MoFi controversy

I have several hundred old records from the 50s to the 80s. I also have over a hundred new reissues. 

To my ears, most of the new reissues, including the most famous audiophile brands, sound like digital. I am sure that not only MOFI uses digital in their record path.
I don't understand people who justify MOFI in this scandal, unless they are people who have a material interest in all sorts of reviewers and other hucksters.
If you like digital sound (I don't mind since digital doesn't mean bad sound) then why spend thousands of dollars on vinyl equipment and buy records for $150+ each? Isn't it easier to listen to good digital recordings on a good digital source?

Regards,

Alex.

If digital is used in vinyl remastering-production proses. Why do we need this vinyl at all? Why don’t stream these files or play this music on SACD/CD player?

Why anyone has to spend $150 for this kind of vinyl, and thousands of $$$ for carriages, turntables, tonearms and phono stages? Why don’t save money for a better DAC, streamer or transport?

Hi @sns,

I completely agree with you.

In terms of sound quality vinyl before ~1965 is really special. I don't say it is better than any digital records but nothing gives me similar enjoyment of sound and music.

For example, most records produced from 1965 to 1970 do not sound good and good digital or analogue remastering of same records sound much better. I think in these years the main issue in sound quality was in record pressing production and less in masters itself.

The pressing quality has improved by 70x, but most of the records are not very special except some like for example, Sheffield Labs.

Regards,

Alex.