When does analog compete with digital?

...when it comes to more complex music, I much prefer the analytical sound of digital, which is more clear and 'in your face', so to speak.

FWIW, the opposite is true in my system. On music of any complexity, regardless of genre, my vinyl setup challenges the clarity of my digital, exceeds it in presence (if that's what "in your face" means) and demolishes it in terms of low level detail, micro-dynamics and harmonic complexity.

My system differs from yours, obviously. My pretty decent digital player retails for just $2K (+ another $2K for interconnects). My vinyl front end retails for over $20K.

Why this particular ratio? Why not a $20K digital source and a $2-4K vinyl one? Because IME my ratio provides better sound for the money.

No digital front end I've heard - at any price - can approach a really good vinyl rig. IMO this is because the two systems are flawed in fundamentally different ways.

Most vinyl flaws are generated during playback, which means they can be reduced by user involvement (better setup, better gear). OTOH, many digital flaws are inherent in the medium and cannot be reduced by the user for any price.

Further, with vinyl the performance ceiling has not yet been reached. No vinyl replay system in existence is capable of extracting all the information in an LP groove. Despite my seemingly crazy ratio, there are upgrades that would take my vinyl rig's performance even higher. Analog sources contain enough musical information to allow changes in even a high end playback system to make real improvements.

So, as others have said, the better question would be, "When does digital compete with analog?" IME the answer is, "When the analog playback system is of a low enough level so that its (avoidable) flaws outweigh the (unavoidable) flaws built into existing digital media."

Good post by Cerrot. I'd offer a teensy semi-correction. IME one can get where he described with *some* inexpensive cartridges, provided everything else in the vinyl front end is up to snuff.

For example, I own a $125 MM. If I put it in my main system ($6K table, $5K arm, $8K phono stage) it performs pretty much as Cerrot described and delivers a good portion of what great vinyl replay has to offer.

As he noted, however, this would not happen if I cheaped out on any of the other three components, not even if I used my costly LOMC. To hear what vinyl can do, table, arm and phono stage must be very good and in these categories good doesn't come cheap.

Agree completely that the large majority of people, even many audiophiles, have never heard a high end vinyl setup. Such a visitor's reaction is as predictable as it is enjoyable: eyes pop, jaws drop, they're typically overwhelmed by the volume of musical information they're hearing for the first time. Records they thought they new well (from the CD) become a completely new experience.

Unfortunately, when they see the work and cost required to achieve this most realize it's just not for them. They're happy to buy me a bottle of wine from time to time in order to hear it again though. ;-)