What LP shows what analog can do?

Vannorm...I tried it for-30 plus years.

Some CD's are lousy, as you describe, but others are good. Same can be said for LPs.

From the album cover of Audio Fidelity Stereodisc AFSD 5861 ("Minstrel Time with the Dukes of Dixieland")...

"Audio Fidelity Records produced and released the world's first Stereophonic High Fidelity record (Stereodisc) in November , 1957".

I don't have that first disc (also Dukes of Dixieland) but I do have several others issued at the same time which have never been surpassed for audio quality in almost 50 years!!

Recently I picked up a reissue CD of the Dukes, and was disappointed. Not as good as the record, but I think the CD was just badly mastered. I guess I'll just have to keep the turntable in working condition.

Dougdeacon...The lack of classical examples is explained by the fact that classical work usually involves wide dynamic range, whereas pop and rock is loud, loud, loud. When classical music enters a quiet passage, the flaws of LPs (LF rumble and HF scratch and pops) become annoying.

In an earlier comment I suggested that some of the very first stereo recordings were the best. (Vanguard put out some good ones too). I think the reason for this was that they said "Stereo...that means two microphones" and that's what they used. 24 channel master tapes came into vogue later, because little care was necessary during the recording session, the idea being that everything could be fixed by the mixdown. The result was often mush.

Also, in the beginning each channel was cut full range (20 to 20KHz). However, this resulted in vertical groove modulation that most pickups could not handle, so it became usual practice to "blend" the Lows (make them mono). Of course we audiophiles have better pickups that are perfectly capable of tracking LF vertical modulation, but usually there isn't anything to track.

I have not purchased any of the (expensive) newly made audiophile LPs. Perhaps these are cut without the compromises necessary for mass marketing.