Digital LP’s

Digital recording to vinyl has been around longer than you might think.

www.aes.org/aeshc/pdf/fine_dawn-of-digital.pdf

I think differences that people perceive are more related to a specific master or mix and that digital in the chain is transparent. Analog to analog is like a photocopy of a photocopy with a similar result.

It's just a ripoff by the record companies as folks will pay double the CD price for an LP. When the Beatles set came out my friends and I compared and couldn't really hear any difference. Since then any of the new remasters I've wanted I've only purchased on CD.

I've read on this forum a few times of people who after having spent tens of thousands on both their digital and analog rigs assert that they now sound the same.

Not being able to discern the difference between an apple and an orange seems to be a bit of a tragedy.

It makes me wonder if they would notice any difference after changing their cartridge out for another cartridge type. 

Interesting question . 

I have replaced a few of my John Prine albums released as early as 1991 " The Missing Years "on CD and finally in 2013 on vinyl and I feel that the vinyl sounds better , this is also true for later albums he released , " In Spite of Ourselves " and "Fair & Square " .

The same goes for Rickie Lee Jones " Traffic From Paradise " and " It's Like This "

Vinyl actually has less dynamic range than a 16 bit CD. But for pop and rock music dynamic range is pretty irrelevant as most recordings are compressed into a very narrow dynamic range window. Perceived differences between vinyl and CD are very dependent on mastering and on the relative quality of the playback systems used to make the comparison.