It is a hopeless argument but always an interesting discussion. Having myself listened to nothing but analog (vinyl, tape, even a few pre-RIAA shellac 78s) for the first 2/3 or so of my life, I recall that the advent of CDs was a revelation of clarity on familiar remastered recordings. I see no earthly reason to change that opinion today. Any issues I've ever had with CDs have been due to poorly recorded disks, remixes that failed to capture the moment (perhaps due to more competent original mixing) or subpar playback equipment.
It would certainly be fun to hear the exact same performance mastered/pressed purely in analog and mastered/burned purely in digital, and A/B both on perfect playback equipment. Alas, I'm restricted to hearing (e.g.) Van Cliburn recorded on tape long ago and mastered either to vinyl long ago or remastered to CD less long ago. In such comparisons, a good CD (mine is RCA, same as the old vinyl) wins by a mile. The 1961 record is made from good vinyl but alas is no longer virgin or even close. The CD remains 'virgin', as does its ripped image. The practical side of the inequality strongly tilts to digital, as the market has demonstrated. The pure quality question is impossibly subjective. Does a modern digital recording sound better pressed to vinyl through a DAC than downsampled onto a CD? Better yet, does a master tape sound better than an HD digital master of the same performance?
There was a reason we went haywire for Burwen pop/tick removers and sliding-filter dynamic noise reduction devices in the 70s and early 80s, and we used them despite the end product being brutal next to a remastering to CD.
It would certainly be fun to hear the exact same performance mastered/pressed purely in analog and mastered/burned purely in digital, and A/B both on perfect playback equipment. Alas, I'm restricted to hearing (e.g.) Van Cliburn recorded on tape long ago and mastered either to vinyl long ago or remastered to CD less long ago. In such comparisons, a good CD (mine is RCA, same as the old vinyl) wins by a mile. The 1961 record is made from good vinyl but alas is no longer virgin or even close. The CD remains 'virgin', as does its ripped image. The practical side of the inequality strongly tilts to digital, as the market has demonstrated. The pure quality question is impossibly subjective. Does a modern digital recording sound better pressed to vinyl through a DAC than downsampled onto a CD? Better yet, does a master tape sound better than an HD digital master of the same performance?
There was a reason we went haywire for Burwen pop/tick removers and sliding-filter dynamic noise reduction devices in the 70s and early 80s, and we used them despite the end product being brutal next to a remastering to CD.