inna, you still seem to be stretching to come up with justifications for the fact you personally (apparently) just don’t like digital sources.
You are just ignoring what I pointed out before; that analog involves gross changes of the form of carrier for a signal, and your logic works against analog as much as digital. When acoustic energy is transduced into electricity it is then NOTHING LIKE the organic thing that sat in front of the microphone. How much like an actual entire symphony orchestra is a teeny, tiny stream of electricity? And yet a teeny stream of electricity is used to represent an entire orchestra until it reaches the speakers to be translated back to acoustic energy. And..again...sit in front of a live orchestra....look down at the grooves of a record. If you can not admit the astounding alteration that the sound of a symphony has undergone to be changed in to plastic grooves, you just can’t be taken seriously. In trying to portray the digital carrier system as somehow turning real sounds in to some unnatural "other" form, you simply are ignoring the same happens in analog.
Further, your reasoning ought to apply to visual signals as well, such as video cameras and televisions. If your reasoning were correct "you ought to keep the visual information all analog." But the digital TVs and sources of today are now vastly more realistic than any analog TV signals we had before.
We get it. You don’t care for digital. But your rationalisations in trying to go beyond your mere opinion, to prescribing how things ought to be as if you’d found some objective truth to declare, just don’t hold water.