Dear Dweller,
I can probably save you the wait by way of example...
At the invitation of a friend, a while back, I bought a "True_HD" BD copy of the Rolling Stones "Grrr" (60 track compilation of their greatest hits) and for fun I compared it with a bashed up 2nd hand copy of "Rolled Gold" (40 track compilation).
Bearing in mind that the BD was probably derived from "original masters" whilst the LP compilation was from a secondary master, the vinyl versions were easily and noticeably more rewarding, and dare I say "live" sounding and involving, than the state-of-the-art digital offering.
I'm always intrigued enough to test new developments but sad to say it didn't satisfy.
Given your age & experience it's highly likely that under the same conditions you'd have drawn the same conclusion as I did (in fact my 23 yr old daughter would have drawn that conclusion even though she hasn't got the slightest interest in audio ;^)
Given the hype and the level of expectation I found it hard to believe but given a choice I'd ignore the BD completely and run any old vinyl instead - even an old compilation album. I'm not the only one who found the BD too sterile, sanitised and uninvolving. (I think that included digital enthusiasts who preferred earlier SACD versions!)
FWIW I don't think there is anything fundamentally wrong with digital recording as a medium, just that the results (usually) seem totally inconsistent with it's capability i.e. indifferent mastering or the current condition of those master tapes?
As they say, there are no easy routes to musical satisfaction (pardon the pun) when you are dealing with classic material. Most often the best way to jump into an audio "time machine" is to obtain copies of the original LPs.