listener fatigue? go analogue.

My turntable is a very modest pro-ject debut 2 and a pro-ject phono box, that isn't the best gear in the world but to my ears it's an improvement, my CD-player is a very
accurate machine: the rotel rcd 971, but in combination
with my CDM 1NT's the turntable sounds smoother.
My amp is a rotel 971 mk2.

My personal experience has been similar to yours, Willy, that analogue music is more pleasant to my ears, even with modest pro-ject or rega 2. It is too bad that some of collections are available only in CDs, otherwise, I would have sold my CD gears long long time ago. No doubt, there are great CD players, but my personal preference is still analog.

Couple of weeks ago my friend and I, We end up listening
to both of my system,My reference system is where my
digital front end,my friend made a comment, that
my reference system is so musical, natural sounding,
and enjoyable to listen.Then He requested to hear my
Diapason adamantes II speakers,this is where my mmf5
turntable is,It only took one LP for both of us, to realise
How good vynil is, very pleasant to listen,We just
listened,and enjoy the music.The LP involved is Allison
Krauss,New favorite. Then we listened to the SACD AK Live,
The song is Youre the Lucky one.It was very close.But
the LP is better.We also agree that my digital is thinner
sounding than the LP.Its nice to have both format.Its
very difficult for me to listen to cd, after vynil.
If I have plenty of time,sure vynil is the way to go.
Thanks,I just thought to share my humble experience.

Not knowing what spk. wires you are using w/your B&W's, it might help soomth out the sound by going to bare-wire connections all around. The Kimber 8VS would be an excellent/affordable wire to consider. I agree, vinyl sounds better to my ear as well.

Although, in general, I agree with your assesment that analog is preferable to digital "most" of the time, I don't find it so when the LPs suffer from so much compression as many classical releases do from the 60s through 70s. In many cases, comparing the CD with the same LP tips the balance towards the CD.

I do not know whether this is as prevalent with pop or rock releases since I don't own many but there are many pretty awful-sounding LPs from major classical companies. Not only in compression issues but also the use of bad vinyl. I just opened a sealed copy of Mahler's Symphony No. 6 with the Berlin Philharmonic and Herbert von Karajan on DGG and the sound is terrible. The compresison of frequencies is simple butchery in a work that requires large dynamic contrasts. The CD of this release is infinitely more listenable although you are still aware of some digital edginess. It seems that classical labels, like RCA Victor, started making extraordinary LPs in the late-50s and early 60s and then it all went downhill from there. In the late-70s and early 80s English companies like Chandos, Hyperion and others started putting out marvelous releases that, even today, sound great. But they were the exception and not the rule.

I am thankful that there is now a small trickle of re-releases being done by Classic Recordings and others of some of the great classical releases of old even though they are expensive. Here I can satisfactorily hear that a "great" LP can and does sound better than the same issue on CD.

I do own many LPs that have the benefit of both good production and manufacture and they do sound so much more musical and involving than CDs. But, I have realized that it all depends on individual items and I can no longer make a blanket statement that "LPs sound better than CDs."