A clean record did sound superb
Unfortunately I don't think I've got any without the odd scratch or dirt in them now.

A few years ago I listened to an vinyl audiophile version of the Rolling Stones "Hot Rocks" album on a Mitchell Gyrodec, compared to my decent Sony CD player (same power amps and speakers).

The CD sounded really good through the setup, but when we put the vinyl on the difference made the hairs on my neck stand up. You could "hear the soundstage" and almost pinpoint where people were standing.

Obviously you needed a quiet room, perfect speaker positioning, £20k of equipment etc., to hear the difference, but it was there.

I should think 99% of the population don't get a chance to compare CD to MP3, and that think their little earphones give good quality. In the end it's all down to what you're able to hear, what you can afford and what you're happy to put up with.

No doubt today a decent digital setup can easily match an analogue setup, providing the source has at least as much information as a CD/SACD.
(Kliper Filllets Getting noticed by twats on the internet since, Tue 12 Jun 2012, 11:23, 3 replies)

I do rip my CDs to a lossless format when I can. The problem is, if you haven't got £500 to spend on headphones or £3k for a sound system then it sounds the same as a 192 MP3
(tyrellsOwl, Tue 12 Jun 2012, 11:36, closed)

I work with a chap that extolled the virtues of MP3's
Said he had thousands of songs on his player.
I did suggest that the compression required would affect the quality. His reply; "MP3's aren't that bad a compression format".
When asked to name a popular format that was worse, he couldn't.

(OK low compression won't sound much different from CD's, but technically I think I made my point).
(Kliper Filllets Getting noticed by twats on the internet since, Tue 12 Jun 2012, 14:16, closed)

Even on my relatively modest set-up...
...a decent 12 inch single will blow the pants off any cd version.
(minimalist ..., Tue 12 Jun 2012, 13:58, closed)

Were the CD and the vinyl cut from the same masters?
If they were I'll be genuinely impressed.
( The Mock TurtIe ™ --- Thinks you are a cunt, on, Wed 13 Jun 2012, 0:50, closed)

I don't know
But it took a record deck with a stylus worth more than my modest £600 CD player to bring out the information.

That was a good 15 years ago, so by now my CD will sound the same but I can't say the record and stylus will have lasted so well.
(Kliper Filllets Getting noticed by twats on the internet since, Wed 13 Jun 2012, 7:13, closed)

To me it sounds like the difference lay in the way the two versions of the album were mixed, rather than the physical format of the recording.

( The Mock TurtIe ™ --- Thinks you are a cunt, on, Wed 13 Jun 2012, 20:40, closed)

Possibly
The CD was no doubt done 'on the cheap', although I'm not sure how much effort would have gone into the vinyl. It wasn't *that* expensive.
(Kliper Filllets Getting noticed by twats on the internet since, Thu 14 Jun 2012, 12:20, closed)