MoFi controversy

I have several hundred old records from the 50s to the 80s. I also have over a hundred new reissues. 

To my ears, most of the new reissues, including the most famous audiophile brands, sound like digital. I am sure that not only MOFI uses digital in their record path.
I don't understand people who justify MOFI in this scandal, unless they are people who have a material interest in all sorts of reviewers and other hucksters.
If you like digital sound (I don't mind since digital doesn't mean bad sound) then why spend thousands of dollars on vinyl equipment and buy records for $150+ each? Isn't it easier to listen to good digital recordings on a good digital source?

Regards,

Alex.

Guess its up to each individual to make cost/benefit analysis in this and every transaction.

@alexberger Probably 90% of my vinyl (over 3,500) is 1950's-80's recordings purchased in 1980's. Certainly sound different than my newer reissues, can't be sure if this due to remixing or adding digital to process. I'd just say more sterile sound quality, less warmth and naturalness vs original recordings. I much prefer my digital setup for newer recordings.

To my ears, most of the new reissues, including the most famous audiophile brands, sound like digital.

Which means exactly what? No one knew. No one was screaming for the last many years that they sounded digital (whatever that means). A big difference in modern audiophile vinyl is how much quieter they are. They may have a wider frequency response due to superior equipment. Does that mean they sound digital? Digital does not sound like anything except flat frequency response without noise.

@theaudioamp The masses may not have been screaming, but I've been telling myself this for many years now, Alex seems to be in same boat.

I'm not saying the old or new vinyl objectively better or worse, it just sounds different, and I'd agree it sounds more like my digital than the old vinyl. Vinyl and digital sound different on my vinyl and digital setups, so they do have different sound qualities, at least in my setup. And I'd bet vast majority of those with both setups find them to sound different.

I'm not judging one as better than other, Iove my streaming setup, rarely listen to vinyl anymore, digital is great. This is not about digital vs analog.

The only thing the DSD transfer will do is remove a generational loss. If they added another analog tape step, there would be more noise, more compression of high level transients, etc.  It is as close to the 1st gen master as possible. Then again, that 1st gen master is possibly quite old now.  Do you associate more realistic high level transients as "digital"? Perhaps.  You may associate softening of those transients as more natural as it is what you are used to, even if it is less natural.  Many analog records were pressed by 2nd and 3rd gen tapes, so more of the above noise and softening of high level peaks. The 1 step process may also preserve more transient detail. It may not even be the digital step.