Looking back, even BEFORE the Loudness Wars started, vinyl generally has higher dynamic range than its CD brethren. No bout a doubt it. You only need to look 👀 at the Dynamic Range Database to appreciate that. The other big advantage of vinyl, at least potentially, is frequency extension. I’d opine it’s extremely difficult to excavate the intricate data that is contained on CDs for a variety of reasons I’ve covered before many times. It’s a shadow of itself, or what it should be. For CDs, without a whole lot of effort, Air, Sweetness and fullness of bass are usually sub par. Even then...
I exchanged few comments with the local audio designer. He also has years of experience in studio production. He claims 24/48 which is practically used as a standard for many things today provides a real dynamical range which on a format level surpasses anything a vinyl can produce. As I understand the same is not true for 16/44.1, though.
The real difference happens in production/mastering. Practically anything on the digital side gets compressed when producing a master. There's an attractiveness associated with compression, too - with some music at least it may sound more attractive when compressed, especially on non hi-fi systems. Sad but true. However though compression is used commonly the level of compression is not the same on each record, of course.
On another level, part of a dynamic nature is associated with reproduction device. Currently I use AD1865 based DIY NOS r2r DAC, and I can tell it made an immediate difference in dynamics of reproduction compared to few modern delta-sigma DACs, which according to their specs should not lack dynamics...