When and how did you, if at all, realize vinyl is better?

geoffkait

... CDs sound relatively thin, disembodied, two dimensional, compressed, congealed, thumpy, piercing, hollow, diffuse, synthetic, amusical, generic, threadbare, edgy, bass shy, peaky, ugly, phasey, irritating, detailed, unnatural, unimpressive, commercial, like papier mache, airless and dry.

I think it's time for you to upgrade your system!

cleeds
geoffkait:
... CDs sound relatively thin, disembodied, two dimensional, compressed, congealed, thumpy, piercing, hollow, diffuse, synthetic, amusical, generic, threadbare, edgy, bass shy, peaky, ugly, phasey, irritating, detailed, unnatural, unimpressive, commercial, like papier mache, airless and dry.

I think it's time for you to upgrade your system!

Touche! Please note I said relatively so don't feel too bad. 

Everything is relative. - A. Einstein

Why did everybody have to have a CD player when they came out?
Why did everybody buy CD's when they cost over $20. with so few titles available, and a new record $7.
Why did so many people sell their records?

Only people in the "High End" knew that analog was much better, and a lot of people on this forum were not in the high end when CD's came out, but had "Dual", "BIC" cheap Girards, that they thought were "The cat's meow", to use one of the many phrases that mean "Hot stuff".

Analog still costs much more than CD when you are speaking of "Audiophile quality".

Now back to the original question; when I spent over 3K on analog, only then did I discover it was better than digital.

In my opinion vinyl pales in comparison to the quality of a really great tape machine. I've worked on a Studer A827 a few times and it's hard to beat an ATR102. 

Parkinen, I don't think anyone will challenge that..