Audiophile label sued over misleading statements regarding its mastering process
A lawsuit has been filed following recent revelations that Chicago-based Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab - a label which specialises in pressing up high quality reissues of records for the good old audiophile community - has not been entirely honest about its mastering processes.

Those revelations originally came via a YouTube video posted last month by Mike Esposito from Phoenix-based record store The In Groove. He accused the label - often referred to as MoFi - of using digital technology in its vinyl mastering process, while advertising its records as purely analogue recordings. Which might not sound like that big a deal. Unless you're an audiophile.

In the words of the lawsuit filed in relation to these revelations: "Defendant advertised the records as being purely analogue recordings - ie directly from the master recording or original analogue tapes - without any sort of digital mastering process. Defendant also charged a price premium for the records based on the same".

And while that used to be true, the lawsuit adds, "since 2011, defendant has been using digital mastering or digital files - specifically, Direct Stream Digital technology - in its production chain. Worse still, defendant continued to misrepresent to consumers that it did not use digital mastering, or otherwise failed to disclose the use of digital mastering, while still charging the same price premium for the records as if they were entirely analogue recordings".

And why does this matter? Well, the lawsuit explains, "analogue records are coveted not only for their superior sound quality, but also for their collectability. Original recording tapes age, so only a limited number of analogue recordings can be produced. Further, because analogue tapes are those used to record songs in the studio, a record cut from original analogue tapes is as close to the studio recording as one can get".

"Digital recordings, by contrast", it goes on, "do not carry as much value because they can be reproduced infinitely; once a digital recording is made, it can be copied as many times as a person desires. Thus, when defendant began using a digital mastering process in its records as opposed to purely analogue, it inherently produced less valuable records". And yet, it allegedly continued to charge the higher price an analogue record could demand.

The lawsuit has been filed Adam Stiles, who has bought various MoFi releases over the years, though he is seeking class action status for his litigation so to benefit anyone else who has bought a vinyl record sold by the label where digital technology was used in the mastering process but not declared.

"Had defendant not misrepresented that the records were purely analogue recordings or otherwise disclosed that the records included digital mastering in their production chain", the lawsuit states, "plaintiff and putative class members would not have purchased the records or would have paid less for the records than they did".

Before things went legal, MoFi President Jim Davis responded to the controversy that was unfolding within the audiophile community in relation to his company's mastering processes.

"We at Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab are aware of customer complaints regarding use of digital technology in our mastering chain", he wrote in a statement. "We apologise 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 recognise our conduct has resulted in both anger and confusion in the marketplace", he went on. "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".

Davis then gave an interview to The Absolute Sound and confirmed that MoFi started using direct stream digital - or DSD - technology in 2011, initially on a pressing of Tony Bennett's 'I Left My Heart In San Francisco'. He added: "Over time, we mastered progressively more titles using the DSD archival capture step. Sourcing-information for all MoFi vinyl titles is being added to the MoFi website daily, and a complete discography will be posted on the site".

So there you go. It remains to be seen to what extent the controversy around MoFi's past misleading statements about its mastering processes has on sales of the company's releases moving forward. Meanwhile, it will be interesting to see how Stiles' class action lawsuit progresses. Among other things, he is suing for breach of express and implied warranty, unjust enrichment and fraud.

BACK TO THE TOP OF THE BULLETIN

R Kelly's lawyer questions star witness as musician's latest sex abuse trial continues
Jurors in the latest R Kelly trial were shown clips from three sexually explicit videos on Friday, each of which allegedly shows the musician sexually abusing a fourteen year old girl. The victim who seemingly appears in the videos, simply referred to as Jane, also continued to testify.

This is Kelly's second criminal trial in a year in relation to the allegations of sexual abuse that had previously followed him around for decades. In a New York courtroom this time last year he was found guilty of running a criminal enterprise in order to access and abuse women and teenagers. In the current trial in Chicago he faces a different set of charges, with the alleged sexual abuse of Jane in the late 1990s key to the case against him.

One of the videos being presented as evidence in this trial was also at the centre of an earlier criminal investigation in the 2000s which saw Kelly in court in 2008. But on that occasion he was acquitted. Jane refused to cooperate with prosecutors back then, and Kelly's defence team successfully threw doubt on whether it was, in fact, Kelly and the alleged victim, then aged fourteen, who appeared on the tape.

This time agreeing to testify, Jane says it is, in fact, her and Kelly who can be seen in the videos. Testifying in court last week, she explained how she met Kelly via family connections when she was in her early teens and he was in his late 20s. They bonded over their shared love of music and basketball, she said. But, after he had gained her trust, Kelly then then began sexually abusing the girl when she was just thirteen or fourteen, filming some of that abuse.

Asked by lawyers for the prosecution why, in the 2000s, she had denied having had sex with Kelly, and insisted that it was not her in the leaked video tape, she explained: "I was afraid to expose Robert - I also did not want that person to be me, I was ashamed".

On Friday, Kelly's defence lawyer Jennifer Bonjean got to question Jane. As expected, a key focus of the defence's questioning was why Jane had changed her story, after many years of denying being sexually abused by Kelly. And, according to the Chicago Tribune, Bonjean began that line of questioning by referencing relatively recent correspondence between Jane and her client.

In her earlier testimony, Jane told the court that - during the 2000s criminal investigation - she was living with Kelly, and therefore he was able to control what she did and said. And even after she stopped living in Kelly's Chicago mansion, when she was around 23 or 24, she was still financially dependent on the musician, who bought her a car and helped her with rent payments.

However, Bonjean argued, in more recent years it couldn't be said that Kelly had any direct influence over Jane, and yet she maintained an amicable relationship with the star. The court saw text conversations between Jane and Kelly, one inviting the musician to a birthday celebration, two others exchanging happy new year greetings.

And after the 'Surviving R Kelly' documentary aired in January 2019 - resulting in the various new criminal investigations - Jane initially sent Kelly a message of support. "I love you, don't let the devil win", she texted him, with Kelly responding: "Yeah, I was on a major breakdown but now I'm on a major buildup".

At that point, Bonjean asked, Kelly "wasn't trying to influence you to do anything - you were just commiserating". Jane confirmed that was true.

The month after 'Surviving R Kelly' aired, Jane was contacted by prosecutors who informed her they were now in possession of additional videos that allegedly featured her and Kelly involved in sexual activities. She then texted the musician stating: "You need to call me right away or I'm making decisions on my own".

Bonjean asked Jane whether that message was an implied threat basically demanding Kelly pay her some money otherwise she would speak to the state attorney's officials. Jane denied that was her intent, adding: "The decision I was going to make was to cooperate with the authorities because I no longer wanted to carry his lies".

Actually, Jane didn't initially cooperate with the authorities, continuing to decline to answer their questions. And that initial decision not to cooperate was Jane's own decision, she confirmed, because she was not at that point under any pressure from Kelly. However, she subsequently decided it was now time to cooperate. Which brought Bonjean back to that key focus of the defence: why did Jane ultimately decide to cooperate with the authorities and change her story?

Obviously keen to damage the credibility of the prosecution's key witness, the defence lawyer suggested that the change in heart came about when Jane learned that she might qualify for restitution, which is to say she could benefit financially if Kelly was convicted. The defence objected to that suggestion, while Jane insisted that she had not yet decided whether to seek restitution if Kelly is found guilty.

When it came to showing the sexually explicit video clips, the prosecution's legal reps asked that media and spectators be removed from the courtroom given that the tapes contain footage of the sexual abuse of a child. However, the judge ruled that - providing screens were placed in front of the jury, so that no one else could see either the monitors on which the videos were played or how the jurors reacted - then it wasn't necessary for other people to actually leave the courtroom.

As a result, those other people could hear the audio on the tapes, although an audio feed that has allowed people to follow the trial elsewhere in the courthouse was cut while the videos were played. As described by Jane in her earlier testimony, Kelly can be heard giving her instructions on the videos, while she can be heard referring to her "fourteen year old genitals" on multiple occasions.

The case continues.

--------------------------------------------------

Californian Supreme Court rules on free speech claims in Michael Jackson fake vocals dispute
The Californian Supreme Court has ruled against Sony Music and the Michael Jackson estate in regard to a free speech question that was raised after it was alleged that three tracks on the posthumous Michael Jackson album 'Michael' did not in fact feature the star's vocals.

The lawsuit that sparked that question has already been settled and the three disputed tracks removed from the streaming services, so the Californian court's ruling could be seen as irrelevant. But it possibly sets a precedent of relevance to future music marketing. Although, what it doesn't do is offer any conclusion on whether or not Jackson does indeed appear on those three tracks.

Released by Sony's Epic label in 2010, 'Michael' featured ten songs that Jackson had started but not finished over his long career in music. Work on each track was completed by one of a team of producers, all led by Timbaland. The three tracks that caused the controversy - 'Breaking News', 'Monster' and 'Keep Your Head Up' - all originated from one recording session with producer Eddie Casci.

Numerous people - including several members of the Jackson family - argued that the vocals on the final versions of those three tracks were not Jackson's. However, the Jackson estate insisted that it was confident that it was Jackson singing on those tracks, publishing a summary of the efforts it went to in order to confirm the authenticity of the music on the 'Michael' album.

But none of that placated one fan in particular, Vera Serova, who filed a lawsuit over the alleged fake vocals in 2014, naming Sony Music, the estate, and Casci and his company as defendants. As that case worked its way through the motions, it was Sony and the estate that posed the free speech question that the Californian Supreme Court has just answered.

They basically argued that the marketing and liner note copy stating that Jackson appeared on the three disputed tracks was protected by the free speech rights contained in the US First Amendment, and therefore Serova couldn't make a legal claim in relation to that copy under Californian competition or consumer rights laws.

A Californian appeals court accepted those arguments in 2018 and dismissed the case against Sony and the estate, but then the matter progressed to the state's Supreme Court.

Summarising that earlier decision in its ruling week last week, the Supreme Court stated: "The court of appeal concluded the motion to strike should be granted, reasoning the First Amendment shields the album marketers from liability".

"Even if the statements about Jackson's contributions were false, said the court, the First Amendment requires classifying them as non-commercial speech, a classification that would offer the statements greater protection from government regulation and, per the parties' agreement, put them beyond the reach of the consumer protection laws Serova invokes".

"The album marketers' statements were, in the [appeal] court's view, non-commercial, because they 'were directly connected to music that itself enjoyed full protection under the First Amendment' and 'concerned a publicly disputed issue about which [the speaker] had no personal knowledge'".

However, the Supreme Court then stated: "We disagree and reverse". Citing earlier precedent, the Supreme Court said that the marketing and liner note copy was "commercial advertising meant to sell a product" and that generally there "can be no constitutional objection to the suppression of commercial messages that do not accurately inform the public".

"We recognise artistic works such as albums, in some instances, enjoy robust First Amendment protections, but that does not turn all marketing of such works into non-commercial speech", the new judgement added, "and it does not do so in this case".

Not only that, but "a seller's purported lack of knowledge of falsity does not tell us whether that seller's speech is commercial or non-commercial, and commercial speech does not shed its commercial nature simply because a seller makes a statement without knowledge or that is hard to verify. The First Amendment has long coexisted with no-fault false advertising laws".

So there you go, Sony and the estate can't get out of this litigation on free speech grounds. Except, of course, they don't need to get out of this litigation at all any more having settled with Serova last month shortly after removing the three disputed tracks from digital music platforms.

On removing the tracks, a spokesperson for Sony and the estate said at the time: "The removal of these three songs has nothing to do with their authenticity. The estate and Sony Music believe the continuing conversation about the tracks is distracting the fan community and casual Michael Jackson listeners from focusing their attention where it should be - on Michael's legendary and deep music catalogue".

Meanwhile, on settling Serova's lawsuit, a spokesperson told Billboard earlier this month: "Regardless of how the Supreme Court may rule, the parties to the lawsuit mutually decided to end the litigation, which would have potentially included additional appeals and a lengthy trial court process".

So, that's that then. Though, just in case it comes up in the future, please note that you can't circumvent legal claims under Californian law over allegedly dodgy marketing copy and liner notes on free speech grounds. We may not know who sang on those three 'Michael' tracks, but we do know that.

BACK TO THE TOP OF THE BULLETIN

Dr Dre says family were told to say their goodbyes after brain aneurysm
Dr Dre has revealed that he came so close to death after experiencing a brain aneurysm last year that his family were told that they should say their goodbyes to him. However, he insists that he "never felt like I was in trouble".

In a message to fans in early January 2021, confirming he was in hospital recovering from the aneurysm, Dre said that he was "doing great and getting excellent care". However, it turns out, the situation was far more grave.

"They weren't allowing anybody to come up - meaning visitors or family or anything like that - because of COVID", he tells the Workout The Doubt podcast. "But they allowed my family to come in [and] I found out later, they called them up so they could say their last goodbyes, because they thought I was outta here. I didn't know it was that serious… Nobody told me, I had no idea. That was crazy".

However, he goes on, "I never felt like I was in trouble. I felt like, 'OK, I'm just going through [a] procedure and I'm ready to go home. I'm hungry'. I didn't eat for two weeks… That was a really crazy experience".

He was eventually released from hospital in mid-January 2021 and, of course, went on to perform at this year's Super Bowl halftime show.

BACK TO THE TOP OF THE BULLETIN

Skullcrusher releases dark and light versions of debut album title track
Skullcrusher has released two new singles: 'They Quiet The Room' and 'Quiet The Room'. They are two different versions of the same song, taken from her upcoming album 'Quiet The Room'.

"'Quiet The Room' is the first song I wrote for the album although I didn't know it yet", she says. "It felt like opening a secret door into a new world. I wrote it on the piano I grew up with and inevitably felt the presence of my childhood self. This would linger with me throughout the process of making the record".

"Simply put, the song is about communication and isolation, the kind experienced by a child that influences their journey into adulthood", she goes on. "I was thinking about my childhood bedroom but also an unknown room, surreal and empty but for the weighted presence of things unsaid".

"The basis of the recording is a live performance I did at Dreamland studios in Woodstock, NY", she adds. "From that take we added field recordings and room ambience - crickets, creaking, doors opening and closing, footsteps, etc. It wasn't until a year later that I revisited the song as the beginning of this album".

As for the second version of the song, she explains: "I had a thought to write an alternate version of the song with different chords on guitar. This version, 'They Quiet The Room', became a different song entirely. It shifted the tone of the lyrics and instead of a dark room I imagined playing outside in the daytime, lost in some fantasy world".

"The two together - 'They Quiet The Room' into 'Quiet The Room' - are like the passing of a day", she adds. "Perhaps one spent as a child making up imaginary games outside before returning inside for dinner, crossing over some kind of barrier as dusk settles, to have dinner or sit at the piano alone".

The album, 'Quiet The Room', is out on 14 Oct. Watch the video for 'They Quiet The Room' here, and 'Quiet The Room' here.

--------------------------------------------------

Drahla return with first new music and tour dates since 2019
Drahla have announced their first new music - a single called 'Under The Glass' - and their first live dates since 2019.

"'Under The Glass' represents a moment of creative reconnection, almost a sense of euphoria in the darkest moments - an awaited, yet slight, respite from reality", say the band.

"The song is a collage, reworking early ideas from 2020 with newer work - bridging the gap of time, in the literal sense as well as musically. The lyrics are deliberately vague, using metaphor to interpret personal experience and emotion of loss and grief".

The band will be touring the UK in September, here are the dates:

18 Sep: Brighton, Komedia
19 Sep: Bristol, Dareshack
20 Sep: London, Bermondsey Social Club
21 Sep: Oxford, The Port Mahon
22 Sep: Manchester, Soup
23 Sep: Leeds, Wharf Chambers

Listen to 'Under The Glass' here.

BACK TO THE TOP OF THE BULLETIN

RELEASES

Zedd and Maren Morris are back together again with new single 'Make You Say', also featuring Beauz. "I loved working with Zedd again on 'Make You Say' after such a thrill ride with [2018 single] 'The Middle''", says Morris. "It's such a vibey melody and making the music video was definitely a first for me as far as choreography and animation go. The fans are gonna flip".

MIA has released new single 'Popular'.

Macklemore has released new single 'Maniac', featuring Windser. "The first time I heard Windser singing the hook on 'Maniac' I fell in love with it", says the rapper. "It's infectious and relatable and I couldn't get it out of my head. We've all been in relationships that maybe don't feel healthy all the time, but we still love that person and are dependent and addicted to that love. It's universal. 'Maniac' is that love story".

Sam Ryder has released new single 'Somebody'. But what is the song inspired by? Well, he says: "'Somebody' is inspired by YOU! All of the kindness, positivity and joy we've experienced so far this year. Ultimately it's about the joy of giving love and experiencing love".

Loyle Carner has announced that he will release his third album, 'Hugo', on 21 Oct.

To mark what would have been Joe Strummer's 70th birthday, previously unreleased song 'Fantastic' has been released.

Congo Natty has released two new tracks, 'Dragon Slayer' and 'Binghi Man'. His first album since 2015, 'Ancestorz (Rootz Of Jungle)', is out this week.

--------------------------------------------------

GIGS & TOURS

After their six night run at Wembley Stadium last week, Coldplay have announced new UK dates next summer, with three shows in Manchester and Cardiff in May and June. Tickets go on sale on Thursday.

Muse have announced UK tour dates in June 2023, finishing up at Milton Keynes Bowl on 25 Jun. Tickets on sale on Friday.

Check out our weekly Spotify playlist of new music featured in the CMU Daily - updated every Friday.

BACK TO THE TOP OF THE BULLETIN

Akon defends Kanye West over "trash bag" clothing display
Akon has come to Kanye West's defence, following criticism last week regarding how Gap was displaying the latest Yeezy clothing collection in its US stores - basically in big old bin bags.

The singer says that West shouldn't be asked to apologise for his creativity - nor an Instagram post about his inspiration for that creativity - adding that the rapper's bin-bag-based clothing sales might actually help the homeless.

West was criticised last week after pictures circulated on social media showing the unusual way in which his latest clothing range was being displayed in Gap stores, ie by being piled up in large bags - actually construction bags, not bin bags, the rapper was quick to point out.

Asked about his decision to have the clothes displayed in that way, West told Fox News last week: "I'm an innovator, and I'm not here to sit up and apologise about my ideas … This is not a joke, this is not a game, this is not just some celebrity collaboration. This is my life. I'm fighting for a position to be able to change clothing and bring the best design to the people".

He reportedly said that the idea behind the large bags of clothes was to make it easier and more convenient for people to buy items from his latest clothing range. As opposed to the very complicated 'clothes on a table' or 'clothes on hangers' set up that we're normally faced with.

Meanwhile, in an earlier and since deleted Instagram post, West seemed to imply that the new clothing line had been inspired by "the children" and "the homeless". It wasn't clear if the children and the homeless had also inspired the way the clothes were displayed, but either way, many people felt it was inappropriate to suggest over-priced clothing was somehow linked to homeless people.

However, Akon has come to West's defence over all this, reckoning that no one should interfere with the rapper's creative process or question what inspires him creatively. And, let's not forget, when that creativity creates opportunity for West, he might pass that opportunity on to someone else. So everyone's a winner really. Maybe even the homeless.

Accosted in the street by TMZ and asked for his view on West's new clothing line and the controversies surrounding it, Akon said: "It's creative. I don't think anybody should ever have to apologise for anything creative. [Being] creative is just an idea of something that's in your mind - [and] everybody would be apologising every day if you had to apologise for things you just thought about".

He added that West's critics "are overthinking it and I think what [he is] inspired by should be irrelevant to what he does once he materialises it".

"That's an idea that could make him more money that he possibly could use to create more opportunities for other people", he mused. "I think that sometimes people have stopped the opportunity before it even gets there because of what they personally think. So I think whatever he has in mind, or what he wants to do, people [should] just let him do it, and then see whatever he does after he's successful with it".

Though, that said, it wouldn't be fair to expect West to single-handedly solve the homelessness problem with his creativity and success, Akon was keen to add.

"I think people put too much responsibility [on West]", he went on. "He's only one man … Me personally, I would tell those [critics] to take the clothes they're not wearing and go give [them] to the homeless. Do something. You do something! Don't wait for Kanye to do it. You do it … The ones that criticise - you're just as bad as the one you're criticising for not having the time or energy to get that done if you're not doing anything yourself".

Just a quick reminder here that West has been selling clothes out of large rubble sacks for profit. But, Akon nevertheless insisted, West is "doing it to put more light on the homeless, to actually create more opportunities for the homeless".

Is that really what he's doing, the interviewer asked? "That's what you would hope he's doing", Akon replied. But is mere hope enough? Well, he added, he has faith because West "has a good heart" and "his intentions are in a good place".

So I think we can safely say that that's all cleared up now. West's Gap collection pretty much immediately sold out across the US, despite how it was displayed, so now we can wait and see if Akon is correct in assuming (well, hoping) that West will use the money he's made to help the homeless.

Meanwhile, Fox News reports that the rapper is now relocating to London to design more clothes. Which may or may not be sold out of bin bags.

BACK TO THE TOP OF THE BULLETIN