The price of the ’One Steps’ has a lot to do with the packaging (box) and the expected profit. Whether they are originally cut from a digital file is questionable, but as the gentleman in the video states, in order to make 40K records, something has to give...and in the case of the ’Thriller’ LP, that is not going to be the master tape.
The Fagen release on the ’One Step’ is absolutely digital, as it is known that the master tape was recorded digitally. The question of whether the others are...is still unknown. However, personally I have no issue with whether the ’One Step’ is cut from a digital file if it sounds superb and better than any other release. My Allison Krauss ’ARKUS’ MoFi is cut digitally, yet it sounds superb and is one of my best sounding LP’s.
The issue of ethics does play into this, as the OP brings up the aspect of ’deception by omission’, which is a very good point. The question of full disclosure when it comes to these vinyl a’phile limited edition releases is where I think maybe MoFi has erred....maybe??
|
This thread brings back a memory of attending a meeting prior Covid that featured a rep from MoFi who discussed their new releases, including the ’One Steps’. The rep did answer questions about the mastering and the ability to use the original master tapes. I remember him stating that in the event the original master tape was available, and not too deteriorated that they would use this. The rep also stated that they would even occasionally go to the trouble of ’baking’ the master to improve the transfer ( which at the time i thought as odd). Many of the tapes that are available to them are not usable, due to noise and age. Also, i think I remember him saying that master tapes from the likes of Apple and the Beatles were never going to be available again; as Apple would never allow them to go out.
Nonetheless, the question is whether all of the ’One Step’ release have been mastered from a digital file? This is unclear to me. Also, if that is the case, did MoFi intentionally leave out this info, knowing how much negative impact it would have on their new ’One Step’s' desirability.
|
While all of the posts so far have been interesting, no one seems to know for 100% certainty that ALL of the MoFi "One Steps’ are sourced from digital mastering/ files?
For example, i would be surprised if the recent Muddy Waters ’One Step’ was sourced in this manner...or for that matter the previous Anadisc 200 gram release of the same title!
|
@whart I’m not sure, is that the video that is in the OP?
That I did view. Is there another video with an "interview"?
One question though, and I do agree with your last two sentences 100%, is this:
MoFi absolutely should have been more transparent and disclosed these issues, if true...BUT what if they knew with 100% certainty that the very best way to make these records sound their absolute best was to go the DSD route, given the anti-digital bias that most of us have ( including myself), would they have been wise to disclose this fact and have to somehow convince the folks that they were right all along (probably impossible); or simply just release the best sounding vinyl that they knew how to make, and let the results speak for themselves? Ethically, like you say...appalling, no question....
|
Given that I have now viewed about half of the "interview" on Youtube, and that it is certainly possible that this question gets answered later on, one thing strikes me as also shocking, and it really is not to do with the digital aspect. These guys at MoFi are taking some huge liberties with the work that was vetted by the musicians when they heard the original recording!! It seems almost as if they are changing the artists and the original master engineerings thoughts intent and expectations, as to what the final product should be. One thing that I would question would be would this be accepted by the original artists IF they knew in advance that the final result would/could be so ’modified’?? Better to the guys at MoFi may not be better to the artists! ( this from an ex-studio pro musician)...
Nonetheless, so far I do seem to see a ’justification’ of this DSD "non-disclosure" based upon the fact that MoFi ( well the guys in the video, not necessarily the rest of the company?) seem to believe that their method is the best option for ultimate SQ. Too bad that this ’opinion’ might not be shared or accepted by other listeners/consumers.
|
Tonight I brought out my copy of ’Monk’s Dream’ on the ’One Step’. I wanted to hear how the sound of the piano came through, as this instrument has always sounded a little off when sourced from a digital file, at least to my ears. The SQ of the piano was still exceptional, and in no way did i hear what I usually hear with a digital re-creation! This is either not a DSD file transfer of this piece, or MoFi have somehow managed to do something that really no others have managed in this regard. Doesn’t excuse their lack of transparency when it comes to the digital aspect of some (all?) of these releases, but it is interesting nonetheless!
|
Looks like the ’One Step’ Evans SATVV is an AAA recording, one of the very few! If so, I would think that this would increase its value, certainly to a higher point than ’Abraxas’, which is determined to be from a DSD source!
|
|
Tonight I decided to do a shoot out between my MoFi ’Anadisc’ Muddy Waters ’Folk Singer’ and the newly released ’One Step’ of the same title.I had done a similar ’AB’ when I first acquired the ’One Step’ and in some ways i felt it to better the ’Anadisc’.
One thing I had noticed on the first ’AB’ was that the ’One Step’ seemed to be a little more specific in its soundstage reproduction.Tonight, I began to hear where the ’Anadisc’ has it all over the new release...and it is in the ’warmth’ of Buddy and Muddy’s guitars. To that, the ’Anadisc’ is far more dynamic when it comes to Muddy’s voice...I had noticed this aspect before, but thought it might have been because the ’One Step’ had been mastered at a lower level..Now I believe the DSD step is the culprit here.Why MoFi could not have used the AAA master for their ’One Step’ is unknown, but of all of the ’One Step’s I own, I think the biggest error they made was not using the incredible sounding original master for this one!
|
@rauliruegas Raul, you are using Jim Davis’ justification for using a DSD step in his ’supposedly’ all analog releases. Davis stated that he and MoFI thought that the DSD recording sounded better than the AAA tape. I have a hard time believing that, because there are clearly a number of other reasons that Davis would come up with that justification...cost, ease of use etc., Besides this is not the point here, even if Davis is correct, because the point is he was still making sure that MoFi and everybody connected to them was propagating a lie for years to their consumers...and I think we all know the reason why!
|
@larsman +1
You are correct, the anger at Mo-Lie is due to the 'bait and switch' tactics that were used to lure the a'phile community into paying more $$ for the 'One Steps' ;wherein all the while withholding a specific step that Mo-Lie knew would severely and negatively impact their desire to the consumer and their profit center.
|
