How much do you need to spend to get digital to rival analog?

Geez...Is anyone going to address the OP's simple question?

I'm betting the OP is aware it's a subjective topic. He just wants suggestions on the latest, reasonably priced gear to consider? I was hoping to read experiences, not members pontificate.

As expected, the thread devolves into a pissing contest.

Digital vs analog vs digital vs analog vs digital vs analog vs digital vs analog!!!!

Geez...Is anyone going to address the OP’s simple question?

early in the thread, this was addressed. it’s basically unanswerable since there are so many levels of analog. maybe if you identify a particular price point of analog you can come up with an approximation of what it takes to compete with digital. but there is no general answer other than there is no answer.

and at the top it’s not possible for digital to compete for any amount of money. and that is where we are now.

you need to come early, then pay attention. :-)

there will be a test later.

I am not an anti digital guy. The truth is that I have never heard any digital that involves me with the music. Everytime I hear a good digital system, I am at first impressed, but after a half hour or so, I want to listen to records. I just recently listened to a 20K esoteric digital setup that does in fact sound great, but I would rather listen to my vinyl rig. Maybe it is colorations that I just gotten used to over decades. I know that digital will never be analog and vice versa but I am asking the question, How much do I need to spend for a digital front end to better my 7K analog front end. Heck, even a 3K turntable with a decent MM cartridge. I am being totally serious here. Out of everyone in my audiophile circle, only 2 listen do serious critical listening to digital. I am thinking it would probably cost at least 30K.  Thats a lot of scratch for digital.

tzh21y OP
I am not an anti digital guy. The truth is that I have never heard any digital that involves me with the music. Everytime I hear a good digital system, I am at first impressed, but after a half hour or so, I want to listen to records

>>>>Bingo! With two simple inexpensive tricks almost any CD player can beat the most expensive analog rig. Scout’s honor! ✌️

Mike, I have not yet spent nearly as much on hi fi equipment as you have but my system is no slouch either. Neither the physical reality or my own listening experience matches yours. The best your ever going to get from a record is 70 db. Most are down around 60 db if they have not been damaged. With 24 bit digital 110 db is attainable limited by digital max.
But, as with everything we listen to it all depends on the mastering. Digital is going to sound very flat if as usual today a ridiculous amount of dynamic compression is used. Everything we listen to has been mastered, engineered. The older records were mastered assuming the limitations of vinyl. Dynamic compression was used to keep the music above the noise floor and below the maximum reasonably attainable tracking capability of phonograph cartridges giving at best 70 db of dynamic range. If I use that same master on any current full resolution digital format I will get the same 70 db dynamic range. If I make a master for digital use only with a dynamic range of 90 db I can get considerably more dynamic range out of any of the high res digital formats. If I used this master on vinyl the stylus would fly out of the groove. These new masters and remasters are starting to invade the market thus hi res digital can easily attain the dynamic range of high speed reel to reel. 
I can hear and demonstrate this easily with my system using the right software which means I can do it with yours. Which means you can do it also. I can also fool people into believing a version of a recording is more dynamic in AB comparison just by tweaking the volume 2 db. 
In the end it all comes down to the master and then the limitations of the format and although many analog to vinyl recordings do sound better than their digital counterparts, analog media are crippled when it comes down to dynamic range even next to lowly 16/44.1  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_analog_and_digital_recording  
So Mike, it appears you have an obvious bias in this regard which makes it difficult for us to interpret what you have to offer in this conversation.

Sincerely,
Mike