What is better, analog or digital?


I'm listening to the Best of Marley on the album, and I have to say it sounds better then digital.   More definition and more realism.  Of Course this is MHO  Using a Rega Planer 1 w a cheaper Project phono amp.  

 Let the debate begin, and what should i change out first for better sound
aasen7
You could have perfect bits sampled thousands of times per second....or drag a rock across some plastic?
That is Funny Mr Flinstone  There is some crackle and pop but much more authentic.  I have a cheaper side of analog. Im using a Cambridge cx 60 w Monitor GR 20's   Good speakers w accuracy and bass
I'm listening to Bread.  Great singer and songwriters
It really depends on your system. I listen to both formats, but vinyl sounds better in my system. 
Anolog will always be king.
OP says " Let the debate begin." Members like him that start this same thread 1000 times over never let the debate end. Talk about BORING. 
A diamond needle riding the undulations in a spiral groove on s rotating plastic disc - or an ADC measuring the voltage variations of a microphone signal/ magnetic tape? Each can be made to work well!
Of Course this is MHO  Using a Rega Planer 1 w a cheaper Project phono amp.  

 Let the debate begin, and what should i change out first for better sound

You answered your own question: change out the cheap phono stage. 
https://www.decware.com/newsite/ZP3.htm

aasen7, there are numerous threads on this subject. Frankly, it all depends. But, if your digital section can't beat out the phonograph system you have on occasion then you have a lot of work to do.
Why. not indulge in both? I would never give up my analog front end. I would never give up the world of streaming with Roon, Tidal, and others.
"Let the debate begin."

Good god, no.
Just curious, what are you using when you listen to digital?  And what  components and speakers does the rest of your system have?
Well, whaddya know! Something different for a change..........

Newbies. Don't ya love em.......?


one of the joys in life is having ability to not have to choose
Here's the Zen answer.  Digital  is like having sex.  Analog is like making love.  Figured  I throw out something  different than Analog is like a med rare steak and digital is like beef jerky.  Another favorite  is freeze dried , you can guess which camp that belongs to.

Enjoy the ride
Tom
depends how much time, money, effort is invested...

both my digital and analog is of equal quality now. they have different flair and I enjoy both.

But fun.?    analog is way way fun and involving 
I'm listening to Bread.  Great singer and songwriters

Fortunately, the OP gives us all the information we need to have this thread promptly euthanized.

Better for what?  
Debate that.
No interest in Best Of ***** here.
Both have their place ,much depends on the design implementation , in Audio it’s all about preference .
I grew up in the age of turntables.  Never had a great one.  then when CD players came out and the cheapest CD player kicked my turntable's butt, I never looked back. 
The format does not matter the more important matter is the recording quality of the material you are playing and both formats can be great sounding when the recording is a good one.
How 'bout another platitude? It's the musician who counts, not the instrument.
So I'm going to put it to the test. Just rebuilt my Pioneer PL 530 TT. Bought a Sutherland Insight PS with upgraded LPS. What cartridge should I use for playing mostly rock and 60's and 70's music? Preamplifier is AR Ls28se, Amp is PL Evo 400, GE Triton Ref speakers. TT because I bought it new in 77. Nostalgic reasons.
Endless roundabout, but I'll weigh in. What's better is what sounds better to you on your system. I have a great analog set up IMO and a pretty large record collection (maybe 2500 LPs or so) and consequently I would say analog, generally speaking. But I also have a fair sized collection of CDs and SACDs and many of the those sound incredible.

As people here and elsewhere have pointed out, it takes lots more money to reach or exceed with analog with what digital can produce at certain price point, but many people (like myself) get so much enjoyment out of analog with high end carts, tonearms and turntables they can pretty easily justify the expenditure.

There are really far too many factors involved to ask so simple a question (which is better?) and come up with a satisfactory answer.
There is some crackle and pop but much more authentic.

Authentic?

Does it really need to have rumble, crackle and pop to be authentic?

Wouldn't crystal clear be preferable?
Love listening to all formats. 
I have a nice vinyl set up and nice digital set up.

like what you like and enjoy the music.

This debate is worn and old. 
   In a short reply speakermaster hit the nail on the head..."the recording quality". Digital can outclass vinyl if compared to a worn out record or a record not representative of the mastering of it at the time. So many selections of LP's out there and many sources to buy them. The process of pressing LP's whether original or replicated is a complex situation.
  Digital, however, is not prone to degradation by having a stylus rubbing over the surface multiple times or the collection of dirt/debris on it. It's relatively maintenance free from cleaning and care as compared to vinyl.
   So..the original question....which is better? Equipment is paramount for either medium. And, it all depends on what the listener expects to hear as the best sound. In a perfect world where the best equipment and best recordings were to compare the two the analog would probably win out (IMO).
   But music tastes widely vary depending on the listener. Both digital and analog can be enhanced by electronics to suit personal preferences. Good question.


One of those two for sure.
If you have to ask the question, maybe you’re trying to justify digital?  Or maybe it is an age thing — like how I find women from the 70s and 80s to be way mire appealing to my eyes. 
PS. Or real boobs vs fake boobs. That’s a better analogy.  
Digital of course...

It is more precise, noise free, much more practical to play and it is 21st century technology.

Plus, you do not destroy the medium every time you listen to it, albeit small.
Ok so I "invested" in the latest McIntosh MCD85 SACD player to go with my McIntosh MA352 tube hybrid integrated amp (analog inputs only, no digital). The MCD85 offers a 32 bit DAC and is connected with balanced cables. My vinyl is played on a Pro-Ject Classic turntable with an Ortofon 2M Black cart.  I'm using the McIntosh MM phono amp in the MA352.

The more I run standard CDs through the Mac the better they sound. Almost as good as vinyl; sometimes just as good. On some material where I have both a vinyl edition and CD version, its very close.

I've found the better the equipment, the more revealing the quality of the source. There are some Jazz CDs that just sound better than Rock vinyl.  That said vinyl and CD quality can vary widely depending on how it was mixed or pressed.  If I have to rank them overall it's still 1) vinyl, 2) SACD, then 3) CDs, as one might expect.  I can also use the MCD85 DAC to convert digital sources like Pandora (via Marantz NA6005 Network Player).  Streaming quality is very similar to CD; better if HD version.

I'm thinking that as detailed a digital slice of the analog wave you get with an SACD, its still a slice and not the full analog wave.  I'd still like to enjoy my CD collection as well as vinyl, so I'm counting on the MCD85 to deliver on CDs.

One note, since the resurgence of vinyl, CDs have gotten very inexpensive while vinyl keeps getting more and more expensive.  SACDs are very difficult to find and run as much if not more than vinyl. 
If you like junk food, digital is fine. If you prefer more tasty and healthy cuisine stay with analogue.
Please can we have a ban on repeat posting of this topic?

Why does everyone want to weigh in EVERY time?
Do they just pick from a library of old posts?
I read nothing above but the topic title.
Digital of course...

It is more precise, noise free, much more practical to play and it is 21st century technology.

Plus, you do not destroy the medium every time you listen to it, albeit small.

Oh, you almost had me. For a minute I thought you were serious.

Good one........touche'
Get it all right, and Analog is the best. Get it wrong, not so much. There is a lot to think about when assembling a good sounding analog rig. Cartridge load/capacitance, azimuth, VTA, SRA, VTF, Alignment....also resonance. Proper isolation of the turntable, the use of proper low capacitance interconnects, the cleanliness of your lp's....proper SUT if using a MC cartridge, the quality of your phono Preamplifier, etc etc etc....whereas with digital, there is far far less to worry about. I'll put up with all the hassle with analog to arrive at a better place ultimately. 
Oh boy, once again the mantra of this topic should be: "it depends". 
What is the make and model of your cartridge?

Shape of stylus, condition of the record, mastering situation, quality of raw vinyl, and how many presses from each child. How clean is the record?OTOH, I just caught a couple hours of some great Bob James on Deezer in high quality without moving from my chair. It’s all good; enjoy the music. 

And of course the OP of the stupid question goes missing...
The quality of the topics at the top of this forum is very low or very old hat right now. C’est la vie.
The quality of the topics at the top of this forum is very low or very old hat right now. C’est la vie.

@lewm

agree 100%

so much pointless 💩-stirring - minimal substantive enthusiast discussion
 For me, its all in the engineering and mastering. Vinyl can sound better and it does a large part of the time in my system. I have a 10k TT and a TOTL 7k SACD player. I have many titles in both CD and vinyl. So there is not a solid no or yes answer to this. The answer is in a grey area. At the less expensive end a $500 CD player will beat a $500 TT set up a majority of the time. So I'm leaning to Yes digital sounds better because the average listener is not going to spend the cash on a turntable, tonearm, phono preamp, cartridge and a support base and the dedication to keep their records imaculate to bring out the virtues of vinyl that a enthusiastic audiophile would. This argument will never end because there are too many variables. I hope I put some clarity in this subject. Thanks for reading
Sorry for not responding sooner.  I have been busy eating and cooking crawfish plus adult activities.   My digital front end is Cambridge CX81 w Cambridge CXU with a Western Digital 4 TB  MYBOOK.  99% of the songs are in flac.  My speakers are REVEL F208's   I just find analog has more texture if that makes sense  Im going upgrade the phono preamp

I do have a few SACD's  Yellow Brick yard and The Stranger  Dire Straits.
Digital to me is more convenient.   I did have a lower end Decware amp that I used w Tekton Pendragons,   I found the amp did not provide enough bass.

I had a few Makers Mark at the time I posted this.  I hope I didn't open up old wounds      Geaux Tigers