Too much generalizing and over-simplifying for me, but one sentence really stands out:
"with the same quality control they had back in the day."
If you think record labels manufactured their 1960’s/70/s/80’s LPs with the care Chad Kassem puts into his QRP pressings, well, I have some swamp land to sell you.
Suggestion: Compare original Buffalo Springfield LPs with the new reissues of those albums Neil Young is doing. If you prefer the originals, I’ll sell you mine for a hundred bucks each.
Another: The original Tea For The Tillerman LPs were mastered with Dolby noise reduction engaged in the chain. When Kassem went to reissue this record, he discovered the tape was not Dolby encoded. So the ’flat" tape had had most of it’s high end removed by the Dolby playback circuitry, drastically changing the timbre of Cat Stevens’ plastic-bodied Ovation acoustic guitar (and the drummer’s cymbals, which I always found severely lacking in shimmer).
If you prefer the sound of the original LPs, that’s your business. But to call them better than the Analogue Productions reissue tells us a lot about your judgment in sound quality. No offence intended. I compared my original UK Island pressing to the Analogue Productions version, and there was a very clear winner. Contrary to your assertion, the reissue was superior to the original in every way. And gee, it's a 180 gram slab of PVC.