Anyone notice different amounts of surface noise with different arms?

@mijostyn Thanks for the list!  One or the early upgrades I thought about was putting a Jico SAS/B stylus into my Shure V15, which I guess is 50 years old and has an elliptical stylus.  For about the same price I bought a new Audio Technica VM540ML cartridge, which seems to have the same MicroLine stylus as the SAS/B, albeit on an aluminium cantilever.  It makes it on to TAS' "50 Greatest Bargains in High-End Audio".  And I still have the complete Shure cartridge!

Had not thought of digitising my records, though I did record all my dad's records to tape.  I note that Presto Classical can now singly manufacture no-longer-available CDs from the back catalogues of record companies like Decca, Deutsche Grammophon, Philips, Sony etc.  They also had over 6,000 SACDs in their catalogue last time I counted.  And they have just introduced a streaming service including file downloads.

@rauliruegas All my records are in effect digitized as my phono stage runs directly into the ADC of the Lynx Hilo. I have gone back and forth between analog RIAA correction and digital RIAA correction and I can not tell the difference. I can record records either way. As far as the performance of my turntable is concerned, it is right up there with the very best. It has no bling. It is the cost effective way of going about it. I put it together to play music not stare at it. Could it be better? Yes, with the addition of a tangential tracking tonearm. No turntable/cartridge/tonearm combination can compete with the best 24/96 or 24/192 files. I have heard some great analog systems over the years and none of them can compete with a digitally corrected one. 

@richardbrand My DEQX preamp has a Volumio chip in it which connects with a multitude of streaming services. After doing some research I subscribed to Qobuz and have been very happy with it. It is the first streaming service I have heard that matches Channel D's Pure Music program. I'll look into Presto Classical, Thanx for that.

@mijostyn As someone who listens for a living in my work which is tangential to the music industry, your blanket statement about that level digital being superior is completely fine for your ears. I’ve done the comparison in a room of people in a recording space with multiple analog sources  vs the best digital and every single analog source, tape or LP was preferred by the group. It’s just what you like, what sounds bring YOU pleasure. This group likes analog sound, you don’t. Blanket statements don’t apply. 

@dhcod I like sound, period. I did not say digital versions always sounds better. Digital sources can in the end provide better reproduction with lower noise and distortion. Whether or not a digital version sounds better is very dependent on mastering. At this point in history 95% of all music is recorded digitally. As for your group think, unless that type of comparison is done very carefully, blinding the panel it is virtually meaningless. 

The greatest sources of signal corruption are the loudspeakers and the room they are in. A system can be measured and these deficiencies corrected with digital signal processing without adding any distortion or noise. If starting with a digital recording it is best to stay digital until the very end of the chain, the amplifier. Going back and forth between formats is never a good thing. 

Anyone who always prefers analog sources and systems has a psychological issue. Nothing in this life is always except death and taxes.

@mijostyn :  As ​​​​​​@dhcod  said " It’s just what you like, what sounds bring YOU pleasure. "

Now, " I have gone back and forth between analog RIAA correction and digital RIAA correction and I can not tell the difference. " :

of course you can't because at the end your system and specially the bass range works in the digital domain. I'm not talking which RIAA is better but  maybe why you can't hear differences.

Anyway at the end we are listening what we like it and not what should be.

R.