Hey - You, don't digitize my Foo MFSL

Strangely I don’t ever remember buying an lp that was warped in the 70s/80s. Guessing that was down to Qc
Amazed how many recent albums aren’t flat these days

Dynaflex records used a softer, pliable formulation that allowed RCA to use less material, saving money and also making the record appear to lie flatter on turntables. At the time, as a cost-cutting measure, most industry record pressing plants were using recycled or “reground” vinyl, taking old and unsold records, cutting out the center with the paper labels, then melting the rest down and reusing the material to make new records. Such “reground” vinyl records typically sounded much noisier and scratchier when played than a record made from new or “virgin” vinyl;

4 Likes

Once a salesman, always a salesman… :laughing:

This is based on nothing,but I think the production is the most important part of the chain,again using Trevor horn as an example of early 80s stuff he was involved in.

If the record was produced badly,every process after that however good can’t make it better.

I have a couple of cheapo James Bond theme albums that sound great,yet have 8 or more tracks per side so you think with all that info crammed in,it should sound rubbish. I’m sure there are loads of similar examples through the 60s and 70s

2 Likes

Totally agree and this is where I don’t understand the wailing and the precious stance of some of the audiophiles (okay yes I do, its pretty much inherent in the nature of the type of person interested in this) about the proposed MoFi version - the multi tracking and compression on Thriller points towards the opportunity for someone to do a much better job of opening it up sound wise. As long as they don’t mess too much with the EQ!

The fact they’re going to do this off a DSD transfer of the master tape is neither here nor there for me.

Statement from MoFi

We at Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab are aware of customer complaints regarding use of digital technology in our mastering chain. We apologize for using vague language, allowing false narratives to propagate, and for taking for granted the goodwill and trust our customers place in the Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab brand.

We recognize our conduct has resulted in both anger and confusion in the marketplace. Moving forward, we are adopting a policy of 100% transparency regarding the provenance of our audio products. We are immediately working on updating our websites, future printed materials, and packaging — as well as providing our sales and customer service representatives with these details. We will also provide clear, specific definitions when it comes to Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab marketing branding such as Original Master Recording (OMR) and UltraDisc One-Step (UD1S). We will backfill source information on previous releases so Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab customers can feel as confident in owning their products as we are in making them.

We thank you for your past support and hope you allow us to continue to provide you the best-sounding records possible — an aim we’ve achieved and continue to pursue with pride.

Jim Davis

President, Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab

Nice of them to do that now. What was the percentage previously?

1 Like

Its okay, they’ve helpfully updated their one-step process graphic to suddenly include another step before lacquer cutting…

A thousand audiofool boners begin to droop :laughing:

Not calling it two step though! :smiley:

It’s One Step Beyond!

5 Likes

It was only ever about the cutting process not the source, :joy:

Should be sufficient to save their business as long as some wealthy US customer doesn’t decide to seek damages in court.

2 Likes

They snuck it in underneath rather than to the right so that visually it doesn’t count (apparently).

1 Like

Thread up to 486 pages.

I am disappointed that the ass-burn appears to be losing momentum :frowning_face:

Post claiming to have documents that show the digital phase is being done in MQA, finishing with ‘is this bad? lol.’ Should liven things up nicely.

2 Likes

Their Instagram apology has enjoyed a salty reception.

Yep and meanwhile they’re drip feeding the source of the records listed on their website, and lo and behold their UltraDisc One Steps, their premium products after all, are slowly being revealed as DSD256 / 64 etc in source.

They have handled this very badly indeed whatever your position is on the quality of the finished product.

This is a bit of a shame or maybe not. I’ve got quiet a few there are some I would love but have never been able to afford and will definitely never be able to afford now, unless lady luck steps in.

Half speed mastering is a valid process when done properly, Decca and Columbia and Tamla Motown were doing it in the 50’s and 60’s and people like Giles Martin are big fans. It is a violent physical process it makes complete sense to reduce the stress on the components.

For me the 70’s were a great period in the record industry with the birth of independent studios, pressing plants and labels. There are some amazing sounding records from that era if you like the music. Buzzcocks Spiral Scratch is an amazing sounding single all done by themselves for £1k.

1 Like

2 Likes

wasn’t that down to the oil shortage in the 70’s

I’ve got a few of those “cheap” wobble board vinyls and they sound great

I’m guessing it was mostly down to cost saving, but they were being touted as technically superior. Like you, I’ve never had an problems with them. Any warped records I own are old issue thick vinyl or 180/210 gram audiophool stuff.

1 Like