Article: "Spin Me Round: Why Vinyl is Better Than Digital"

@mahgister- thank you and a thousand holiday blessings to be bestowed upon you as well. 
Time is a construct. Back to the nuclear lab before they know I'm missing. :)
Bill

There way too many variables within this argument.  I started out in the late 60’s with decent separates, and the only choices were turntables, then reel to reel for recording LPs.  Eight tracks were never considered, due to performance issues.

Fast forward to the 80s when CDs came out in force.   The combination of diminished size and less fussiness and the ability to play the same item at home and in cars killed the underperforming cassettes.

Now we have DACs, streaming and a variety of ways to take music anywhere.

What gets lost in all the arguments is system price points versus sound quality.  The few with unlimited budgets live in a different world tan most of the rest of us.

I am lucky in that I live somewhere in the upper middle ground.  My current system makes it sound like Eva Cassidy is in the room singing directly to me.  This is in a digital format.  Time and circumstance (divorce) caused me to lose my vinyl rig years ago and I decided my constant moving back then was not conducive to rebuilding in vinyl.

I still love what vinyl does, but the structural impediments keep me from revisiting the form, Not the sound.

I would posit that what we see if fairly comparing systems at a variety of budget constraints is that decent sound can be acquired at a modest cost, then you get into the audiophile marginal cost versus marginal gain debate that will never be resolved for all the known reason.  Once you pass the point of five figures in your system, gains at the margin become ever thinner.

In context for this debate, I own a Mercedes E400 coupe that has all the bells and whistles, and my other car is a 1958 Austin-Healey Bugeye sprite that makes me smile every single day.

Enjoy your rig, digital, vinyl or both, no one will make you change your mind, most of all, enjoy the Music!

lhasaguy thanks for another wise post...

I would posit that what we see if fairly comparing systems at a variety of budget constraints is that decent sound can be acquired at a modest cost, then you get into the audiophile marginal cost versus marginal gain debate that will never be resolved for all the known reason. Once you pass the point of five figures in your system, gains at the margin become ever thinner

Wise indeed and truthful for me....



Just a remark coming from my own experience with a 500 hundred dollars system... Way more low than 5 figure budget then...
My experience is that money generally dont necessarily buy an audiophile experience, rightful embeddings controls almost always did it ....

Because there is no reason an amplifier at any price will  sound good in a non mechanically embedded audio system, in a high noise floor electrical grid house, and in a badly acoustically designed room....






Merry Christmas to you....

@mahgister- thank you and a thousand holiday blessings to be bestowed upon you as well.
Time is a construct. Back to the nuclear lab before they know I’m missing. :)
Bill

Take care of the radiation....

Time indeed is a construct of the brain, i think we live on at least 2 levels at the same time: ( past «-now) and( future-» now) the brain filter information from this 2 locations in time creating our freedom answers and questions in the now moment to these 2 almost simultaneous rythmical flows of information...

Back to my asylum with my friend Einstein....😁😏

Merry Christmas....

Ihasaguy, love that Bugeye Sprite! 

Someone above mentioned that you can go anywhere with a digital signal but you cannot do to much to an analog signal. I would add that you can not do much to an analog signal without adding distortion unless you digitize it. 
As far as recordings go, studio recordings always reflect the intension of all those involved in the recording process and is in short an art form. It does not reflect the reality of a band playing on stage. It reflects the reality of a band playing in a studio frequently at different times and locations. I do not try to think of it as a band playing on stage. If you do you will be sorely disappointed. A vocalist can still sound as if they are standing right in front of you just not on a stage in a big hall. This is why some of us love live recordings such as Waiting for Columbus, a wonderful recording wherein you get the feeling of a live band playing on stage in a large concert hall. I have both the mobile fidelity vinyl and high-resolution digital versions of this concert.  Because the bass in the mobile fidelity version was boosted this is a case where the high-resolution digital version sounds better. Mobile fidelity did this sort of stuff a lot in the old days.
I think that I am somewhat of a traditional list. I prefer to keep in a log recordings analog and digital recordings digital. So records recorded before 1985 I will usually get the vinyl version if available. Recording is done after 1985 I will look for high resolution downloads. I try to get 24/96 or better. There are some older recordings that were remastered for digital such as led Zeppelin 1.  The high resolution version of this recording is far superior to the original analog record. Led Zeppelin 2 was also re mastered but the original analog vinyl still sounds superior. Go figure. 
Mahgister, you are entitled to think that doing all that stuff to a DAC will make it sound better but that is psychological and solely in your own world. The only way you can make a DAC sound different is by dumping it in the bathtub.  However with a turntable all you have to do is increase the VTF a little. There are all sorts of things you can do to a turntable to change its sonic characteristics. Getting a turntable to sing separates the men from the boys.  Anybody can get a DAC to play even millercarbon:-)))