When and how did you, if at all, realize vinyl is better?

It is quite revealing how many of you guys support your self-fulling prophesy of vinyl adoration. The most revealing are the ones who denigrate cheap 1980's and 1990's CD players, as compared to your Koetsu's etc. Jeez! Get real. How many of you have actually compared comparably priced CD vs. LP equipment on a recording that had very specisl attention to quality and was released on both formats, with the LP on direct to disc? Try Sheffield's recording of Thelma Houston's "pressure Cooker", originally only on D to D vinyl, but decades later  on CD from un-publicized, hidden(?) tapes. Then get back to us. It really would be a shame if your thousands of dollar, if not tens of thousands of dollar turntable systems sounded worse than a decades old, pre-worth-a-darn CD. I wonder if you could justify hearing a good CD drivin system without serious cognative dissonance.

First realized the superiority of vinyl in the early days, when I bought a CD of a favourite recording (Joan Sutherland, Lakme). Then I asked for in-home demos of digital and analogue at the same (high) price point. It was no contest then, and it is no contest now, although the price points have risen by an order of magnitude.

My dealer, a trusted man of good taste, astonished me by preferring digital. He explained that while he could hear electronic distortion, he didn't really mind it, but couldn't abide any degree of speed variation. With me it's the other way, and I have never heard digital that I could listen to, even a six box cost-no-object DIY.

Well, Dan, it seems that our minds think along similar lines. I composed my post before seeing yours. The similarities are striking, even down to the Koetsu!

@danvignau that would be me also, I like cassette sound recorded on Nakamichi LX3 off Sony D-7 Discman when listening through the same hp amp and HD600 to the "master" CD. Extra wow and flutter must have painted over digital deficiencies and I find them more "natural" sounding. Mike Fremer said something similar in one of his YouTube blogs, that he prefers analog distortions 

@lowrider57

Thanks for the answer, I think I was trying to say what you are saying, you being more eloquent on the way of articulating it. I do believe the LP is warmer, but for the reasons mentioned, the EQ at the production stage, the "artist/mastering engineer" (that, after all, has the job of making a recording "fit" the LP media), and even (not odd, i.e. 2, 4, 6, 8, etc) harmonics distorsion, that we like to read this or not... After all, listen to a piano and punch the two C (one octave apart), IT IS warmer, much more rich than a single note, no wonder we humans like "even" harmonics...

On another note, I am always amazed how many people that I talked to in my youth, never noticed the distorsion (with the treble going out) of an LP near the inner grooves; out at the end of a side.  You turn the record over, and suddently the sound comes less distorsioned and treble is at max. This can be explained for anybody who studied physics.  The tangential velocity of an LP is probably double that of the one at the end. This means that at the beginning of the record, the 33rpm is like more equal to 16 rpm at the end, or 66rpm at the beginning would equal 33 at the end, something like this. I don't know the exact value, but it is quite heard... I often wondered, in fact, if more complex tracks were not put at the beginning of an LP for this reason.  Yes the mastering engineer can relax the space between groove when the lacquer is cut, but the speed cannot be changed.

For the RIAA curve, I am not sure if I agree. Normally when you pre-emphasis and you de-emphasis using the same amount the result should be the same. However tolerances of the system may come into play. For that reason and for the fact that compression combined with the EQ (RIAA) your point may be valid.