There's nothing, repeat NOTHING, about vinyl itself that makes the music sound better. What you're hearing is recording technique that didn't worship compression. THAT is what makes music sound better, and in fact, there are CDs that use precisely this type of careful, realistic, non-compressed technique, and they sound awesome. As I said multiple times above, go get a Telarc reference CD and sit and listen to it on a good system. You'll be glad you did.

Vinyl doesn't do a thing to, or for, dynamic range. In fact, vinyl has less dynamic range than CDs do by quite a bit (about 60 dB for vinyl as compared to close to 90 dB for CDs.) What the critical issue is, is that back in the day, the engineers making the recording didn't compress the music, so what is on the record closely tracks what you would have heard with your ears. On other words, it sounds lke you expect it to sound, and your mind knows it's just closer to being "right." You have literally trained your ears all your life to know what things are supposed to sound like.

Today, engineers compress like crazy, and so even though the CD is *capable* of greater dynamic range, you rarely get to hear that taken advantage of in modern recording, particularly in the pop and rock genres. Instead, everything is as loud as possible. Ugh.

But you can in fact find some CDs that were recorded quite carefully -- and when you do, you'll know it right away. They sound MUCH better. Try Telarc's reference series for a starter. Mostly classical, but it'll "tune your ears up" so you know what you're listening for. Once you do, though, it's difficult to go back. Just fair warning.

Yes, if you like vinyl -- for ANY reason -- that's fine, and no one should tell you that you are wrong to listen to it. What *isn't* fine is trying to say that given quality reproductive hardware for both, vinyl will inherently sound better than CDs, because what that is, is trying to substitute your own pseudo-facts for reality. CDs are better for recording and playback. It's all in how that process is pursued as to whether they live up to that potential. And that's a whole 'nuther story.

The first is really not anything to do with the media. The first advantage is that back in the day, recording engineers didn't compress the life out of the music the way they do today. A CD has more dynamic range *capability*, but you don't usually get to hear it because of how bad the actual recording technique is now. Standard CD's (meaning, not SACD or DVD-Audio, etc.) also offer lower noise, no rumble, no wow, no flutter, more consistent and longer lasting frequency response right up *way* past where you can hear anything unless you're a dog or a bat, better stereo separation, no groove wear, no stylus wear (no stylus!), no tracking error, constant (and very low) THD, no audio feedback path and so they bring the ability to play back at ANY volume, all in a smaller, tougher form factor that can carry data like song, artist as well as the music itself. Vinyl, on the other hand, griefs you with the other side of each one of those coins to various annoying degrees. CD's can outperform vinyl on every audio front imaginable.

The second advantage, again, doesn't really have anything to do with the vinyl itself, but more with the media companies: You simply can't get some recordings on CD (unless you put them there yourself.) The record companies, the lawyers, the agreements, the cluetards in congress... all combine to make it very, very difficult, sometimes impossible, to get certain recordings to CD, so sometimes the original vinyl is all there is. And of course, the longer this goes on, the more the original studio tapes degrade (assuming they still exist, which they may in fact not) and so the more valuable the vinyl becomes. This, in fact, is the single reason why I still own a (relatively) high end turntable.

It is a rare audiophile indeed who actually understands what it is they are hearing, and why it sounds better (if indeed it does... stories of the idiots who buy stratospherically priced cables made of exotic materials and polished wooden knobs to "warm up" sound abound... as do companies selling such foolery. PT Barnum explains the success of those companies: There's a sucker born every minute.)

Next time someone claims vinyl "sounds better", all you really need to do is come prepared with a Telarc reference CD; these are recorded properly, contain honest dynamic range, audio levels that go from the merest whispers to "blow your ears out" (seriously -- try the 1812 overture, for example.) If your supposed audiophile has even half-decent ears, they will positively *swoon* over the Telarc CD. It's just that good. The sad thing is that all of your music could have been recorded that well, if the recording studios weren't engaged in the most ridiculous war to make sure their records are as loud -- no kidding -- as everyone else's. Otherwise, you see, a tune played on the radio or on your stereo might require you to adjust the volume control, and we Can't Have That! So these lunatics compress the life out of everything and in the end, most modern CDs sound flat and just... wrong to educated ears.

And don't even get me started on tubes as opposed to decent transistor design. Much the same story. 99% nonsense, 1% love of that yellow glow, and yes, I will admit it: Transistors just don't glow. Well, they might, but at that point you've let the smoke out and things will not be going well for you.