Has anyone been able to define well or measure differences between vinyl and digital?

On paper, digital has it all in spades, but there’s no denying, that vinyl can  have a truly inviting sound.

A long time ago I read a couple of different articles about differences in dynamic range as well as separation and after that I gave up. 

The variability in mastering, not just from LP to CD or SACD but from release to release was so great.  Some tests showed CD's having markedly reduced separation, or SACD being deliberately manipulated.  It is possible that benefits to LPs today are in the hands of the ME's.  Maybe they know the vinyl lover is pursuing a different sound than the MP3 downloader?

At best, I think we could tell there was a trend with mastering engineers to get as loud as possible when CD’s hit. We’ve barely recovered from that in pop culture music.

By all means, play what you enjoy!

Thanks Eric and all others here.

There is an almost immediate recognition but probably not foolproof double blind test differential between these two formats, isn’t there? The apparent open spaciousness and feeling of lightness airiness not on all tracks probably but in general to vinyl that isn’t the same in digital.

These are instantly recognizable at least in enough cases that some here have agreed with the proposal. Not better, just different. Like was said earlier, better is a judgment of experience and that’s not my point here.

Its trying to describe and understand the differences.

Of course direct comparisons between tracks with same version is probably as close and discernible situation to hear those differences in. I’m sure there are YT example and experiments you can do at home. [Youtube limits aside, obviously]

One of my reasons for asking is to poll our knowledge on this topic and hear the common and different perspectives of this topic. I see some common and divergent knowledge already.

Depends on the quality of the recordings. Way too many variables to make a logical comparison. Cables, cartridges, preamp, setup, room acoustics but mostly, quality of the recordings (or lack thereof).

@cleeds

We know that CD has a greater potential dynamic range than LP but in practice, the opposite is often the case.  Just look at the DR database.

"Dynamic range" has multiple definitions even in professional sense. For starters, for a given recording one can derive large number of dynamic ranges based on even a single parameter of averaging over time.

Then, if we go deeper, to psychoacoustics of music perception, we may start discerning different large sets of dynamic ranges for large number of frequency ranges, for "standard ear".

Going deeper yet, we ought to take into account individual hearing systems differences. A typical teenager, for instance, may discern a wider dynamic range at 15KHz compared to a typical retiree.

The standardized procedures are indeed useful, as they give general idea about the dynamic range of a given recording, allowing to compare different recordings in this regard, yet those are gross simplifications.

Depending on the method of dynamic range measurement, most suitable in a certain sense for a given music piece and listener, ether CD or LP may be "proven" to have a greater potential dynamic range.