Rt66indierock Posted August 18, 2022 Author Share Posted August 18, 2022 31 minutes ago, botrytis said: Well, High West buys much of their Rye Whiskey from that alcohol plant in Indiana. I worked in the industry, for a competitor that got their Rye from the same place in Indiana until they built a large Distillery in Iowa. A bit off topic old friend. When I buy High West Whiskey, I’m buying Brendan Coyle’s blending skills. If it come from Midwest Grain Products so much the better. When I buy a Mobile Fidelity release, I’m buying the mastering skills of their engineers. Not an all-analog chain, I know better. And I had great fun telling people in DC from about 2012 until I moved to Phoenix in 2014, your craft whiskey came from a giant factory in Indiana. Link to comment
Iving Posted August 18, 2022 Share Posted August 18, 2022 11 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said: When I buy High West Whiskey, I’m buying Brendan Coyle’s blending skills ... When I buy a Mobile Fidelity release, I’m buying the mastering skills of their engineers. Not an all-analog chain, I know better. AAA = Single Malt That's what most MoFi vinyl customers thought they were buying. If they knew the product was blend they'd not have bought it - whether it's good or not. Sure they've drunk it and enjoyed it and it's too late now. But it's still a con and why should people suck up having been hoodwinked. Pure Vinyl Club 1 Link to comment
Popular Post Samuel T Cogley Posted August 18, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted August 18, 2022 How can so many audiophiles who claim to know so much about the tech that goes into their systems know so very little about how fragile and precious these master tapes are? I'm with @Rt66indierock, people thinking they were getting the master tape cutting the lacquer over and over deserve the product they purchased. It's not the alleged unscrupulousness of MoFi that will be remembered when this story is retold 10-20 years from now. It's the pompous entitlement of boutique vinyl buyers. 🧐 A First World Problem if there ever was one. charlesphoto, Gonzbull and botrytis 3 Link to comment
Popular Post Norton Posted August 19, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted August 19, 2022 I suspect the MoFi instance is just a high profile example of a much bigger issue with the provenance of the music we buy and stream. When I see a classical recording from the analogue era touted as now available in a new digital transfer from the “original recording” or “original master“, I’ve often wondered do they really mean a fresh transfer from the actual original master tape or are they starting from an existing digital copy? Let alone being fragile, do the original master tapes, for DECCA SXLs for example, really still exist and in a useable form? Although I guess multiple copy tapes may have been made over time. It would be good if there was standard and required labelling to detail all the known formats, sample rates, bit depths etc that a release had gone through from recording to distribution. Iving and PYP 2 Link to comment
Popular Post The Computer Audiophile Posted August 19, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted August 19, 2022 15 minutes ago, Norton said: It would be good if there was standard and required labelling to detail all the known formats, sample rates, bit depths etc that a release had gone through from recording to distribution. While this may seem like a good idea, it would really be a disservice. Any transfers or conversions that a release has gone through, are of no consequence to the listener if the product sounds good or sounds how the company releasing it wants it to sound. If we had all the information, every armchair engineer would be spouting nonsense and this would actually create a market for worse products, but products that have a mythical following because people talked good about them. PeterG and botrytis 2 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Popular Post Norton Posted August 19, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted August 19, 2022 18 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said: I'm with @Rt66indierock, people thinking they were getting the master tape cutting the lacquer over and over deserve the product they purchased. It's not the alleged unscrupulousness of MoFi that will be remembered when this story is retold 10-20 years from now. It's the pompous entitlement of boutique vinyl buyers For some reason you really, really want this to be something to bash people who enjoy vinyl with and seem to care much more about it than most MoFi vinyl customers do. Why are boutique vinyl buyers pompous and entitled? They are just pursuing a hobby that gives them pleasure and I guess have a reasonable expectation that if they pay a premium price for a product of a given (or at least heavily implied) provenance, then that is the product they should receive. But even given that, there is little evidence that most MoFi vinyl customers are doing anything other than continuing to enjoy their purchases. Iving, PeterG, The Computer Audiophile and 1 other 4 Link to comment
Popular Post The Computer Audiophile Posted August 19, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted August 19, 2022 14 minutes ago, Norton said: For some reason you really, really want this to be something to bash people who enjoy vinyl with and seem to care much more about it than most MoFi vinyl customers do. Why are boutique vinyl buyers pompous and entitled? They are just pursuing a hobby that gives them pleasure and I guess have a reasonable expectation that if they pay a premium price for a product of a given (or at least heavily implied) provenance, then that is the product they should receive. But even given that, there is little evidence that most MoFi vinyl customers are doing anything other than continuing to enjoy their purchases. +1 botrytis and Iving 2 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Norton Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 25 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said: it would really be a disservice I kind of understand where you are coming from but still surprised at your approach, as the information involved would be much the same as that which is the bedrock of discussion on this site. Are you really saying that it would be a bad thing to let people know, for example, that the 24/192 release they are considering buying is just upsampled from RBCD? Iving 1 Link to comment
Iving Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 4 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said: +1 + 100 warp speed provocative nonsense Link to comment
Iving Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 1 minute ago, Norton said: the information involved would be much the same as that which is the bedrock of discussion on this site + 10 Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 Just now, Norton said: Surprised at your approach as the information involved would be much the same as that which is the bedrock of discussion on this site. Are you really saying that it would be a bad thing to let people know, for example, that the 24/192 release they are considering buying is just upsampled from RBCD? What I'm saying is that if a chain of provenance is on display, it should provide information useful to consumers. We may think it's useful to know how many transfers a specific tape has undergone or what resampling has been done to a specific digital album, but more often than not this information would only have the chance at causing issues. It's a popular belief that less is more and recordings without resampling are more "pure" and thus better. Does the original master of Kind of Blue sound different than the safety master? Chances are very high that people would purchase a derivative of the original master before purchasing a derivative of the safety master. What if the safety master was stored properly and the original master was not? What if the safety master sounds better because of its lack of use? That would matter not because people have it in their heads that they know best, know more than the professionals creating this stuff. Remember SPARS codes? Did they really mean anything, in relation to the final product's sound? No. Gonzbull 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 Rather than relying items we think would be helpful, SPARS codes etc..., we should rely on the people with proven track records of producing good products. This comes down to people. Jud 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Samuel T Cogley Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 28 minutes ago, Norton said: For some reason you really, really want this to be something to bash people who enjoy vinyl with and seem to care much more about it than most MoFi vinyl customers do. Why are boutique vinyl buyers pompous and entitled? They are just pursuing a hobby that gives them pleasure and I guess have a reasonable expectation that if they pay a premium price for a product of a given (or at least heavily implied) provenance, then that is the product they should receive. But even given that, there is little evidence that most MoFi vinyl customers are doing anything other than continuing to enjoy their purchases. I understand the pro-consumerist backlash. If you feel "bash[ed]" by what I wrote, so be it. Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 @Norton I used to be in your camp. I've since come to realize my logic was based on zero factual evidence. A record company will happily release an inferior remaster of Kind of Blue from the original master rather than a better sounding version from the safety master because the effort involved to attempt to change peoples' minds with respect to a specific master is far too great. Thus, we end up with an inferior product. I wonder if MoFi wishes it would've released an inferior product (AAA), rather than deal with all that is going on. botrytis 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 What does provenance tell us about a specific album? Absolutely nothing about the sound quality. What does it tell us about a specific album when a professional works on it, does whatever s/he believes is best, and puts his/her name on it, as in MoFi? It tells us a lot about the sound quality. botrytis 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Iving Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 26 minutes ago, Norton said: the information involved would be much the same as that which is the bedrock of discussion on this site Here at AS, as @Norton suggests, we discuss endlessly digital math; e.g.s: Over/upsampling vs. NOS per se but also wrt Holo May DAC; HQPlayer - how it dances math-wise with specific DACs; PGGB, "heady brew of math and magic"; Digital room correction etc etc etc All of which overlaid on what? A recording/mastering: - Leave to experts - don't question - they know best - black box - mystery - we shouldn't have audacity to ask or - Openness about provenance chain so that we can know and understand how our audiophile hobby math combine with what's mathematically underneath - and we can satisfy intellectual curiosity into the bargain? Link to comment
PYP Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 1 hour ago, Norton said: I suspect the MoFi instance is just a high profile example of a much bigger issue with the provenance of the music we buy and stream. When I see a classical recording from the analogue era touted as now available in a new digital transfer from the “original recording” or “original master“, I’ve often wondered do they really mean a fresh transfer from the actual original master tape or are they starting from an existing digital copy? Let alone being fragile, do the original master tapes, for DECCA SXLs for example, really still exist and in a useable form? Although I guess multiple copy tapes may have been made over time. It would be good if there was standard and required labelling to detail all the known formats, sample rates, bit depths etc that a release had gone through from recording to distribution. As someone who is always interested in reading about production methods and the like as well as the general concept of transparency, I think some additional information about the provenance, if known, would be interesting. It wouldn't make me question what I hear nor my own preferences, but it is like giving credit where credit is due. Those companies that take time and care to provide the best transfers should be recognized. Sure, the number of folks who care about this might be small, but if the effort needed to provide some insight is also small, it seems worth doing. Qobuz has multiple sampling rates for some albums. When I have listened to those, I don't always prefer the highest resolution. This is probably because of the provenance. It would be interesting to know how the transfers have been made. Iving 1 Grimm Audio MU2 > Mola Mola Kaluga > B&W 803 D3 Cables: Kubala-Sosna Power management: Shunyata Room: Vicoustics Ethernet: Network Acoustics Muon Pro “Nature is pleased with simplicity.” Isaac Newton "As neither the enjoyment nor the capacity of producing musical notes are faculties of the least use to man...they must be ranked among the most mysterious with which he is endowed." Charles Darwin - The Descent of Man Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 5 minutes ago, Iving said: Perhaps straying from MoFi legal issue but how else to discuss ... Here at AS, as Norton suggests, we discuss endlessly digital math; e.g.s: Over/upsampling vs. NOS per se but also wrt Holo May DAC; HQPlayer - how it dances math-wise with specific DACs; PGGB, "heady brew of math and magic"; Digital room correction etc etc etc All of which overlaid on what? A recording/mastering: - Leave to experts - don't question - they know best - black box - mystery - we shouldn't have audacity to ask or - Openness about provenance chain so that we can know and understand how our audiophile hobby math combine with what's mathematically underneath - and we can satisfy intellectual curiosity into the bargain? We had SPARS codes. What did those tell you about a recording's sound quality? botrytis 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Popular Post Norton Posted August 19, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted August 19, 2022 20 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said: I understand the pro-consumerist backlash. If you feel "bash[ed]" by what I wrote, so be it. Not being a customer of MoFi or any other “boutique” vinyl label, I don’t feel bashed. But I am interested in why you are so keen to be the basher. People like you give us high functioning misanthropes a bad name. Jeff_N, botrytis, Jud and 1 other 4 Link to comment
Popular Post Norton Posted August 19, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted August 19, 2022 22 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said: Rather than relying items we think would be helpful, SPARS codes etc..., we should rely on the people with proven track records of producing good products. This comes down to people. Isn’t that perilously close to just trusting the little blue light...? Iving and botrytis 1 1 Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 1 minute ago, Norton said: Isn’t that perilously close to just trusting the little blue light...? Trusting a blue light is like trusting a SPARS code. It means nothing. Sure, people can create great products followed by bad products, but on the whole, MoFi has produced great products. Trusting MoFi to continue to produce the best products it can is probably a decent move. botrytis 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Iving Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 2 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said: We had SPARS codes. What did those tell you about a recording's sound quality? We enjoy a hobby where, at least on this forum, we dig and turnover many information and experience amulets in order to make our own judgements about SQ without fear or favour! Why not provenance. Are we not grown up enough to blend in provenance info. Spars very small and specific category of provenance. Anyway - can we not make up our own minds. Link to comment
Iving Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 Just now, The Computer Audiophile said: Trusting MoFi to continue to produce the best products it can is probably a decent move. Sure - based on accurate info about retail product. Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 Just now, Iving said: We enjoy a hobby where, at least on this forum, we dig and turnover many information and experience amulets in order to make our own judgements about SQ without fear or favour! Why not provenance. Are we not grown up enough to blend in provenance info. Spars very small and specific category of provenance. Anyway - can we not make up our own minds. This has nothing to do with making up our own minds or being grown up enough. It's about a mistaken belief that this information tells us anything about the quality of the product. It doesn't. Period. Look at @JoshM's amazing series The Best Version Of ... That's how you find the best sounding version. Not by looking at provenance. People are mistaking provenance for sound quality. botrytis 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Iving Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 Just now, The Computer Audiophile said: People are mistaking provenance for sound quality. I don't. imo patronising remark Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now