Anyone heard of mofi-gate

[MIOM]

Untill someone like Mike comes up with proof that they were doing otherwise.
People believed the same with Mofi till yesterday.

The proof is there if you've been following the thread and associated videos. Even I acknowledged that as posted above. Here's a good summery of the whole thing. Note the end of the video (in fact post #8 is what I'm referring to)...

 

[arj]

Which proves that we are sheep.

Ha ha,..Yes we are !

Twitter, Black carbonated drinks , cigarette etc all prove it

 

[coaltrain]

The issue isn’t about SQ,rather the fact that MoFi wasn’t transparent about their source and cutting for their records post 2015.

Nope, it’s not that either.
The answer is actually in the second part of your post. People are p***ed off because they’ve been caught butt naked in the emperor’s clothes
Here’s the biggest buffoon in Hifi waxing eloquent on digitally mastered wax.
Too much wax in the ears, perhaps?

 

[MIOM]

Which proves that we are sheep.

To me part of the problem is the "audiophile" community with their analogue is purity, digital is crap mentality. Now they're upset with Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs for deceptive marketing of pure analogue vinyl pressings when in fact they should be embarrassed that MFSL fooled them by showing them what digital is capable of. That even the most diehard analogue purists were fooled with a digital mastering process.

A YouTube viewer lamented the good MFSL could have done when they said this...

Think of the good MoFi could have done in the audiophile community if they had spent all this time promoting how great digital mastering can sound, instead of perpetuating and profiting from the myth of analog superiority through deceptive marketing.

Source: "VWestlife" post on this YouTube video: Did Mobile Fidelity Lie?? The evidence examined (with a surprise at the end!)

To me, that's the real shame of MFSL, is they didn't have the courage to go up against the analogue purists and say, "look what we can do with digital in our vinyl process". Instead, they feared (and rightfully so given the outrage) the purists wouldn't have bought their products. Read the comments on the controversy and no one is denying the recordings sound great, they're just mad they were fooled by "digital".

 

[bhaskarcan]

While passing by the Kolkata record market area after long time, I learnt two new categories of records.... "Digital Record" and "Analogue Record".
Obviously, the "Analogue records" are way more expensive than the "Digital Records".
The record of interest here is a semi-battered copy of Indian DSOM, which is more expensive than a new 2016 re-issue, just because it's an "Analogue record".

 

[MIOM]

Finally, a reasonable voice...