Which is more accurate: digital or vinyl?

I would say vinyl still has the edge. Through the whole process, it also keeps it in the same mechanical vibration format it started out in, and is reproduced by the speakers in that manner, the same as we hear. The gap has closed quite a bit though. I use more digital because of the convenience, and availability.

I see digital as inherently more precise in that vinyl results can vary much more widely I think.

I was under the impression of all things being equal. IOW, the best analog system and record, along with the best CD and player. Still a digital system can have a sonic characteristic that's not natural. I had a Luxman CD player years back that could not make anything sound real. Also a couple of other brands of CD players, or DAC's. I've heard plenty of bad sounding records, but they still somewhat sound more like the original source, than a bad sounding digital reproduction. After hearing some fairly bad digital reproductions, I find that I still hear that artificial reproduction in some pricey players. With analog, I never get fatigue, or those odd artifacts even from the worst records I've had. Bringing tolerances into it changes it some, but still I think vinyl has the edge.

I suppose one could make the argument that on the molecular level, analog tape provides no more than random samplings.
Unsound (System | Threads | Answers | This Thread)

Then if you take that same tape with its particles and use if for a digital recording, maybe you'll get different digital defects?

11-07-11: Unsound
Hifihvn, no, not unless the analog tape's sampling is very much larger than microscopic.
Unsound (System | Threads | Answers | This Thread)

After thinking about it more, we do hear the hiss from audio tape, even on the masters. I actually wonder if it does play games with the bit-stream when this same type of tape is used for digital?