The article is correct in that what sounds better to a person is likely to be his or her preferred medium. I think this is somewhat generational. If you came of age in the 60's, there is a better than even chance that you will prefer the sound of vinyl through a quality reproduction system (read high-end). If you came of age after 1990, there is a good chance you prefer digital formats and, further, if you are not an obsessive audio person (like most people reading this thread), you probably rarely listen to a high-end audio system. You likely listen to most of your music on ear-buds or phones. Can it sound good? You bet. Can it sound as good as vinyl through a Thorens turntable, McIntosh preamp and amp, and top of the line Klipsch speakers? Not in a million years. But, as I've stated in other threads, us older guys came up willing to sit down in a listening space, block out everything else, and absorb the wonder of the reproduced performance. Most people under the age of 40 are unlikely to put their phone, iPad and laptop down for 40 minutes to listen to an LP equivalent of music (Again, present company excepted). Does any of this mean one way is "better" than the other? Not at all. It just means we are all looking for different things from our music listening. I absolutely believe the techs in the article who claim that all electrical measurements prove that digital recording is more accurate. But when I want to spend some time in dedicated listening to music, it will likely be from a vinyl source.
