I'm glad we're having this conversation here; "analogers" are prone to exaggeration, but I believe and trust my fellow music lovers.
I always had to spend more money on analog to equal CD, and now I know why; all CD players are not created equal, and my "Marantz" is evidently better than most. It's taken me years to come to that conclusion, and it answers the question why I have to spend more on analog to equal it.
Alex, I have a PC "Guru" who is worth his weight in gold, otherwise I might not have it either because I don't understand computers. What's funny is when I call him over, and ask a question about computers, he gives me that look that says, "You wouldn't understand it even after I explained it". That look means, just tell me what you want accomplished.
If you had Burmester, what you call modest might be better than what the "exaggerators" call modest.
My description of sound is "Either the thing produces "Holography" or it doesn't" I don't know what "natural" means.
While we agree on old and new CD's, I'm not sure about this statement for me; "If I could afford it, I would buy only records and would have only analog set up".
Rok, I know you're taking this all in, and since you no longer have records, I don't suggest you buy any. If you have excess funds, I suggest a DAC for your PC output, and upgrade in CD player if you still have loose change.
Back to Alex's "If I could afford"; I would most certainly have a very expensive "analog rig", but in the meantime, it's flip a coin as to which is better in regard to what I have presently.