When is digital going to get the soul of music?

I think that there is much more going on than we think(with apologies to those that have pointed this out in this thread). I just bought 38 cd's for $38. I played a few cuts from each(almost), then I got to Earl Klugh's, "Life Stories". At the back of the cd it said, "The music on this Compact Digital Disc was originally recorded on analog equipment. We have attempted to preserve, as closely as possible, the sound of the original recording. Because of its high resolution, however, the Compact Disc can reveal limitations of the source tape." Well, guess what guys, when I played this cd, it was instant relaxation. Isn't music supposed to relax you? I guess I'm confused. I understand that the digital recording process is not the problem. At least, I've heard cd's from analog turntables, and I've heard cd's(like this one)derived from analog tape, and they are both relaxing like analog. But some cd's aren't relaxing. I think that we need more clarification here. What we have is a cd maker apologizing for maybe lost information, but not understanding how relaxing their own cd is. Is there something wrong with that equation?

Let me just say this. Lp's made from 1981 or earlier are all relaxing(vinyl enthusiasts don't recognize this). I'm trying to codify cd's. What I'm thinking now(and how come a cd neophyte is the one coming up with this?) is that earlier cd's sound better when coming from analog tape, while later cd's(at least 1996) can sound pretty good. I don't know why, but why am I the one even suggesting this? No ears out there?

digital is a wrong way for reproducing music, compared with analogic.
Even if it's superior physically, in some fields.
It cuts the time into instants and reconstructed it after, more or less closer to reality.

Neil Young, for instance, has never accepted digital, calling it a crime for music !

I have been positively surprised by the JPS cable "Digital AC" made for CD/SACD/DVD outfits, which makes sound the digital gear closer to the analogic true sound.

Very interesting, Adhoc. I too believed that digital was wrong-and it was backed up by listening. Now, I'm not so sure. I've found digital more than tolerable with the APL Hi-Fi Denon 3910. Maybe it's due to less than optimum setup of my Linn(circa 1992). But, I no longer, necessarily get tense from all digital. My current interconnect(Oritek X-2) was designed mostly listening to digital. I do have ideas on cd's now. First, cd's made from analog tape are mostly(albeit, maybe, they are a little clinical, but generally that's musically insignificant) okay. Second: cd's made after 1995(approximately) can be excellent. My question here is, was there a breakthrough at this point(1995), or was it incremental improvements(I don't believe the second.)? I have found one cd made earlier that was able to communicate the music message with the cd format(R.E.M.'s, "Automatic for the People"-hell, what do you want for a buck?). I've got to admit that I've not tried turning down the volume of those objectionable cd's, to see what effect that has. D_edwards, when you talk about surround, are you mostly talking about 5.1 cd's?

Sure, that the best CD/SACD players are much better than 10 years ago, and often sound very good.

Now, besides theory I just spoke a little in my former message - I can't develop more in english, not to say that I am not a technician - I just can say :

- I have a very good CD/SACD player, Accuphase DP-85, considered among the few best ones (16'000 euros in Europe)
- as analogic outfit, a Michell Orbe, Rega RB1000 tonearm and Lyre Titan as cartridge.

Well, my top sounding LP's sound better than my top sounding CD's or SACD's.

Richer, fuller, warmer - just more musical, if I can say that.
Ok, more dynamics in CD's.
I enjoy a lot my CD's, no problem, but when I want to listen to the best sound, I put my LP's.