Vinyl vs Streaming

@ghdprentice I agree with you............mostly. I do think that the very most important piece is the recording itself. If it is the absolute best that it can be in analog and in digital, which one is actually superior? You have a great deal invested in both or all sides of your system. I admire that and would love to hear it or something like it but I probably never will have that opportunity.

I'm not looking to argue anything with anyone (I don't think you are either). Just trying to find an answer if one exists. Maybe it doesn't yet. It just seems like there should be a way to measure it somehow besides our own ears. I don't want to sound like an ASR advocate but...............well, I just don't know. It seems that this should be measurable in some way just as in my photography analogy. It simply came down to megapixels or dots per inch. Digital surpassed analog photos at roughly 7 megapixels. The "music picture" should be measurable in some way as well..........at least in my mind.

@billpete 

Ok, I think I understand what you are asking. I typically approach these problems from a pragmatic side. Here are some theoretical limits of vinyl vs digital

I tried a number of queries and an AI came up with this answer from a theoretical perspective:
 

A fair engineering estimate is that the best vinyl playback lands roughly in the neighborhood of 10 to 12 bits of effective amplitude resolution, paired with bandwidth that is broadly comparable to about 44.1 or 48 kHz digital sampling. That is because top vinyl playback usually delivers something like 55 to 70 dB of usable dynamic range, while 16-bit digital provides about 96 dB of dynamic range, so vinyl falls well short of 16-bit on noise floor alone. 

So if you wanted the digital format that best matches the best analog vinyl, I would say:

About 12-bit / 44.1 kHz is a reasonable rough equivalence.
Not exact… but in the ballpark. 

Why that answer?

Digital has two separate axes:

Bit depth maps most closely to dynamic range / noise floor.
Using the standard rule of roughly 6 dB per bit, 60 dB of vinyl-like dynamic range works out to about 10 bits, and 72 dB works out to about 12 bits. That is why people often treat very good vinyl as somewhere around 10–12 effective bits. 

Sample rate maps most closely to frequency bandwidth.
If vinyl can reach roughly the top of the audible band under good conditions, then 44.1 kHz digital already covers that, because it can represent frequencies up to a little above 22 kHz under the sampling theorem. 

But there is an important catch…

Vinyl does not fail like digital fails. It is not cleanly “12-bit.” Its limits vary with groove position, cartridge alignment, record wear, cutting level, pressing quality, and frequency. Inner grooves are worse than outer grooves, and distortion rises in ways that do not map neatly to bits. So “12-bit / 44.1 kHz” is only a rough analog-to-digital translation, not a literal one. 

So the simplest answer is:

Best-case vinyl ≈ roughly 12-bit, 44.1 kHz digital
Typical vinyl often behaves more like 10-bit or 11-bit equivalent

And that is why CD-quality digital already exceeds vinyl technically, even though many listeners still prefer vinyl subjectively.

I live in the Pacific Northwest. I’d love to have you over if you get up here. Just send me a direct message. 

@ghdprentice I think it must be more complicated than the explanations that we have. 16/44 RBCD playback is not without flaws. Again, some is much better than others so we are up against "quality recording" vs garbage in all media as both exist in all media. In my own system, the very best RBCD recordings that I have, are at least pleasing to the ears, although I do often find them fatiguing over time and I find analog recording to be pleasing at higher decibel levels than the same in digital format. HDCD is much closer to my best vinyl but still not 100% there, just getting very close. My system is what it is and is all I have. Nothing wrong with it but it isn't 100k system either. Most of it is quite old and it would be difficult to even measure it's value even though prices can be assessed to each piece, they are no longer being made for the most part. Anyway, that's kind of pointless blather I suppose.

The point that I'm trying to make is that there is missing data (music) in typical RBCD playback, more so than in quality LP playback. I don't understand why this is if the numbers say different. There is a harshness and lack of fluidity which does not exist in quality analog. This is not always true but in comparing the best of both worlds (and with my system), it is the general rule. Am I making any sense? 

Vinyl can’t be mapped to a resolution of digital. There are no bits and nothing to process and convert unless you’re using ADC. 
Furthermore, it is impossible to measure musical engagement with an oscilloscope. You cannot measure the naturalness of tone either. 

Our preferences are never the same. Some value total silence and have zero tolerance for any type of imperfection. Even at the expense tonality and musical engagement. Some value convenience over anything else. Some are amazed by technology and don’t care about anything else. 
 

It’s like saying a Tesla Model 3 Performance is better than a BMW M3 because it has full self driving and can hit 0-60 in 2.9 seconds. It has zero feel and is completely artificial. Some absolutely love it. It can drive you around and you can even summon it from a parking spot to come to the front of the store where you’re standing with shopping bags. But…it’s completely anemic, has zero feel and zero engagement factor. It has superior technology in electronics that’s about it. I’ll take the noisy and rumbling BMW where I can feel the thing breathing and screaming. 
Different vibes for different tribes…
 

@billpete 

HDCD is much closer to my best vinyl but still not 100% there, just getting very close. 

I've found that rips from HDCDs that took advantage of the extra resolution usually sounded especially good. At one point before high res appeared, I tested a couple of thousand CDs to see if any had HDCD coding. There were several that were not marked as such. Also I looked through an online registry of HDCDs to see if there was any worth buying.

I wondered if more care was taken over the mastering than for the typical standard 16 bit CD.