Digital LP’s

Vinyl actually has less dynamic range than a 16 bit CD. But for pop and rock music dynamic range is pretty irrelevant as most recordings are compressed into a very narrow dynamic range window. Perceived differences between vinyl and CD are very dependent on mastering and on the relative quality of the playback systems used to make the comparison.

There's still loads to unpick in this interesting discussion.

The vinyl production process is different to that for CD because on top of the choices made by the mastering engineer, the cutting engineer has to make a set of additional choices over and above those made by the mastering engineer as and between bandwidth, dynamic range and running time. So most of the time, the sound of what goes on to the final analogue reproduction medium can never be the same as what goes onto the digital.

By the way, I have very high resolution CD/SACD, Vinyl and Streaming front ends and I'm not biased towards any one of those. However, if I am going to purchase a digital recording, I'll do so on a digital medium rather than having that recording put through an additional step in being transcribed to vinyl.

+1 jji666. Part of the bad reputation of CD arises because a lot of the ADCs and DAC's in the early days of CD weren't capable of true 16 bit resolution. Since then there have been significant improvements in converter and filter design that have led to improved sound from CD.

A lot of so-called High Rez recordings don't have the frequency response or dynamic range to need 24/96 resolution in the first place. Some do and I enjoy them for that.  But to speak to your reference to "care", they are often more purist recordings where the quality of the engineering is probably a bigger determinant of their sound quality than whether they are 16/44 or 24/96.