What can i say, they made people think they were getting something they weren't as a placebo effect. To sell those records at those prices they needed people to believe they were buying all analog.
Making a record is much more expensive than a cd, and even though they copied the master tape with the best reproduction equipment, the end product is analog, no DAC needed for lp playback.
@@jeffl915 in late 90s LPs were cheap as dirt, you could get a double lp album much cheaper than the cd. The only reason vinyl now is so expensive is because of the vinyl trend... And the end product is just a lesser quality analog copy of the digital file... So its not analog there isnt such thing as pure analog anymore for ex copying a cd to a cassette doesnt make it analog...
@@HASHEAVEN There are a few companies making pure analog records, and Analog Productions is one of them, also Speakers Corner. We are still 30 years away from the 90’s, and the cost of production from inflation alone, is huge. If you pressed a record today, and sold it for $10 bucks, you would lose your ass. Pressing records it a much more laborious task than making a cd.
The record industry has been doing this ever since the resurgence. Do you know how many modern artists are recorded on computers? Any vinyl you’ve bought from a modern musician, save a select few that do painstakingly insist on using tapes, is a waste of money.
Your comments are so spot on with my own thoughts. If all the reviewer "audiophiles" had a clue about recording or mastering, they would know that exactly what MOFI did will not result in any difference in sound of the end product, other than perhaps a positive one in that the "one step" stamping process can be used to make far more records, without deteriorating the analog master tape. Aside from that, you covered it. Thank you!
I have an extensive digital and analog collection myself. I am fine with digitally sourced vinyl as well (when it is disclosed). What I like about the all analog sourced records is the romance, the extra effort, the human touch, the care and attention that goes into it. Digitally sourced vinyl might even sound better in some cases. That's all subjective. What bothers me is that I feel deceived here. That's all. I hope there is a reckoning for MoFi. They lied by omission. Very disappointed. If a vinyl record has digital in the chain I would sooner justy but the digital file. Thanks for the video.
While you don't think MOFI's decision to hide the digital steps in their production process made sense, I'd say it made perfect sense. They were trying to maximize market share in a premium-price market they knew required analog production. Analog, in the audiophile segment, is what product marketers used to call "a determinant attribute." That is, a product attribute that must be present for the item to sell. This is the segment their strategists believed would be most profitable, but in order to increase production (volume of copies and number of new titles) they had to move away from a completely analog production process. So they lied about how their product was manufactured. We usually call this consumer fraud.
Pretty straightforward case of fraud …what it shows is no one can reliably distinguish between a digital vs an analog source, if both are done well and thus there is no reason other than nostalgia to reissue all- analog records or even use vinyl as a medium.
@@jayedwards4787 It's the same with all sorts of 'premium products'. For instance several guitar manufactures offer "Master build" guitars, which are normally build by hand by a master guitar builder. However, if it turns out the 'master builder' doesn't build any of the guitars at all, but rather just picks nice examples of the mass produced line of guitars and puts his signature on it, it would be fraud. It doesn't matter if those guitars are nice guitars that sound and play great. The price premium is not justified and costumers are misled.
Thank you for your excellent comments. You hit the nail on the head. I'm not mad at MoFi because I love them and DSD, but esp. at those prices, analog fans need to know. The fact that no one noticed for a while is another essay.
Hey Kenny. Your video was randomly suggested by RU-vid. Your common sense attitude towards music is refreshing. I like what you have to say. Sub’d and liked. Looking forward to your future videos.
Great, concise summary and I 100% agree with everything you’ve said there. I’ve got several MOFI records and they all sound great to my ears, and this news absolutely cannot change that fact. They have definitely been disingenuous though, and of course we’d all like the facts before parting with our hard earned cash. I don’t see how they can not be 100% honest going forward, to allow folks to make an informed decision cheers.
You're absolutely right in saying that, when done well, both analog and digital can sound tremendous. What MoFi/Music Direct has been doing for the past 15 years seems very dishonest from a marketing standpoint, but you bring up a good point about the merits of digital. For over a year I've been buying MoFi's SACD's pretty heavily, and to a one I'm very impressed with the product. I got into them because of rising vinyl prices, and now I end up reaching for them more than my records. They offer genuine archival-quality sound and apparently they are a more honest product :D A lot of audiophiles have long refused to reckon with how good the MoFi (and Analogue Productions) SACD's sound.
I can’t believe this is happening. What with all the soaring high prices for vinyl, now I know I paid too much for these records. Alot of them I paid $50-$125 or even more at retail. I could’ve gotten the SACD for $30 & the recording is 1 generation better. I think my head is going to explode 🤯
wow. ur a huge fan of miles. im sure u have the OG pressings of my favourite LPs by him workin as well as cookin. the reason y MOFI didnt disclose abt the DSD thingy from the get go is they know that if they have done so, many people will not have bought their releases. abraxas 1 step is crazy expensive in the secondary market and even that too is DSD slapped onto a slab of vinyl. sigh
I have a few IMPULSE John Coltrane CDs from the nineties and they sound fantastic...I have a 2nd press BLUE TRAIN mono from 1958 and it sounds fantastic...why do they all sound great?......because they were recorded and mastered extremely well....I have "lowly" cassette tapes that sound great....all formats have their own particular "good points"....GOOD TO HEAR A SENSIBLE TAKE on this MO-FI "SCANDLE"
I guess the sad part is it just about discredits everything said about these releases by audiophiles. The fact is they are great digital releases and that’s a big shame for the collectors and retailers. They must feel a little humiliated by this.
What I get from all this situation: - mofi could specify all that dsd thing on their vinyls, but they didn’t. Mainly because they knew ppl that are vinyl lovers no matter what and pure analog freaks wouldn’t buy it. Easy. - all these years, people LOVED Mofi. All one steps has some quality control issues with materials. But all sound amazing. Everyone was sooo impressed and said in all reviews that it’s the best they’ve heard from each title. So now that we know this, it sounds bad now? Come on guys. - I love analog etc. however if technology allows you to get the best of both worlds, the quiet and details of the digital, and the warmth and natural sound of a vinyl played through your Koetsu cartridge and 100k audio system, then what is the problem? If THAT Mofi result is superior to all the previous pressings of any album and sounds best, then who cares? Are we all here to buy digital or analog etc. or are we here to find the best sounding album and have it in our collection? - last, of course Mofi made a huge mistake of not being clear and lie in some videos and interviews in the past. They found a formula that works, but knew that they would lose all the analog vinyl purists etc. these purists care about analog and not how it sounds. That is the problem.
It would be interesting to discuss your differences in the KIND OF BLUE formats and sound quality. The Apple Music stream of it is lacking life. My old vinyl sparkles to life.
I only have 10 Mofi's. Two are old analog records. I listen to those two over and over. The eight newer ones with the digital component, until last night, I had only listened to once, and put on the shelf. Maybe that's just a coincidence. I have really clean original copies of everything that I bought on Mofi, and i would rather listen to my very nearly mint, 6 eye Columbia than the Mofi 2X45. I am not an audiophile, more of a collector I suppose. Give me a clean original any day. Last night I listened to Abraxas Mofi (not a one step). It sounds really great. Different for sure. It sounds like they cleaned up the bass and made the high end shine, and it does sound beautiful. The original has a bigger bottom end. The original bass sounds like a Pbass with flat wounds played with the fingers. The Mofi, the bass sounds again, like a Pbass with flat wounds, but the attack is so clean it sounds like it is played with a pick rather than the fingers. The technology is nice, and can make things shine. It still feels like cutting the bass boom out of a raggae song is not exactly what the artist wanted. Choose your flavor.
Your room set-up is wonderful. I’m glad I stumbled onto your channel. I am with you but so many feel betrayed by the omission (as you mention). Your Columbia copies are really nice. I look forward to trolling your back catalogue of videos.
They lied by omission to create a boutique product and charge lots of cash. But it doesn’t bother me because I gave up on vinyl albums decades ago. Though it certainly looks like you have a very nice collection there 👍🏼
Well said. Record companies (including... maybe ESPECIALLY MoFi) MUST have transparency... including listing the how they process ON THE ACTUAL Record jacket. It's as simple as that. Maybe we should put Neil Young in charge. Cheers!
Good video 👍 I agree with you and many others that they should be more honest with their products. But, for me it is more important the opportunity that this is giving us to reconsider the whole “Audiophile” community. I hope people stop saying that one format is better than other one just because, there is people that haven’t even listened to those albums because they are sealed in their shelfs and they are complaining about it. There is a lot of speculation and that increase the price of albums and that hurts people like me that just want to enjoy and listen to a good piece of art like “Kind of Blue”. Please enjoy and listen to the music and stop this madness of the formats! PS: it would be nice if you can improve the sound in your videos.
Thank you very much for viewing my channel and for taking a few moments of your time for your comments. I sincerely Apologize for the sound on my video's...I am using my smart phone to make the video's. Thanks again for viewing 😁
The fact that you embrace both analog and digital got me a subscribed. And I agree with you 110%. No transparency. The literature wasn’t clear. I don’t have any MoFi records but I’d feel cheated if I paid premium expecting AAA records of my favorite albums.
To put it clearly, MOFI has been caught scamming their customers. There's a value that SOME of their customers put on analogue recording processes (and for many good reasons) and MOFI dissembled in allowing these customers to think that MOFI's vinyl releases were created using only analogue processes. This bait and switch allowed them to charge a LOT more for their faux analogue discs. If MOFI had been completely transparent about what they were doing, they could not have charged their customers the prices they charged them. The market would not have allowed that. So, class action lawsuits, I'm sure, are in the offing. They have to be.
Enjoyed your video and became a subscriber to your. I agree with the points you've made. It doesn't bother me the process used by MOFI. I buy records to enjoy them because I love music. Have a great weekend.
Good video and I agree with your comments on those "golden eared" audiophiles who claim that digital is the devil and that they can tell the difference between digital and analogue. I think those people have come off worse from all this controversy than Mofi. I don't own any Mofi recordings but all the videos I've seen all say the same thing and that is, despite being digitally sourced, the records sound great. Where does that leave these charlatans who have praised Mofo products because they believed they were all analogue.
Exactly, "Where does that leave these charlatans who have praised Mofo products because they believed they were all analogue." ridiculous, they made huge fools of themselves
Money. That's the reason they we're not transparent from the beginning. I have a few MoFi LPs and let me tell you, I would have saved me some money and bought their CD/SACD versions instead if they were transparent.
The point is that all analog fans that were shouting how much better analog sounds compared to digital... were just listening to a lesser quality copy of the original dsd digital ile... Placebo is strong among this hobby... bit this just proves that DSD is the best medium to listen to music...
Nice presentation, Kenny - Thank you! I pretty much agree. I prefer my vinyl to be all analog (AAA ). If something I like is not available in analog, I'll buy a CD - as you know they're generally much less expensive than a digitally mastered LP.
Most modern albums are done completely digital. Old albums typically suffer from tape degradation. That’s why people have to study which releases are best. The 90’s Beatles remasters on CD for example are the best digital source. When they rereleased the vinyl records they actually used the digital source of those cd’s. That’s why I don’t get caught up in thinking records are superior to CD’s or digital. I do my homework and buy the format closest to the source at the best price. Modern vinyl lovers are jaded.
Hello I'm new to your channel and I believe you were very fair for both Audiophiles and Digital I have MoFi pressing of Love Forever Changes and it sucks but I also have Pinkinton and it sounds great so it is very hit or miss for me but with Audiophile I have never gotten a bad pressing so far ( knock wood) I have about 50 Tone Poets and everyone sound amazing and I have the Doors first 2 albums I know that the first album is done from the safety pressing but the second is from the mastered tape and both are amazing. I also manage to get my hands on Fleetwood Mac Rumours cut at 45rpm by Kevin Gray and Steve Hoffman it is the best-sounding record in my collection so if I can afford it I will always go Audiophile over digital and vinyl over cd.
Why did they not disclose it? Because they were trying to conceal it. Why? I believe it was simply profit driven, tough they should at least be given a chance to explain themselves.
MoFi made a big mistake by not disclosing the digital masters that were being used in these releases. There is no question about that. Be that as it may, I also think it is time to accept that for many older albums, the days of re-releases that do NOT use a digital source are numbered. Many master tapes are already gone; labels have had to rely on duplicates or vinyl copies for some reissues. Others are falling apart. Digital technology has evolved to the point that there are formats that can capture the information in an analog source in a highly transparent manner. We have already seen this with film. If you see an old movie (shot on film) in a theatre today, the odds are you are going to be watching a digital file and not a film print. Of course, you know it's digital going in, but for 35mm film a well mastered (that is the key) 4K digital source will look essentially transparent to an analog print. High-resolution DSD can do something similar for audio. There was a time when technology demanded that all preservation and mastering work be done in the analog domain. Not only is that not always possible anymore, but digital has evolved to where it is capable of (and will be essential to) preserving our musical heritage so that it can be heard by future generations.
As long as they're not using slave labor, I don't personally care how they achieve the best result. That being said, I care deeply about integrity, and I won't be engaging in commerce with Mobile Fidelity.
Digitally enhanced analog recording will be something pursued in the especially for poorly recorded analog music, just wait and see. I love analog when it is done right but digital enhancement done properly can help poor analog recordings. Yes, there are many poor analog recordings! Transparency is what is needed but also we need a good understanding of digital enhancement which most all of us lack including myself. Soon as we see digital we cringe but maybe that should not be the case, sound quality should be the deciding factor. But the placebo factor of digital is strong, probably because of past experiences with harsh sounding digital music! Problem with mobile Fidelity is not the sound but the label at the top saying original Master recordings and should indicate original Master recordings from DSD files or whatever source.
The quality of the MoFi records is great, the information provided about the mastering and production is not correct, the prices are way too high.... With a digital master, you can make millions of records, and make a huge amount of money.... MoFi should publish a list of all their releases, provide information about how the records were produced, and make apologies to all customers ...
For the past thirty years, EVERYTHING has been a copy of the master, because none of the record labels are going to let their masters out of their sight. As long as MFSL has the best sound, it should not matter if it is completely analogue or if there is a digital step. YES, MFSL needs to be transparent. And yes, they did use the original master as the source when they could find it. Note that the digital 4X DSD will capture as much of the analogue as anyone could possibly hear. IT is NOT the CD or even the SACD digital format. It is way beyond that.
give the poor cd the mastering and attention to detail of the vinyl and no one should be able to tell the difference between them. vinyl is missing dynamics and details compared to any digital medium.
I suspect a lot of the people who are very angry at MoFi right now are driven mostly by embarrassment, and although they could take this humbling experience as a useful lesson, they will instead lean into demonizing the record label
Right. If people knew what MOFI was doing with these records, most would have opted for the much less expensive SACD versions. I mean, why wouldn't you? But MOFI was fooling people into spending big bucks. They have to make some form of restitution to these customers.
I listen to both analogue and digital audio but I must say that I prefer analogue audio on vinyl records and tapes. There is something in digitally processed audio that sound too clinical and artificial. Kind of metallic. Lets not forget the much maligned cassette tapes. Good cassette tapes played on vintage decks that have been cleaned, head aligned demagnetized, head lubed with Dolby circuity swiched off, sound the best to my ears. Like concert hall or studio, full bodied, chest pounding bass sound.
I really like and enjoy digital souces. You are correct about cassettes. I have a good vintage cassette deck and although I do not use it much the sound is great.
Here’s my point of contention. If the ‘master’ was all digital or digital from the original analog tapes, I would rather have the 💿 CD playback format. 💿 CDs are much less of a hassle for me than vinyl. I will admit that some early 💿 CDs weren’t the “absolute best.” I have some early ones and even though I still enjoy them, it didn’t take long for the CD format to improve BIG TIME. That raises another question (from my standpoint). What happened to Blu-Ray audio discs? Why didn’t Mobile Fidelity release some of the albums on Blu-Ray? I’m told that Blu-Ray has a slight sound quality advantage over CD. I have a Blu-Ray player and I’m very curious about the Blu-Ray audio format. Mobile Fidelity, did you forget the curious and (rule breaking) audiophile like me? At this point, I’m not big or committed to vinyl.
You are correct about CD's..although they may not sound as good as the LP format..these days they sound "Good enough" for those who do not feel like dealing with the "hassle" of the LP format. You mentioned blu-ray audio. That's a great point...DVD audio was also good a few years ago, but the blu-ray format was never used to its full advantage.
The use 4xDSD files which are few magnitudes more resolute than CD quality files and use them to cut the lacquer. They also usually release these as SACD which are DSD files in CD format.
There is one thing you didn't say that I'm glad for you. Your didn't say Mofi was making only digital records, like some of these sharks smelling blood people are on here. That is probably a bad & wrong inference and people can get sued for saying false things about somebody, especially if a judge thinks it might have cost them money. In other words Mobile Fidelity could sue some of these people. When Mike of In Groove interviewed them, Mobile Fidelity reps said two times, fairly early on, that when travelling to copy a master tape, they bring a DSD recorder (digital) and a Studer reel to reel recorder (analog). And the Studers weigh a ton. They are obviously making both analog and digital recordings, and I never heard Mofi say that they are making ONLY Digital copies of the master tape. Your video is smarter than you think. Mobile Fidelity could go up against some of the ones on here like Poetry On Plastic in court. And I'll bet they have pretty good lawyers. Those Columbia records had a digitally remastered logo in the corner to impress people and create more sales. Back then, those were the days when some unknowlegeable person writing for your newspaper could be telling everybody how much better digital sound is. They weren't trying to be transparent, they knew that digital was impressive to many people minds. From what they were told. For every one person who read TAS or Stereophile there were tens of thousands reading the newspapers and columns like I mentioned above. Mofi might not have mentioned digital copying because nowadays its a little different. Many people view digital as inferior and it would have cost them sales.
ALRIGHT KENNY!! diggin' that Miles!! i've got several cd's and vinyl pressings of it -you can't never have enough copies of KOB. i have the MoFi 45rpm and the AP UHQR but still looking for a nice OG preferably mono. which is your favorite pressing on vinyl and which is your favorite on digital compact disc??
My favorite on LP is the UHQR and my second favorite is the MOFI 45 RPM set. I have about 8 different digital sources and jury is still out on what is the best
I think what you said at the end is the real damage in this case. That people believed, were convinced, they have something analog, when in fact it was mastered digital. How can they trust Mobile Fidelity, how can they trust their own ears again? MOFI being unhonest about their mastering practices is manipulative. How can someone, who praised an album from MOFI as analog that in fact was digital, trust in himself to correctly distinguish analog sound from digital in the future? The least Mobile Fidelity should do is publicly apologize and publish a complete list with their digitaly mastered records.
People who own these mofi recordings should be doing blind tests to see if they bought themselves into the placebo effect of buying an alleged quality product. I'm sure the results will surprise everyone.
if a person clearly ONLY cared about the sound quality; then I could understand the idea that MOFI is just trying to provide the best listening experience(add violins here). However, if a person wanted the source to be purely analog(even if it sounded terrible) because they want specifically an analog experience regardless of sound quality..then they rightfully should feel screwed over.
Between PCM and DSD I prefer DSD. To me it sounds more relaxed and open than PCM. I understand why MoFi would use it, and how they got away with it for so long!
Most of their LPs start with the original master tape. Their one step records mostly start from the original master tape, reduce the some steps in the manufacturing process (three steps to one step) to help reduce two steps generational loss and they use high quality vinyl.
Some mean-spirited people are bashing music lovers who favor vinyl over digital, claiming that those vinyl lovers were listening to digital (DSD) that was used on the vinyl that they were praising. Their accusations are that the vinyl lovers were listening to digital, and claim that vinyl sounds better. Those accusations, that the vinyl lovers have egg on their faces, is wrong, and here is why: Any DSD content that you own is encrypted. Why? That DSD content is an exact byte-for-byte copy of the record company's master DSD file. But the record companies do not want you to own a copy of their master DSD file. So they encrypt the copy that you own. Then how come you can play it? Because any hardware that plays DSD content includes a Sony chip that decodes the DSD encrypted content. And that is the crux of the matter, and is why there is misinformation abound: Sony's decryption chip is good quality, but not high-end quality. Therefore, no matter how good your DSD player is, it is limited (in sound quality) by Sony's decryption chip. As such, your DSD content can sound only so good, and there is nothing you can do to make it sound better than the quality of Sony's decryption chip. But with Mobil Fidelity Sound Lab's process, that Sony chip is removed from the picture. MoFi was given the actual DSD master content in its natural form (no encryption). MoFi did not need to decrypt anything. Therefore, MoFi's use of the DSD content was not hindered by Sony's chip (because the chip was not used). So MoFi was able to transfer the glorious sounding DSD content directly to vinyl. Now the customer plays the vinyl, and it sounds fantastic. But in this case, the customer bypassed Sony's decryption chip (because it was not part of the process). So comparing playing a copy of DSD content vs playing vinyl made from DSD content is not a proper comparison, because the former requires Sony's nothing-special decryption chip, and the latter does not involve Sony's decryption chip. So the vinyl enthusiasts are not imagining things. Their vinyl pressing actually do sound better than the DSD versions of the same songs. If there is egg on anyone's faces, it is those making accusations that do not know the process I described above, and are quick to hurl insults, which is usually relegated to the actions of children in playgrounds. And for those that do not know... the DSD (Pulse Density Modulation) format is superior to the PCM (Pulse Code Modulation) format, when it comes to capturing (creating) the initial digital file. When done right, the DSD capture has near identical sound quality as direct microphone feeds. PCM, although very, very good, falls short of DSD's quality. PCM is what is used on standard Redbook CDs, since their inception in the 1980s. PCM is what is used in mp3 files, wav files, flac files, and the various Apple formatted sound files. Virtually no one has heard pure DSD (due to the Sony decryption chip choke-point). The closest we have come is with vinyl derived from DSD content, and we hear how good it is. Lastly, DSD masters are used for crating vinyl stamping plates, because when the stamping plates need to be replaced, new ones can be made from the DSD file. Analog tapes do not need to be run, over and over and over, to make new stamping plates. Running the analog tapes degrades them. Hence the reason for running the tapes once to create the DSD file to be used thereafter.
So I assume that if MOFI would have been more forthcoming and honest the from day one when they first started using DSD and made it perfectly clear in their advertising and literature and explained their position on using DSD in a similar fashion that you just articulated so well, then we would not have this "controversy" ?...or at least it would not be as bad as it is ? In the end the issue perhaps may not be analog vs digital or what manufacturing process is really and truly the best... it may be that MOFI was advertising one thing or idea and delivering another. It seems to me even if you are a child or the most mature adult, people do not appreciate the perception of being deceived. MOFI could have handled their business a lot better in my opinion. Thank you very much for viewing my video and taking the time to outlined your comments and thoughts, it is welcomed and very much appreciated 😀
@@kennysaudiophilerecordreviews As it pertains to how MoFi handled this, what you wrote is exactly correct. I agree 100%. My "acting like children hurling insults" was not meant for MoFi's actions. Rather, for people laughing at those saying that the vinyl sounds better than the digital, even though the vinyl was derived from digital. Those that are laughing are asserting that the vinyl cannot sound better than the digital, because the vinyl was made from the digital. And that sounds reasonable, when you don't know the process. And I suspect that nearly all of the vinyl folks do not understand why their vinyl sounds better. They just know that it does. That Sony decryption hardware (used in one case, but not in the other case) is the key to the sound quality differences.
As usual you make fantastic points. I must say though that although MOFI has been using DSD in their manufacturing chain in recent years and their products are first rate for the most part, Analogue Productions goes to great lengths (Especially Chad Kassam who makes himself available and has a fantastic youtube presence and does not hide behind his corporation name) to say that they are using all analog in their manufacturing chain (and in the rare times they do not, they are clear about it) but overall in my opinion Analogue Productions Productions products sound better to me (wit Analogue Productions using all analog and MOFI using DSD in their manufacturing chain)...I assume that has to do more with mastering and not analog vs digital (DSD). You make a worthy debating opponent and I am deeply honored that you took the time to watch my video and comment....strong respect 🙏
@@kennysaudiophilerecordreviews Opponent? I thought that you and I are on the side of truth in the world of audio? By the way, I gave up on MoFi many years ago, after hearing one ordinary sounding, and even less than good sounding, pressing after another. My last straw was Dark Side Of The Moon. I feel like dumping it. But some collectors will probably offer a bid on eBay. But if I am told by people who's ear I trust (and you seem to quality) that MoFi got their act together, I might give them another shot. I am not working, and refuse to roll the dice with them any more, unless I am told that they now got on the ball.
I believe that both of us are on the side of truth 😊...In my opinion, individuals can respectfully disagree on some topics evey now and then and still have common goals and interests simultaneously. Please do not take the term "opponent" to seriously as I sincerely did not mean it the way that it probably came across. I am a audiophile but not on a too serious level because there are othe facets of my live that are far more important....as I said in one of my videos, in the department store of life being a audiophile is in the toy department 😁
I just found your channel my friend but I made sure to subscribe to you!!! My name is Rod I have a channel as well stop by sometime my friend and., I look forward to watching your videos my friend
