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

@teo_audio

To clarify, an engineer is not trained to commit to the scientific method or invention, they are trained to follow the books, as that is why they are engineers, not scientists who explore and change things as required when required.

I respectfully disagree. Engineering is the practical application of science to solve problems. I went to university to study engineering and made my career of it. I was never trained to “follow the books.” My entire university experience can be summed up as “learn how to think and problem solve, don’t waste precious memory on things you can reference in a book.” My entire engineering career can be summarized as “I am a truth seeker, not a case maker. The data will guide my decisions. We cannot always have all the data we want, but we will endeavor to use reliable data and we will be flexible and adapt as needed.” I am very inquisitive and inventive. My work and personal interests straddle the line between science and engineering. My work 100% follows the scientific method.

@cleeds 

What makes you think that?

overanalyzing everything.

First of all I would suggest a blind listening, switching from CD to Vinyl. Humans are full or bias, what you hear may be because it is what you want to hear.  For example when listeners listened to music with various speaker cables, they always said the music played thru thicker speaker cables sounded better than thru lamp cord.  However, that was only when they saw that it was thicker cable.  When lamp cord was disguised as a thick cable they thought the disguised lamp cord sounded better than the normal lamp cord.  Also blind tests showed that most people could not tell the difference between music played over You Tube compared to the same music played from a CD. To me I can always hear the difference between vinyl and digital because digital has none of the dust pops or crackle in quiet sections of the music.

On the bench CD and digital blows away vinyl.  Vinyl wins in the romantic, tactile, visual departments.

@prosdds , there is value in a blind test, but there is no point doing that test for vinyl and CD. The noise, even the faintest clicks/pops, will quickly identify the vinyl. Even if it did not, you would need 1 of each mastered exactly the same. Does that exist? Is there a test record that matches a test CD?  After that you need a perfectly set up turntable. Nice to test to aspire too, practically impossible.

@asctim , @grislybutter , I think they are on the right track. @asctim has provided concrete differences between CD and vinyl. @grislybutter talks about learned responses or learned likes. If you tie your self worth to your likes and purchases, then you may be inclined to argue that those likes and purchases are inherently better, not just for you, but for everyone. Maybe it is just the mastering, but I am inclined to believe it is the flaws in the vinyl that often give it that special magic. Not always, not even 50% of the time for me, but when it works, it works really well. For me, it does not need to be superior technically for me to like it.

For discussion accuracy, vinyl, tape, and analog are not the same thing. Vinyl and tape are storage mediums that are predominantly analog in nature. What would perfect analog sound like? Digital!! :-)