Turntable got absolutely crushed by CD


Long story short, i've just brought home a VPI classic 1 mounted with a Zu-Denon DL103 on JMW Memorial 10.5 with the appropriate heavier counterweight. Had everything dialed in..perfect azimuth, VTF, overhang, with only a slightly higher than perfect VTA. Levelling checked. All good. 

I did a comparison between the VPI and my Esoteric X03SE and it's not even close. The Esoteric completely crushes the VPI in all regards. The level of treble refinement, air, decay, soundstage depth and width, seperation, tonality, overall coherence is just a simply a league above from what I'm hearing from the VPI. The only area the VPI seems to be better at is bass weight, but not by much. 

I'm honestly quite dumbfounded here. I've always believed that analogue should be superior to digital. I know the Esoteric is a much pricier item but the VPI classic is supposed to be a very good turntable and shouldn't be a slouch either. At this point I feel like I should give up on analogue playback and invest further in digital. 

Has anyone had a similar experience comparing the best of digital to a very good analogue setup?

Equipment:
Esoteric X03SE 
VPI Classic, JMW Memorial 10.5, Zu-DL103
Accuphase C200L
Accuphase P600
AR 90 speakers

Test Record/CD:
Sarah McLachlan - Surfacing (Redbook vs MOV 180g reissue)



chadsort
This year’s "Records To Die For" in the February 2019 issue of Stereophile, which according to the magazine is comprised of recordings that are, "both musically and sonically impeccable," includes 17 Lps and 30 Cds (or other digital formats, but mostly Cd). I counted 47 instead of the 46 the magazine states because one was recommended in both the Lp and Cd formats.

This is not new this year, Cds usually outnumber Lps. So that leads me to believe that the absolute sonic superiority of Lps that some proclaim is based more on ego than hearing.


@dynaquest4  

Chakster:

Not sure I get why you uploaded that "slide" image. To me it just looks like a a digital scan of a blurry purple haze. And since it is now a digital image, what I supposed to compare it with.    

It's an example. 
Actually i have uploaded original cross-processed slide film scan, no phonoshop, no filters, nothing, this is just a film as it is. Digital only help me to share it. I can make print right from the analog scan in superb resolution. 

I do the same with the music, if i want to share it (or if i want to discover new music) i will use digital, but to play music in my system i will use original vinyl. 

I can understand a lack of enthusiasm about analog formats in certain age, so i do not blame you or anyone else on here, but younger generation think different. I'm not so young, but i'm happy with analog. I'm happy when i see young people buying and playing record, taking pictures on film cameras and buying books in analog format. This is a proof of how cool those analog formats really is, otherwise they would not survive in the digital era. 

I would never trust a digital source to store my music or even pictures, many information lost on broken hard drives, old computers, cd-rs etc. Digital is good and bad at the same time, many formats are not supported on newer computers, i just don't like it. 

What i like is that i can pick up even a 78 rpm record from 1930s made by RCA Victor from my grandpa collection and i can still play it in 2019. Not sure you will be able to play your digital files for such a long time. I can not open some of the digital files made 20 years ago. 

Chakster said:
This is a proof of how cool those analog formats really is, otherwise they would not survive in the digital era.
They are cool!  That is part of the appeal of retro.  Listening to vinyl, as I've said before is, in my opinion, is all about nostalgia, the equipment, the process of loading a record and listening to that old familiar needle in groove sound.  I get all that.  Just does not make analog vinyl a better performing media (all else being equal).  Like nostalgia? Great - go analog til your hearts content.

I suspect, for me, like with film, the complete inconvenience of an antiquated system (records) totally eliminates vinyl in a competition with digital.  Would I go back to having a turntable?  Maybe...they are still very cool to look at (like my Garrard Zero-100) and the experience might be fun; but.........

I loved and would drool over my Nakamichi Dragon.  But the cassette tape was an awful medium from the get-go despite Dolby's (and others) later efforts.  But I did love making compilation tapes using two Sony ES CD players and a mixer.

Of seven Corvettes I've owned, my favorite was a '67 big block.  But it is an antique; and while still very attractive, there is  absolutely nothing mechanical about it that makes it a better automobile than just about any modern car with a 3.5 ltr motor.

It is OK to be happy with analog - as you are...but you don't need to justify it by touting it as an overall better media.  
Post removed 
@dynaquest4 I'm not sure, but maybe you never owned a high-end turntable, cartridge, phono stage ? What i can read about that Garrard Zero 100 is comments about problems with this turntable from many users.  

If you imagine me with automatic retro turntables like that playin advocate for retro analog then and you're wrong.
 
I think most of the analog lovers here on audiogon are pretty serious about turntables, cartridges, tonearms, phono stages and everything else to make analog system superb today in competition with digital. 

If you reference in analog audio is Garrard Zero 100 then i understand why do you like digital. Maybe you can recall a better turntable from your arsenal ? 

P.S.  I thought the Nakamichi Dragon is superb cassete deck, but i never tried one, if you think it's so awful you can send it to me :) This is definitely retro cool looking japanese deck.