This is really funny. Most "audiophiles" love classic music, or classic jazz or classic blues. Many other styles also. However, my point is that most of the older music was recorded via analog to master tape. Yes, master tape is analog. When re-mastered, they (the recording engineers) used the "master tape" to re-record to digital. So, you are still getting analog first. I have heard wonderful digital recordings and wonderful analog recordings (tape or vinyl). Here is the trick. If you take an original digital recording. i.e. recorded directly to digital master. This could be analog music via mikes to digital recording instruments or straight digital electronic music plugged directly into digital recording equipment, and then take that digital master and re-master it to analog vinyl and then compare them on the same good to great quality sound system, you probably won't hear much difference because it was digitally reoorded in the first place and the inherent sampling issues are present from the start. However, if you take an original analog recorded master from analog tape to vinyl and convert that analog master signal to digital (as is the case for most older classical, jazz or blues music) you most definitely will hear sonic differences. I have done this test so many times in so many venues that I have lost count and not once was the digital reproduction more accurate than the vinyl analog pressing. Now before you all jump on me, please re-read my post. I specifically described the recording medium first. As an Electronics/Electrical Engineer in analog/digital design, I can tell you that digital to digital reproduction has no losses because it goes back and checks the reproduced signal with the original ones and zeros to make sure they match. However, analog to digital reproduction or re-mastering, that error correction simply doesn't and can't exist. Sampling an analog signal to digital will result in inherent signal gaps, because you are sampling. Yes, you can increase the sampling rate, but you still will have gaps. So, logically and truthfully, step back. Something is lost in the digital re-mastered signal from analog. Analog doesn't sample and therefore, there are no gaps. That said, I have also heard some really bad analog recordings. But, this is due to the recording medium used. Bad mikes, bad mixing boards, terrible low quality electronics in the recording chain, etc. I have also heard incredibly awful digital recordings. which could be from the issues I mentioned above and also due to bad equipment, low sampling rates, etc.
Take an original analog recording (analog master to vinyl or master tape) and listen to it. Then listen to the digital re-master from the analog master tape on a decent system and then you are talking. Now some people simply don't care for whatever reason. Some don't want to keep getting up to turn over or change the record. Some don't want to clean and maintain their records. this is really a pain. (Pops and cracks shouldn't exist if you've taken care of your albums in the first place. If you used nails as needles, then oh well..) Some people like the ease of digital playback over vinyl. All are great reasons. Some people simple can't hear the differences. Could be their hearing is off, or their system is not up to snuff, or simply the recordings are so close to each other, they can't tell the difference. For this reason, I addressed how that could be earlier in this post. Either way, in a few more years, some new medium will come out that will blow away these. It will be fun to be there when it happens. Hopefully, I'll be around and my hearing will be adequate.
This is always a fun topic. enjoy