Cleeds & others here point to the issues of the "evidence" presented by the question. The virtues of analog are an inconvenient truth for those not at all prepared to do genuine comparative testing & do not trust or have developed their intuition to properly & deeply do so. I'm always a little surprised to almost never encounter any reference to the top (or really any other) audio reviewers when sound quality is discussed in AG forums. Valin (perhaps the most respected) of Ab Sound has said digital can sound excellent but is no match for analog as far as low-level information is concerned in numerous areas.
It's like not trusting your eyes to evaluate Art & needing scientific tests to verify what you think you see - or want to. Anyone who claims the long discredited history of putting science before listening is miraculously been overturned will always try to falsely claim they've found data that "proves" their point.
It's like not trusting your eyes to evaluate Art & needing scientific tests to verify what you think you see - or want to. Anyone who claims the long discredited history of putting science before listening is miraculously been overturned will always try to falsely claim they've found data that "proves" their point.