Does Anyone Think CD is Better Than Vinyl/Analog?

Hold on there Tim. Most music after 1990 is recorded in hi res digital.
Older issue may still be analog but much of that has been digitized. Yes, there are companies that specialize in very high quality recording. I get D2D discs from Bandcamp and they are excellent if you like the music. If you don't like the music how it was recorded means nothing. The question becomes what version of the album that I want sounds best? So you check out what is available. If it is an older analog recording I will go with the Vinyl if it is available. With a newer digital recording I'll go with the highest resolution I can get or Vinyl. You would be surprised at how much better some 16/44.1 discs sound when you oversample them and move the filters up out of the way. I find that HD Tracks does an excellent job for the most part and I would bet the record companies get the lion's share of responsibility for how the recordings are transferred. It is not like HD Tracks is trying to do this under the table. Most of my new material comes from HD tracks. The industry is obviously learning to trust them as a very legitimate storefront. As for which format sounds best? That has more to do with other issues than the sampling rate and bit depth.

@noble100  Thank you for your informed response.  About 2,500 of my 7,000 CD collection consists of music not seen (and probably never will be available) on streaming or any other format.  They consist of ethnic, proprietary (my own orchestral, chamber and choral recordings of the past 35 years, 20+ years digital) and remasterings of 78 rpm records with esoteric/subsription labels Marston, Romophone and Biddulph for instance.  Another 2,500 CDs of the analog LP era are not currently available on streaming and some of the other 2,500 CDs that are available for streaming used inferior masterings/versions of the CDs.  So, perhaps 1,000 of my CDs would or could sound better on streaming.  

Knowing that upgrading to a Esoteric, Jay's Audio or Denafrips transport won't make much difference in my CD sound quality is very helpful.  I'll use the savings for another cartridge or tweaks to my system.  

No matter which medium you prefer, fleschler makes an excellent argument for not callously tossing your old recordings away when you buy a replacement.  Yeah, clutter does clutter up your life, but who knows what magic might happen when you run that ratty old CD through that new diamond-studded DAC?

Nah, that is why I have everything ripped with multiple backups :-)  The CDs have long been in storage.

mijostyn: " Hold on there Tim. Most music after 1990 is recorded in hi res digital.
Older issue may still be analog but much of that has been digitized."

Hello mijostyn,

     I do not believe it’s true that most music after 1990 is recorded in hi-res digital or, more specifically, most music has not been generally recorded ’directly’ to hi-res digital. My reasoning is that, if music recorded after 1990 actually was recorded direct to hi-res digital, it would be obvious to all since they would perform and sound a whole heck of a lot better than they actually do.
     My main point is that the provenance of master recordings, if accurate, are excellent tools in determining the actual sound quality potential of those master recordings and the source material copies made from them. Statements that "the master was recorded direct to hi-res digital", or even "the master was recorded and mixed direct to hi-res digital", are very good indicators of high quality performers.
     Statements similar to "the recording was remastered to hi-res digital", are very good indicators of music, originally recorded directly to a non-hi-res bucket or format, and then merely transferred to a much higher capacity hi-res digital bucket or format. In my previous post, I was stating my opinion that these transfers are best avoided for optimum results.
     I only mentioned HD Tracks, as a prime example of a purveyor of these source material recordings with poor performance due to poor provenances, because it was my disappointment with their "remastered to hi-res digital" products that initially spurred me to investigate and discover the critical, but rarely mentioned, importance of master recording provenances.
     I don’t believe HD Tracks is the only seller that tends to obscure, or at least avoid mentioning, the critical importance that master recording provenance plays in determining the quality of their products. I think this is a marketing mistake and that a better strategy would entail educating consumers on the truth, emphasizing the very obvious sound quality differences between transfers and direct to hi-res digital recordings and increasing profits by charging a premium for the good stuff. I’d definitely and gladly pay a premium.
     My current opinion is that provenance is destiny concerning the sound quality of recordings. Ideally, recording companies and musicians will recognize this fact and make recording masters directly to hi-res digital the new standard method.

Tim