CD vs. Vinyl

"I wonder if the sound of vinyl is in some ways similar to the "color" of speakers? It's not so much of an information difference, just the sound of the medium?"

As we are talking about exceptional vinyl replay vs exceptional digital replay I believe you will hear more detail and thus experience a more realistic presentation via vinyl so I would say no it is not just a coloration. There are, however some caveats which relate to the three "situations" you propose. Really, I refer to situations one and three as I am not sure how many instances of the second situation are out there. Comparing the same performance, recorded on two mediums at the same time would be interesting and I am sure someone has done it but I have nothing in my library that I can listen to to form an opinion.

IMO digital comes closest to vinyl when comparing it with analog playback of digitally mastered material and with HI Res files in particular digital comes very, very close. I have never heard, however any recording of the same performance actually sound better via digital than it does via vinyl.

On the other hand if we compare the original analog recording with an a/d conversion in my experience the differences and superiority of vinyl are immense even using less than the very best pressings of vinyl.

When you get to some of the very best vinyl recordings via analog you are able to immerse yourself in the performance in a way that I do not believe is possible via even the best digital.

In my system I have room for both mediums and get enjoyment from both but I seek out digital only when the performance is unavailable on vinyl.

there are exception in digital that comes very close to vinyl. To my ears, Dvd-Audio by far the closes to vinyl playback.

If you get a chance to hear Diana Krall's CD, SACD, DVD-Audio and LP ( since her albums are available in all formats ) then you can tell us how you feel about all different format.

at the risk of redundancy, digital and vinyl are diffferent. one is not better than the other. so as to avoid being accused of either being a pedant or of sounding overly didactic, i will say that when one discusses aesthetic endeavors--art, food, movies, books audio, e.g., it is often arbitrary to say that one instance is better than another. again as an example, to say that one movie is better than another is philosophical in nature, an opinion and cannot be proven.

i know, a lot cannot be proven and we are entitled to my oponions.

i have been accused of many things,--iconoclast, lousy ears, contrary, etc. .

the point is the realm of audio is entirely philosophical.
there is no definitive conclusion to a philosophical argument.

enjoy your vinyl, assert that vinyl is better than digitla. its a matter of taste.

when using the word better, it helps to define what is good, better and best.

audiophiles will differ as to these things.

i'm ready for any invectives that come my way.

i believe what i learned in during my time in college in which i was enrolled in two philosophy courses justifies my position.

you may disagree.

I really agree with Mrtennis here. With an audio component, like with a mate, there are so many factors involved, some very hard to define because you are dealing with human senses, each factor can be better, worse, or just different from each other, and therefore a simple ranking becomes really treacherous.

In the listening experience that I refer to when I heard a CD vs. vinyl, the CD player wasn't at the same level as the turntable, but certainly wasn't a low end product. The salesman pointed out this fact and also noted that the difference was there, however maybe not as drastic, on more equal equipment.

My experience was that the CD sounded wonderful with the exception of the first few seconds after the switch from vinyl where it sounded harsh. Once my ears adjusted, it was again a wonderful sound.