Analog vs. CDP: A fair comparison?

It all depends on what is important to you. If absence of surface noise, idiot-proof operation/maintenance, multichannel potential, and low cost are important you should stay with digital. On the other hand there are a subset of audiophiles who have an almost religious belief in vinyl. If you can pay the dues to join this club, and have the patience to "properly" set up and maintain your hardware and LPs they say it's nirvana. Don't know...never been there.

Eldee: I take it you mean "never been to nirvana"...I know you've been an owner of turntables and records!

Zaikesman...I used to think my LP equipment was OK until I got lectured by Albert and his crew! It, and other systems I have heard, have never delivered the quality of sound that vinyl fans describe, and so, for me, digital is better.

E: I think choice of program material also has something to do with this -- if I listened primarily to classical, where noise and time limits can be more intrusive, I'd probably find more reasons to enjoy digital. Personally, I think CD and LP can each show faults compared to the other in different ways, but also believe mastering quality is really the main determinant (assuming the playback quality is on a par). Of course, neither my digital nor analog playback chains, nor the rest of my system through which I hear them, are anywhere near SOTA...

Zaikesman...You are correct in that program material which is recorded on vinyl at a uniformly loud level, ( not typical of classical) but not so loud as to cause mistracking, yields excellent sound, without intrusive surface noise. Of course this fact was the basis of the DBX LP recording system that I found to be excellent.