Mobile Fidelity Settlement Update

People should be ashamed. A bunch of slackers wanting something for nothing. America.

@texbychoice  it doesn't matter if you think an all analog process is inferior, people should get what was advertised.

@secretguy  I don't think anyone should get anything more than their money back if they choose. 

People should be ashamed. A bunch of slackers wanting something for nothing. America.

+5000

Even before all these frivolous lawsuits, vinyl bozos will on average return 6 copies of a pressing before they found their 'perfect' copy, 

I am somewhat confused: if they have great ears and 10K-100K etc system how come they didn't hear the digital "pollution"/limitations in those recordings?

grislybutter

... if they have great ears and 10K-100K etc system how come they didn't hear the digital "pollution"/limitations in those recordings?

You're the first person I've heard claim that the records were plagued with "digital pollution." Which titles do you own, @grislybutter?

@cleeds there were quotes around it, and it was meant as a joke mostly. I don't own any "titles". 

Y'all need to deal with facts of this controversy.  After 1980 there was digital manipulation of every mix transferred to a Master Tape.  So an analog master tape from after 1980 transferred directly to vinyl today is not 100% analog.  Before 1980 you can find 100% analog tape masters that may or may not be in good condition.  If you have only 1 analog master tape and you perform a 100% analog transfer to vinyl, that master tape has to be used each time a single LP is produced.  1,000 LPs means 1,000 times the master tape is played, resulting in wear and degradation of something that could initially be fragile.  Good way to destroy a precious single copy of an all analog master tape from the 50s.  You analog enthusiasts should be well aware of that fact. But I guess it is more important for you to get your own "analog" LP now without concern about degrading or destroying the original master tape.  Screw anybody else today, tomorrow, or in another 50 years having the opportunity to enjoy a slice of history.  Unless, of course, you part with an LP from your "analog" collection for a tidy profit.  

MoFi made a technical choice to produce the best quality LP without destroying master tapes.  Plenty of information has been around for a long time about MoFi, their mission statement, and other claimed analog direct to LP producers.  A little homework is required to educate oneself and understand the entire context.  Too bad there has been little of that in this situation.  

All the best,
Nonoise

 there is this thing called a stamper…… suggest the soapbox ignorant do a whisker of homework about the process…

Stamper! Wow! (Flutter Crapper)

"1,000 LP’s means 1,000 times the master tape is played." Wow! @texbychoice, you need to read up on the subject, you’re embarrassing yourself.

"1,000 LP’s means 1,000 times the master tape is played." Wow! @texbychoice, you need to read up on the subject, you’re embarrassing yourself.

I don’t think he meant that literally... But, mofi’s process has been the most foolproof w.r.t mitigating unnecessary abuse of the tape and offering the best fidelity on vinyl.

Eitherway, I no longer have any skin in this (no longer a vinyl guy) and all my vinyl sht is sitting in storage.. Discovering Levinson ’s Masterclass software was the final nail on the vinyl coffin.

and yet the dog keeps barking…..

@deep_333 Are you referring to me ? i didn’t file a claim with MoFi. I suggest even a child might offer to retract such a petulant immature post. 

Just a simple question here.  How many people here think that the MoFi LPs they purchased that have a digital stage sound better than the same files when played in the purely digital domain?  And why do they think that they sound better through a lp based system?

deep-333 calling someone low class, how rich.

I did like the video explaining recording.it is very educational

I don’t think he meant that literally... But, mofi’s process has been the most foolproof w.r.t mitigating unnecessary abuse of the tape and offering the best fidelity on vinyl.

Bingo. There are factors of context involved.  MoFi decided on a process to minimize possible degradation and/or damage to original Master Tapes whether they are used once or multiple times.  The MoFi process for public consumption has been available since at least 2018, probably longer.  The nuts and bolts details are considered proprietary (intellectual property) so MoFi has every right to protect their investment in R&D.  The DSD step is mentioned in the public domain. The parties claiming damage apparently failed to read information readily available.

It was reported the first two parties claiming damage wanted a $10K each payment.  Quite a bit more than the cost of 1 or several LPs, so clearly looking for an undeserved payday.  

It was reported the first two parties claiming damage wanted a $10K each payment.  Quite a bit more than the cost of 1 or several LPs, so clearly looking for an undeserved payday.  

Maybe they were running short on their kids tuition this year.

All the best,
Nonoise

I wouldn’t be surprised if people send back for a refund and they scratch the records invalid before. Just like companies that make you crack the lp before a refund. Beware of secondary mofi records with etchings of “F… You” or “All analog my a..” Lol

my only complaint is I feel bad for the people that bought mofi records way above retail years ago that collected all analog records and now see that those records went down in value because of this debacle. The secondary market did take a hit over this and it’s a bummer for those people.

and yet the dog keeps barking…..

@tomic601 , who were you grunting at and referring to as the barking dog? That would make you the petulant thug/ hog right? If you were referring to someone here as the barking dog? Clarify what you meant.

You could have disagreed without name calling, but, the colors came out apparently.