Washington Post article on MoFi vs. Fremer vs. Esposito

The case number is 2:22-CV-01081, filed in Western district of Washington.  Defendants will file response then Judge will decide if there's a case to move forward. 

Why, you planning on attending ? Joining the suit ? 

If anything, MoFi did us a favor by demonstrating that digital does not inevitably lead to horrible sounding recordings.  Records do sound different from digital versions because of differing mastering and the process of mechanically converting the signal to a vinyl recording and then playing it back, and if you like the results (I do too), that is quite different from concluding that digital conversions inherently ruin the sound (I don't think that that is the case).  Even Michael Fremer often shared digital downloads of records being played back by different gear and has admitted that digital copies of his analogue playback sound good.  Clearly he likes what analogue recording and playback does to the sound, but, that hardly implicates digital as ruining the sound when digital can faithfully pass through analogue sound.

Sorry I meant to say more than a sin of omission. 

Good points @larryi. There is a case to be made that a DSD 256 (or even 64) file made from a master analogue tape is not necessarily in every way inferior to a 1/4" (or even 1/2") 15 IPS (or even 30 IPS) analogue copy. I’ve read reports from well-respected audiophile mastering engineers who’ve said each has it’s own sonic signature, neither perfect.

But MoFi instead for whatever reason decided to deliberately hide their digital step from consumers. If they compared a digital transfer to a tape copy and judged the digital to be better sounding (perhaps at least over all), then have the courage of your convictions and say so. They didn’t, I believe, because they feared audiophiles are analogue purists, and it would hurt sales of their LP’s. They were probably correct on both points.

Though their promotional material long stated they started with the original master tape, I for one new that was in most cases very, very unlikely. The record companies themselves almost never use the 2-track mix master tape as the source for the cutting of the lacquer. In the analogue days they made production master tapes from the 2-track master, and put that original back in the vault for safe keeping. Some companies were more open to letting a tape out, the Warner Brothers group of labels, for one. Do you really think Capitol Records would lend out their Beatles tapes?!

@cleeds Exactly what I was thinking. Is the intention to drive Mofi out of business?

I have no problem with the notion that many of us simply like the alteration of the sound that analogue recording imparts.  Those alterations would also be there if the original source is digital or digital is somewhere in the chain.  I read an article where three recording engineers were talking about high resolution digital vs. very high end analogue—like 1” tape at 30 ips—and they all agreed that the digital recording sound much more like the microphone feed when you do a direct comparison.  But, they also agreed that the analogue tape actually sounded nicer.

To some extent, what we prefer may be a matter of conditioning—we like what is familiar.  Around 15 years ago, a researcher took high quality recordings and then converted them to CD quality recordings and old MP3 quality recording (before MP3 was even close to decent). When his college test subjects listened to analogue vs. CD vs. MP3, they overwhelmingly preferred MP; this was the sound that was was familiar to them.

@larryi - that's an interesting test with surprising results. I mean, I was familiar with VHS tapes, but DVD's still looked a lot better to me when those came out.

I'd like to see more details about that researcher's test of 15 years ago, as I'd have to question how he converted those 'high quality recordings' to 'CD quality recordings' (to me, CD's are plenty high-quality). After all, there were some really rubbish sounding CD's through much of the 80's, especially. It's a real art and skill, mastering music for CD's and other media.

I'd also be interested in knowing how the test subjects did this listening - if it was on crap earbuds or on a crap system, no, I probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference, either, or might prefer the mp3... If it was on a good sound system (and it may have been, I don't know) or quality headphones, the results might have been quite different. 

I don't know the specifics of this experiment, but, I would bet it was simply a matter of running the signal through a commonly available analogue to digital converter that would turn the signal into 16 bit 44.1 khz sampling rate of CDs or the MP3 compression algorithm that reduced the amount of information stored by 75 to 95%. 

I thought MP3 sounded really bad on something as lo-fi as a car stereo, so it would not take much in the way of gear for differences to be noted.  The point was, that people accustomed to MP3 tended to like that sound because it was familiar.  I bet the loudness war works the same way--sadly, I bet the majority of listeners actually like highly compressed music.

MoFi has an interview on their site with their President being interviewed by TAS

I tried to copy the link but failed

There is a magical two-word rebuttal that seems to cover all situations and appears to satisfy a large bloc of people when uttered.  MoFi should simply intone:

"Fake News!"

@larryi + 1

that's a pretty juicy story! Gotta love vinyl!

I would think the important thing would be the analog source, and if the digital stage reduced the number of generations it takes to get to the disc it would compensate for the insult to one’s digital virginity. They shouldn’t have lied about it. It’s the posturing and pretensions of the digital virgin community that makes it comical. It would also seem that if it's the amateur reporter who gets the subject to tell the truth, the amateur v. professional question becomes moot, doesn't it?

What is the difference between a "Professional" Audio Journalist and an amateur?

Presumably the pro gets paid for what he or she does and the amateur doesn't.  Knowledge wise there may be no difference at all, and it is quite possible that the amateur has more knowledge in our hobby.  It isn't as if there is some graduate degree in Audio Equipment Reviewing

“I bet the majority of listeners actually like highly compressed music.”

@larryi …sadly majority of listeners just don’t care. Spotify still has the largest subscriber base due to their vast catalog, streaming in 160kbps - 320kbps range. 

i don't doubt that the digitally-tweaked vinyl sounds better, and i would argue that mofi doesn't deserve the death penalty. bottom line, though, is that if, as alleged, mofi intentionally misled those analog purists who paid a superpremium for these records mofi should face some financial consequences. nobody's above the law, right?

English is not my first language so I apologize for asking this question which I offer genuinely, sincerely, and honestly but I see nowhere on any of the Mobile Fidelity products that I own any reference, promise, or indication of an "all -analog" process so where is it exactly that this company is accused of "lying"??

@clearthinker Is not withholding critical information is in fact misrepresentation to some degree, ultimately, courts will decide this issue.

My issue is with what are the harms done to individual purchasers of Mofi recordings? Did suddenly gained knowledge of digital step in mastering instantly change inherent quality of recording? No, the inherent qualities of recordings are absolutely the same as prior to this knowledge. Some may suddenly dislike the sound quality, total delusion based on anti digital bias. So there is no devaluation of these recordings based on sound quality. Then there is the question of market value of Mofi recordings, will these recordings drop in market value due to same bias?  What a shame for  Mofi to suffer based on anti digital bias, remember no devaluation based on sound quality.

I don't see any harms to individual purchasers of Mofi recordings. The misrepresentation should have some consequence, I'd suggest any financial settlement should accrue to entire mastering industry, not individuals, whether in class action or individual suit.

@clearthink - from what I've seen on those YouTube videos, you are correct; they haven't said 'all analog' since 2015 or something.

But I guess there is still an implication of such to some folks, and some people who paid a lot of money for what they mistakenly thought was 'all analog' are upset... I've got no opinion one way or the other. 

What a fabulous....intervention.

What I do not understand is why the article did not mention that the vast majority of records are now recorded in digital. Only records recorded before 1981 are sure to be analog. 

MoFi is guilty of misrepresentation. But the fools are a certain journalist and his "only analog" following.  

@sns      I think the legal position is quite clear.  If MoFi states an LP is 'all analogue' or 'AAA' and it is not, they are guilty of misrepresentation.  If they say nothing then there is no cause of action since a misrepresentation has to be an actual statement and does not comprehend a failure to state something whether or not the something is important, or even critical for some.

It is not a question of 'harm done' although the value of the harm suffered will be the main determinant of the amount of damages, apart from any punitive or exemplary element.

You suggest the knowledge that an LP previously thought to be all analogue is not doesn't amount to harm done because the material on the LP has not changed.  This may not be the case, since the opinion of many audiophiles on sound quality is based at least partly on a psychological reaction to knowledge of the components of the system and the recording that reproduces that sound.

I have many MoFi records that are stated to be AAA and they probably are since they were all purchased more than 10 years ago.  They vary quite a lot in SQ, probably because of the state of the master tapes when they were copied and the quality of the engineering.  Some are amongst the best LP records ever issued.  The best I have for SQ is 'Beatles for Sale' where the capture of the harsh edge on Lennon's voice on lead vocals puts him right in front of me.  Magical, and I haven't heard that on any digital version.

I stopped buying MoFi partly because I have the ones I want but also partly because I noticed the average SQ was becoming poorer   That will be because MoFi weren't taking the scrupulous care they did at the start.  Like quite a few things in audio, the glory days are still the glory days.

@clearthinker You may or may not be correct on misrepresentation issue, suppose it depends on how expectations of purchasers presented in court.

I did mention the psychological bias in my post. And yes, Mofi could lose based on that bias. Psychological harms may indeed be inflicted and compensated by courts, I don't believe that fair.

I quit purchasing modern vinyl perhaps five or six years ago, have much vinyl from 50's-70's, many very high sound quality, assume from original or early generation masters, some hot stampers.

@sns    As to MoFi losing a case on the basis of alleged listener bias, I doubt the cleverest and most devious lawyer (even in the States) could prove a case, even on the balance of probabilities test, using evidence based on unprovable psychological listener bias.  I wonder if he would have to present double blind ABX tests in court?  Might get interesting.

Yeah, me too on modern vinyl.  MoFi at the start apart, I still think the glory days started with HMV and Decca and the development of the LP in the late 1950s and were largely gone by 1970.   Yes, I have 3000 odd of those.

What next? Cuban cigars with a smattering of North Carolina tobacco?
 Jim Davis’s response makes sense to me but some will call it spin.

All the best,
Nonoise

At least as printed on the MoFi website, the questions lobbed to Davis are all marshmellows.  Presumably because MoFi advertises on TAS

Spun.

Jim Davis spun the story well but if it gets into the court system the only winners will be the lawyers

So the old process that degrades after so many copies resulting in loss of quality that buyers can hear but is saved by digital means which more accurately maintains the quality of the original is not good enough for those who now want to sue. 

Talk about clinging to the past. 

All the best,
Nonoise

My post from August 6,2022:

"I have purchased vinyl that was cut from digital--like Steven Wilson remasters that are excellent. I’m not against such a purchase. But with MoFi, we were lied to--flat out. The One Steps contain an insert that purports to provide all of the steps in the reproduction chain. The insert and advertising were designed to extract more $ from the customer due, in whole or part, to what the consumer was led to believe was the purity of the process. Most importantly, MoFi knew that if it revealed that DSD was part of the process, some customers would avoid the purchase and others would not pay the enhanced price--so they purposely left that information out. Most state Consumer Fraud Acts provide that such an omission is a violation subjecting MoFi to enhanced damages on an individual or class action basis.

I suggest that MoFi offer exchange refunds or credits to any customer who wants to return a digital One Step to avoid such liability. Just sayin."

To elaborate today------

As a legal matter, the issue is not whether you or I can tell the difference between a Mobile Fidelity pressing directly from tape or with a DSD conversion with any particular record. It is about whether the purchaser was misled by the seller and was damaged.

Let’s look at it from this point of view:

Was the product sold as advertised? No.

Did the insert and public explanation claiming to show every step of the process cause me and others to make the purchase at the enhanced price? Yes

Would I or other purchasers have made the purchase had we known of the DSD conversion? For many, No.

Conclusion:

Mobile Fidelity has obtained $ from me and other record buyers allowing them to make a profit through misleading advertising.

That's all that is required in a consumer fraud case.

+1 @gpgr4blu 

I'm a Physician.  I am not a fan of lawsuits.  However if it deters companies going forward from actively misleading people to make a buck, then it has a purpose.

My vinyl was tainted by A/D/A conversion(s).  There ought to be a law!  Maybe us audiophiles need to take the law in our own hands -- YEEHAW!!!

What this does is support the assertion of many audiophiles that DSD (as in SACD records) does not distort or destroy the "analogous-ness" of the original the way PCM does.  There is a reason download services use DSD for ultimate sound quality in their downloads.

I entered the online audio world with that claim way back when SONY first release it's DSD recordings, and I could do comparisons of analog, PCM, and SACD releases.  DSD has been accepted by critical listeners.  PCM now with high bit rates and somewhat extended frequency response has nearly matched it (some would say it has matched it.)  But for MoFi, they obviously felt that DSD could be used without distorting or lessening "the analog sound" of the master tapes.  Doesn't excuse their lack of disclosure, but does tend to support the belief that for a decade DSD far exceeded PCM in "truthfulness" to the analog signal.

All recordings are quantized. With ‘analog’ tape the signal is generated from a stream of magnetic particles which are which are either magnetized, or not ( i.e. 10 or 0). As the tape passes over the head gap these pulses are integrated to produce a continuous signal. Usually with some ‘hiss’ noise. The wider the tape track and the faster it moves it moves the less the noise.

My understating is that these particles, and thus the pulses they cause, vary in size. But the recording itself is NOT a pure analog image of the original signal.

With digital the pulses are all the same size, and are converted to an analog signal electronically.

If there are enough bits, and they are saved retrieved accurately, the only issue is the accuracy of the DA process itself. I am not versed in the latest technology but I understand that is not an issue these days.

Also, I believe, if all the magnetic tape particles were the same size, “analog” tape would be equivalent  to 1-bit digital encoding albeit with a different conversion process.

I would be interested to know (if there is someone out there who can tell us - approximately)

• The number of magnetic particles used to store 1 second of recording studio quality audio (stereo) on tape
• The number of bits used to store 1 second of a studio quality DSD audio (stereo)
• The number of PVC molecules (particles?) that impact the stylus for 1 second of LP audio (stereo)

So that barrel of 100% whale oil that I bought is not 100% whale oil? When I asked they told me that what whale oil in it is 100% whale oil but it was supplemented with a mix of olive, nut, hemp and castor oil. It took that combination of other oils to approximate the burn, look and smell of whale oil so I would not be disappointed. 

It matters not as I was told it was 100% whale oil. I was mislead. I'm contacting my local barrister to file a writ with my local magistrate and get the compensation due me. 

All the best,
Nonoise

I feel like this topic boils down to what the customer was intending to pay for.

It seems that the people that are upset with MoFi are disappointed that the vinyl that they paid for wasn't the result of wholly analog processes.  In my mind, there's two primary reasons for this.  First, they are willing to pay more for an all analog recording than they are for one that includes anything digital.  There's value for them in maintaining the old school process.  Second, they have a believe that  all analog recordings sound better.

What's puzzling to me is that it seems like a lot of people considered the MoFi recordings to be to notch before they were aware of the process used to produce them.  I recognize that there's some intrinsic value in owning an original recording as it's a collectors items that cannot be duplicated.  I don't think that reproductions have any intrinsic sentimental value and the sound quality is the only thing for which they should be judged.  It seems like the sound quality of the MoFi recordings should be the catalyst for opening minds to what is possible.

Audiophiles are funny creatures and I'm sure that there are some that will now be able to hear digital artifacts in the MoFi recordings now that they know that they are not all analog.

A song comes to mind:

There may be something there that wasn't there before
You know perhaps there's something there that wasn't there before
There may be something there that wasn't there before

The guy who wrote the article for the Washington Post has since been interviewed by Michael 45RPM on YouTube, and is available for viewing on his channel fyi. 

Want to share this article on wine tasting (relevant)

What concerns me most if that some members dont seem to think MoFi did anything wrong. Or at the very least, the sin was minor and really not really worth mentioning. 

I have found that usually the MoFi remasters arent the best pressings available. All MoFi I own were made prior to the "new" process. 

What to do, what to do...

Some can start with a lawsuit and hope to make money off of a product they claim to love and hobble the industry, somewhat, in the process. That would put some people out of work and drive up prices in an already competitive market, making what they've hoarded go up in value and sell it off on eBay, making a minor killing, all in the name of...., well, it's not being an audiophile.

All the best,
Nonoise

MoFi admits they only sold $9 million in records last year. So any lawsuit could potentially have them filing for bankruptcy, killing them for good. That’s the price you pay for not being upfront about your operations. 
 

It is a shame too, for had they been honest, the argument would be, which is better, DSD “analogue”, or authentic analogue. Will there be more DSD companies starting up to enter the fray? Well, maybe at least 1. 
 

The moral of the story is, if you lie, you die. Rather blunt, but truthful. 

Interviewing the WAPO writer. 
 

What concerns me most if that some members dont seem to think MoFi did anything wrong.

I haven’t seen this opinion expressed much. I think that most people agree that MoFi did a real bad thing and I think that people have a valid reason to be angry with MoFi. I think that a little perspective is needed, though. We are lied to by people who want to sell us things all the time. Often these things have a much greater impact on our lives than a 4x DSD step in MoFi’s vinyl process.

We are frequently sold food and medicines that are terrible for our health, cars that manufacturers and dealers know have problems that they don’t disclose, premium priced shoes and clothing that are made by people making starvation wages under terrible working conditions, etc. Do I need to mention politicians and the news media?

I personally don’t want to see MoFi put out of business. A lawsuit would take years and would only benefit the lawyers. I think MoFi learned their lesson and I think that people can get their money back on the used market if they don’t want the LPs anymore. I haven’t seen a flood of MoFi vinyl hit the used market since the story broke.

Interesting article, @fstein

How many times does some "scientist" have to come up with an article debunking wine tasters? Are there that many who were wounded by one earlier in their life?

Here's a more relevant article that doesn't demean wine tasters by just another parlor trick. And here's another. Of the thousands of possible genetic combinations for taste and smell, each individual only uses about 300 or so, making everyone as unique as a fingerprint when using those senses.

So yes, absolutely, there are those with talented tongues and noses, and yes, they can taste and appreciate the differences. The rest of us have to learn to taste and smell past what we can't and super concentrate on what we can coupled with the memories of past tastings. 

That's why there are always those outliers who aren't fooled by the parlor tricks yet they're never mentioned, for some strange reason. And, once in a great while, they are, but that doesn't negate their whole body of experience and expertise. Nothing like people falling for the old, "gotcha".

All the best,
Nonoise

Wow!  Deciet, dishonesty,  misrepresentation. The non-authentic records should be replaced by a real tape master copy. Premium prices were paid.

Well I dont think that stating the obvious that we are lied to on a regular basis changes things one iota. Some sort of weird relativism at work evidently. 

Let the market decide if MoFi goes out of business. I will never buy another MoFi product and this will be the end of my involvement. 

Tomcy6 am I missing something or are you expressing the precise attitude I mentioned earlier? 

Well I dont think that stating the obvious that we are lied to on a regular basis changes things one iota. Some sort of weird relativism at work evidently. 

From my earlier post:

I think that most people agree that MoFi did a real bad thing and I think that people have a valid reason to be angry with MoFi. I think that a little perspective is needed, though. 

That's all I was saying.  Be angry but don't lose your mind.  And yes, I wish that people would save their outrage for things that really matter.  

As if, within each of us, exists a limited amount of anger which when directed towards things that dont really matter will diminish what we have left for things that do. I am not being snide and I hope you see my point. .