Does Anyone Think CD is Better Than Vinyl/Analog?

Just to add yet another item; Eric Clapton’s ’461 Ocean Boulevard’ from 1974.

The CD, Remastered, 20 BIT ADC, Apogee Electronics... REFERENCE STANDARD and on...
No match at all to the original issued LP, Polydor/Rino, and a 'local' RSA pressing to boot!
The CD sounding sort of ’over-refined’, kind of boness / gutless, when compared to the LP.

So where on earth does that leave one comparing the different systems?

The bass, ’lacking’ with this *Remastered* Clapton CD is in extremely stark contrast to e.g. the CD of Morphine ’cure for pain’ RYKODISC 10262.
So, like most everything: it bloodywell DEPENDS, or as some suggested here: ’ask a different question’.
Michélle 🇿🇦

@lp2cd had by far the most intelligent answer.

@lp2cd believe it or not stochastic resonance has been brought up.


Jitter on recording was pretty much gone by mid 90s, earlier in some studios a bit later in others.


To the op, many will post "facts" they have literally made up about digital while having no clue how it works or any depth of understanding. Most to justfy they "like" vinyl better, not because it is. That includes false claims about errors in digital, made up claims about "timing", or even claims to needing wickedly expensive digital, and claims about the "superiority" of certain digital implementations that absolutely sound better to that listener but are farther from accurate.  


Very few here have heard a live recording in process done on analog or digital. Anyone who has worked through that ove the years will tell you that modern digital is what captures fully and accurately what is being played. Not analog tape (and consequently not vinyl). I am not saying you will like the sound better simply that is is accurate.


@lp2cd , one more point is simply information overload. The reduced information on vinyl may cause less masking of detail for many listeners.

Perhaps to that point personally I find jazz, most classical, etc., to be preferable if mastered well on digital. I often prefer rock/pop on vinyl. Admittedly mastering will almost always dominate the listening experience. I like the post from one op where they have a few DACs based on their mood. I totally get that. On the production side we have been adding artifacts to recordings intentionally because people like the results.


Can't remember which label but recently a label that subscribed to high res being superior did a study and found their listeners couldn't detect superiority of high res over level data.

That should be "over Redbook level data"

When both are good recorded and well pressed, in general LPs sound better than CDs. 
In my experience, the variance of the quality of recordings and pressings on LPs are much wider than CDs, which make some badly recorded and pressed LPs sound worse than CDs.
To compare apple to apple, late 50s ~ 70s LPs with original pressing will definitely sound better than corresponding CDs.
For many digital recordings in early 80s, CDs and LPs do not sound much different. Both are pretty bad.
It varies for sub $20 LPs released new recently -- some sound much better than CDs (like Norah Jones Come Away) but others don't differ much (like most of Diana Krall's albums).
All audiophile pressing will sound better on LPs than CDs. 
Most new LP albums costing over $40 sound better than CDs. I have Talyor Swift's Folklore whose LP sounds better than CD. Same with most of Patricia Barber's albums.
However, some audiophile CDs (costing $40 or more) sound really good. For example, I have 'Best Audiophile Voices' I ~ VII. They all sound superb, but unfortunately they did not release LPs so I cannot compare. 

These are my experiences on Esoteric UZ-1 ($1500 used, $4000 new) and Clearaudio Bluemotion ($1200) with Audio Technica AT150mlx cartridge ($500) with Magi Phonomenal phono premap ($1000). 

Audio2design, that is the answer you would expect by theory. No big surprise.
Jeecc, If you like DVD and Blu Ray then you should check out sites like HD Tracks and Acoustic Sounds were you can buy and download Hi Res digital files to your hard drive.
Antigrunge2, the beauty about computers is that they do not pay attention to noise. They only know about numbers. They ignore noise. I use a Berkley Audio Design Alpha USB which keeps any noise from the DACs which if built correctly should ignore noise anyway. I had a very expensive Aurender in my system for a week and there was absolutely no difference between it and the computer. My own take on the noise issue in digital equipment is that it is more audiophile mythology. Noise is only a problem with analog units and sections. You take a Mac Mini with a  big processor, lots of memory and a big hard drive with Channel D's Pure Music program and you get the same performance and much more capability than a $22,000 Aurender.