The character of analog and digital

Digital recordings are much more uniform.

My experience has been the opposite. They vary greatly.

Millercarbon,

Yes, a very welcome back to you. I’m honored to be the venue for one of your initial posts.
Until recently I was in total agreement with your analog/digital view. As written above, I no longer see the dichotomy as so clear cut.

'Vinyl captures much more of the original event'? The only ones who capture anything from the 'original event' are the producer, engineers, etc. The recording sounds how they want it to sound. No reason why good digital shouldn't be as good as good analog when it comes to capturing 'original events'. 

Since I can listen to hours of digital music in a day, these people who can't stand more than five minutes of it, supposing they exist, have nothing to do with me. That aside, far be it from me to argue with some else's religion.

Don’t expect to change any minds. Like I said, people listen for different attributes. Audiophiles love to justify music appreciation in technical terms. What I have seen, over and over again, digital just ain’t all that.

And yet digital can be all of that. If the listeners were not engage or interested in listening to the CDs, could simply reflect the digital hardware not up to the task. Fortunately I haven’t experienced this let down with digital sourced audio components if there’re up to snuff.

Both analog and digital are subject to the same range/spectrum of poor to sublime. Either is dependent on quality of the recordings and quality of the respective hardware. I’d take a deeper examination of what is being utilized and seek to improve. Digital is absolutely capable of delivering natural, captivating and exquisite sound quality if one has assembled a proper set up.

Charles