out of times where there was no digital would also be interesting. If you want a record out of that time, and there is no sacd or download file vinyl might be the best solution because getting the mastertape would be way more difficult ... I guess Mikey has all the records he wants, most in digital form, the rest as tape. So I myself want to be in both worlds, and as good as I can afford it. I have not that big of an archive, so I might end up with vinyl or dsd ... whatever I can get my hands on first or what I can afford at that time. I guess I have to go Mikeys way with Playback-Designs Transport (CD+SACD+Streamer) & their DAC all from the 8 series, amp I don´t know yet. What turntable and what preamp I don´t know yet, maybe the Luxman 590AXII which would be an integrated class-A with great phono input, but maybe this solution would be a bit to "less" in the chain. Don´t know if it would make sense spending 45k for transport+dac and "only" 10k for the amp
I love my vinyl though i prefer digital. I find that the anti digital guys think there is some magic in the vinyl. I bought a used sacd when i found out my blu ray player could play them. Sounds awesome. No vinyl could reproduce the bottom end as well.
im a digital guy but i cant really hear a difference between 44.1 khz pcm and 192khz pcm in blind tests so i doubt DSD would make that much of a difference for me. but idk maybe my ears are just lofi lol
After learning about this deception, I cancelled my many MoFi open orders. Sorry, but if I want MoFi digital, I'll buy Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs editions. I did recently purchase The Rascals Mono supposedly from the mono master tapes. But that could be B.S. too.. However I have a mono cartridge/turntable so I'll give it a try...I'm a vinyl head. I use a Townshend Audio Allegri Reference preamp(oh no!)....Can digital sound better? Maybe sometimes. Do I care? Not really. I have a music streamer too...But I love the vinyl experience. I love reading the inserts and cover copy, all the pictures, the whole experience. I love buying original jazz albums from the 50's and 60's. Who touched and played these albums? And the sound to me is just great. And that's all that ultimately matters right?
The best vinyl pressings come from TAPE or DIGITAL as their source rendering vinyl a packaged good made to profit record labels at the expense of sonic quality. The ORIGINAL recording format will ALWAYS remain the best. There are a few records recorded direct to the lathe lacquer but there are so few its not a factor...
A bit too much commercials for your playback design selling ;-) there are others out there as well, like looking for the technically grammy award winner Daniel Weiss :-) DAC501 owner with latest 4ch upgrade
I think the issue isn't how good Quad DSD is or not but Mo-Fi not being transparent and even being misleading. They know vinyl enthusiasts want an all analogue chain. They like vinyl because they prefer the sound over domestic digital. No argument tape is best but most of us can't afford a top tape deck these days or those £450 tapes from the master. If MFSL know Quad DSD is so good why not be up front about it and tell us of it's advantages on their record sleeves.
right, and they could sell these files via their website. Sure the illegal copying of this stuff would be a problem, but they certainly did what they did for profit only. The vinyl fanboys are a cow you could fleece forever, maybe not anymore, we will see but this will hurt them i guess.
God this is a relief. I didn't like records as a format when that's all we had. It was crap then and it's crap now. I was in a band for 30 years and we had an album absolutely ruined by a bad pressing. The 2 inch tape was killer, the record unlistenable. Come on people. RIAA curve, it's low fidelity on a good day. Cassettes we're worse. We'd do something in studio, sounded great, they'd run us off a cassette and one generation later there was no dynamic range, just no life left. Even the the tapes Mikey shows have lost a generation and in tape terms, that's a lot. I'd love to have the Mofi digital files. That's as close as you'll ever come to what went down in the studio.
There it is .... Thanks Eric for saying that... You are not the first professional to tell me that.. Ive been told it repeatedly, with production guys as well as Artists... Hope you still play, man !
MoFi write on the sheet that is following with the one-step record: "MFSL engineers begin with the original master tapes and meticulously cut a set of lacquers " If that is not a lie I didn't know what is!
Perhaps some were made with lacquers which was the original way to do it, but I guess they did use Digital files on some of the stuff but never made it clear until they were taken to the mat.
@@OCDHIFiGuy with all respect it do sound like you have no idea how the record production is done. "Perhaps some were made with lacquers" ALL LP are coming from a lacquer, so no lacquers then no LP. The thing is that one step process you use the stampers (A and B side a set). That is made from those 2 lacquers and the lacquers is destroyed in the process when the stampers are made from them. So we only have the stampers. The stampers will get worn out after ~500 to max 1000 LP pressings. When they're worn out we need to make new stampers by playing the master tape or in this case 4xDSD file AGAIN and cut a new lacquers. If we want to keep the highest quality and sound quality and do 500 copies of each set of stampers. Then in Michel Jackson thriller case with 40000 LPs then we need to run the original master tape 80 times.. And of course they aren't doing that when they run the DSD 80 times instead. Or how many times they want.. As we see no cutting from the original master tape of the lacquer has occurred in any way. When ALL cutting has been done from the digital file. When they are in the digital domain they can do whatever. They can fix tape artifacts and EQ some parts and fix. The guys telling us they're doing that and makes test LP pressings until the get the LP to sound as they want. So it is a good synergy between analog and digital.🥰
@@magicfields101 Yes, you are right. I am at first hand a vinyl lover. But I am also the first one to acknowledge that vinyl is shit sound quality of the all formats besides some corner cases (that is of no interest for most people). I can rant and double the list of why that LP is shit. There is many different reasons why to play LPs and it is not for SQ. For me I am a normal stressed guy with family and children, work, car and house. When I use a streaming or some optical media. Then even if the digital song I listening to is great in every aspect and way. Even then my little reptile brain 🧠 thinking that maybe the next song is better? And I skip to next track and thinking not to skip to next track unnecessary when this is already good.. I keep the stress levels "elevated" and i have a hard time to wind down and enjoy the music.🤔 A LP you put it on and no remote and you inderecty need to commit to sit there and listening to all 20 minutes. But I was the first that were calling LP as the analog equivalent to the digital MP3:s! But I play LP to wind down in this stressfully world. 🥰😉💕🎶🎼🎵
I dont know how this was recurded, but it sounds great- Pcydub Ethnic Chill Out World- High Vibes Tribal Psychill Entheogenic Dub in 4:20 mix 2021 RU-vid
I like vina because I like the artwork and I noticed it on CDs they don’t do the same thing and sometimes I like to know the years of the music they came out and said he don’t do that and other music I just like to know how old the music is and it’s not the vinyl is better no HSA people all have different taste in it but for me I love you forever reason today in a group or on it so I like it but I’m at work and I never I never changes I was a kid and that we’re watching the Nike and I just stuck with it I got into CDs but I but there is one song that I like and I don’t know why they shorten it down so bad it’s a song called inside Evita and that’s what I said going back into wine only because they started shorting things on Siri and they wouldn’t do that he’s not bad it’s just he made the song shorter than what it was originally and that’s what made me mad and that’s why I started going backwards but no I actually you have the right idea he just said he just said if people when I do that I said cutting down songs and bordering on an 11 that they originality that’s what I like I like the originality of the song I don’t like it be like five minutes when is the whole entire side side B and you Know
GREAT RANT! - If the music sounds great, who cares about how its done! Real Audiophiles and Music Lovers know its all about the music! I support Mobile Fidelity, PS audio OCTAVE Records, Blue Coast Records, Chesky, 2L Recordings, etc. who make all make great recordings. If you like their artists and LPs and SACD & DSD recordings, then buy them. If you are an investor or trying to make a quick buck, identify yourself so that we know why you are so upset. If I had the money, I would give Playback Designs a ride!
@OCD HI-FI Guy while I agree to your part about Vinyls being made from digital masters, I do not get the part of Playback Designs being the best because DSD is designed by one of the inventors of DSD. There are several others which are at-least at the same level of Playback Design. I can give you example of Merging Technologies which I am not sure if you have heard of but is a very big name in recording (pro-space), bigger than Playback Designs. Here is a quote from co-founder of Playback Designs Jonathan Tinn regarding Merging Technologies dac from one of the popular forum. "Hi Keith, Interesting. As the founder and former owner of Playback Designs, I've compared both players numerous times as well as with the newer Playback Designs components and I assure you something must have been amiss during your time with the Merging Technologies NADAC because there really is no comparison... the NADAC is far superior sonically. Also the Playback Designs is quite a bit more expensive and always has been. You can listen to 10 dacs all with the same chipset and yet they all sound different. Why is that if the DAC chip is so important? There is a lot more that goes into the sound of a DAC. I sold the company in 2014 and did not take on new digital until 2019 because I had not heard anything I thought was worthwhile enough until the Merging Technologies NADAC. Merging also now offers an optional and outstanding external power supply which adds greatly to the sonics and is still quite a bit less expensive than the Playback Designs offerings. I had a chance to compare the Merging with other DACs as well, the Nagra HD, Lampizator's Golden Gate 1 & 2 as well as the Pacific, Aqua Formula xHD, EMM Labs DA2 and countless others. The Merging NADAC always easily came out on top. That is why I proudly took on the line. Keith, I do not know where you live, but I invite you to revisit the NADAC again. I am certain your experience will be much different. Best Regards, Jonathan Tinn Blue Light Audio darTZeel - Importer Evolution Acoustics - Co-Owner / Founder Merging Technologies - Importer Playback Designs - Co-Founder Wave Kinetics - Co-Owner / Co-Founder Wave Kinetics Records - Co-Owner / Co-Founder"
@saurabh, nice shill for Tinn... Looks like he is nothing more than an investor... Ill get the real info on him shortly... He is the USA importer for Merging.. Of course he thinks its best... Words dont mean anything. Proof is in the pudding.. The listening. Send me a GADAC and Ill listen and compare...
@@OCDHIFiGuy Yes, best thing is to listen to it and decide. While I can not provide you any loaner unit, nor can I arrange one for you so best way would be you will have to arrange for a demo unit (maybe from Jonathan Tinn himself) for you to compare. Alternatively you can buy a used one from Audiogon (there are couple for $4500 - $5000 listed on Audiogon) & if you don't like it then you can sell it off (that way you won't be losing lot of money). In any case I suggest you to use the full stack of Merging viz. external power supply & master-clock (I know you don't believe in it, but that would be the best version of NADAC even as per Merging). If you are purchasing used one then you can get any decent 12V LPS & then create a dc cable using your own cables & get a clock from AfterDark (if you can go for the top version of it) as clock from Merging is ridiculously expensive.
@@77MovieFan Merging is not any cheap Chinese brand who only copy designs from other brands. It's a pro brand with some 20 odd years of legacy & very strong in the pro-world. Beside as a matter of fact to state their know how in this A/D & D/A business, DXD (viz. 352.8KHz 24/32 bit PCM) was developed by Merging along with Philips. They have also developed Ravenna/AES67 protocol for audio over IP, which is used mainly in Pro world...so don't just discredit something without knowing..
Vinyl guys are gonna have to eat some crow and just move on and enjoy their music. That is what it is all about anyway. One can get a little miffed about how the sausage is made, but get over it cause those MoFi vinyls and SACDS for that matter, sound awesome!
The vast majority of LP "re-issues" are sourced from digital. Many from PCM sources. Why should MO-Fi be any different? Their main difference is what they charge for their "one step" "Limited Edition" records.
MOFI One Steps vinyl is based on a 4XDSD file and the SACD is a 1XDSD, so!!!! they are going to sound different!!! I hear some Mofis (including the One Steps) and mostly are better than the Mofi SACD counterpart. With that I don't say the SACDs are bad.
That would be the question for us customers, would we hear the difference when they do their "1XDSD work with the SACD against the process of going Vinyl both from the same great source?" I guess nobody of us is getting that 4XDSD in any form, only what gets processed out of this source by them. It is good to know that great sound doesn´t need to come 100% from analog but in the end the end-product matters and if their work to the end-product vinyl sounds better as the end-product SACD or downloadfile because this also gets worked on, I would prefer the vinyl. Maybe that step from 4XDSD to 1XDSD is way more superior and easy, dont know. So even if Playback Designs is working on analog to 4XDSD and are great in decoding all that stuff, the source disc/file we enter into our chain at home is not that 4XDSD file right? I guess they are also great in handling that finished 1XDSD SACD but should we consider this to keep it in our backhead or forget about it? Boy my head hurts now, al this is very complicated
How long will DSD, DXD, WAV, FLAC be around for? I bet my mortgage and my life that they won't be here in 70 years time! And I also bet the same arguments will still be taking place. Live in peace guys and gals and enjoy the music whatever you have.
13:19 where do you buy all that? I mean those are original master tapes or copies of? (I have in mind the original master tapes are owned by the big music labels, you know Sony etc.) You need to understand too that not everybody can buy the tapes, even we already know the Vinyl is "lossy", people can go to the stores and say "hey! sell the master tape".
I dont suggest anyone buy master tapes. Im offering proof that Im not just a bag of air. I walk the walk. How do I know my DAC sounds as good as Master Tape ? Because I bought a vault collection from a recording studio and I use them as reference .... not many other dealers can say that ... ;-)
@@OCDHIFiGuy yes I understand you, I know that you are not suggest something that is impossible (millions of regular people buying the master tape or paying $450 for Analogue Productions Reels), we know that nothing beats the master tape, the master tape is a step before to any other media, vinyl or cd.
You have to get your facts right. It's not as simple as just digital/analogue. Even though there's a transfer for mastering for LP, it doesn't mean it's as simple as saying it's "digital". Further more, the whole point of the MOFI thing is not the digital/analogue thing and quality of the MOFI products. It's about the honesty and pricing of the company. Read below.
