Washington Post article on MoFi vs. Fremer vs. Esposito


Here's a link to a Washington Post article on the recent dustup with MoFi. The comments section (including posts by Michael Fremer) are interesting.

Disclaimer: This is a "public service announcement, a point Im adding since some forum members complained the last article I referenced here was "paywall protected", I'll note that, for those who are non-subscribers, free access to limited numbers of articles is available by registering (trade-off: The Post will deluge you with subscription offers)

kacomess

Showing 2 responses by oldaudiophile

Just curious!

Old master tapes, especially of famous albums & artists, are usually kept in temperature and/or environmentally controlled vaults ... are they not?  As such, doesn't that prevent or, at least, seriously mitigate aging & deterioration of the tape and recording quality over time?

Regardless, doesn't all of this debate really come down to sound quality or fidelity, regardless of how these recordings are engineered and reproduced? Even great vinyl recordings of old, from original master tapes, were subject to the quality of the PVC compounds used, quality of the pressing process, mold release compounds employed, environmental controls and quality control employed by various pressing plants, number of copies made, post-production storage & shipping methods employed, etc., etc., etc.

I just recently purchased a MoFi original master recording ultradisc one-step pressing of "Desperado" by Eagles. I haven't played it, yet, because I need to run it through my ultrasonic cleaning system. Nothing goes on my TT, now, without going through my ultrasonic cleaning system first.  I have an original pressing of "Desperado" that I purchased in 1972 and cleaned with my ultrasonic system last year. I cleaned it again this year, using a Degritter that I demoed.  Couldn't really tell any difference between my lash-up ultrasonic cleaning system and the Degritter, which is why I ultimately chose not to fork out 3 grand for the Degrittter (now, even more expensive). If Degritter lowers the price significantly, I may reconsider that position because of its sheer convenience and speed over my lash-up system. My original copy of "Desperado" and all my vinyl has always been lovingly cared for. "Desperado", one of my very favorite works, has always sounded great on my previous TT & sound system and on the new TT and system I have now. My original vinyl copy has been played many, many times. This is why I chose to spend so much money to buy this new pressing of it. The original pressing sounds noticeably better since ultrasonic cleaning. I'm anxious to see if this new MoFi pressing will live up to my expectations after I run it through my cleaning system. If any of you are interested in my two cents on this, I'll be happy to oblige.

As for the justifiability of the retail cost(s) involved in replacing your most treasured recordings with ones with quality fidelity that will truly knock your socks off, that all comes down to how much that really means to you, doesn't it? Isn't that why audiophiles spend so much money on their toys?

Just curious again!

Even though I'm about to do this A/B comparison for myself, as soon as I get my butt in gear and run my new MoFi one-step through my ultrasonic cleaning system, I'm wondering if anyone else out there has compared the sound quality of one of these one-step pressings to a regular MoFi re-pressing of the same album(s). Don't be afraid to burst my bubble! Tell it like it is! Depending upon my own experience in this regard, this will have a major bearing on whether or not I replace or, rather, back up some of my very favorite albums with one-steps or just a regular re-pressing. For example, next on my agenda will likely be the Allman Brothers live at the Fillmore East.