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)


@4krowme , +1

Though I am using digital streaming, I will say that if you are advocating/offering analog pressings, then you should be upfront about where your albums are being made-especially if the cost more than two decimal places.

Boy, am I glad I bought records at Barnes and Noble for under $3 in the 70's. Unfortunately, the majority were poorly pressed -Remember Dynagroove?



My aunt used to head up the accounting department at London Records and I once asked her who owned the master tapes, she said that varies from artist to artist, even contract by contract for an individual artist.  She also said that she remembered, at times when a pressing was beyond end of life, they sometimes had to remaster an album, so they could recut the pressings.

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.

While I never bought any MoFi LP’s, I’ve bought quite a few newer release LP’s made years or decades after the CD, manufactured by the same company that manufactured the CD and made from the digital tapes.  I play the CD and the LP in immediate succession, and the LP always sounds a lot better…so, while MoFi might have acted like a MoFo, I don’t think their actions have necessarily detracted from the SQ experienced.

Sad but not surprising if true. However, I’ve never been that impressed by Mofi…they’ve seemed dubious since the”half speed master” days…and their  recent expensive reissues I’ve purchased are inferior to the originals.

To me…Mofi is pure hype and I would not be surprised if they were knowingly deceiving.

The biggest crime is …some people are apologists for them…saying “oh well they’ve done the best they can”…which would be fine if their business model and inflated profit was not entirely based on their use (and mysterious/exclusive access to) key master tapes.

Your opinion may differ.