How much do I need to spend to make vinyl sound better than digital?

$5,477.36

There is no simple answer to your question.  My best phono playback system (I have more than one) has a price tag of over $70K, my best cd player cost almost $17K.  Usually, the phono playback is the better of the two, but not always.  It depends of the recordings, how they were mastered and so on.  It is safe to say that the best bang for your buck is digital.  Chasing the elusive best sounding recording, whatever it is, is like chasing after the Holy Grail.  

$5,477.36 Yep that’s exactly what I came up with too. Great work middlemass.

Phonostage, phonostage, phonostage- don't forget the phonostage!

$5,477.36 including taxes and tariff charges is about right. Using  a significantly better phono pre and cart wil keep you content until you're prepared to spend another $5477.36 for a nice table/arm.

I think that @tablejockey is giving some good council.  Let's say you decide to pull the trigger and upgrade your table & cartridge.  Surely you would want an external phono preamp.  Why not add the phono pre now and see if it gets your system closer to where you want to be?  If that doesn't get it done, then you have a phono pre to upgrade your table around.  There's tons of great phono pre's out there with all kinds of different sound signatures.  Good luck and cheers.  

buy a set of cheap speakers. 

hook it up to your digital chain.

you are done. 

The issues you describe sound like it could be a less-than-optimized set-up.

My guess is that if you haven’t spent the time to fine-tune your table set up, then that’s where I’d start. Now, perhaps your particular model doesn’t allow for much fine-tuning, which would be a related issue. Nevertheless, if your cartridge isn’t perfectly aligned and sorted out together with your arm and table, then you’re not hearing what your rig is capable of.

I’d start there.

You’ll learn more about how it all fits and works together. There are various tools that can aid you. Do all that before investing in a new anything. Then, from there make a call.

Vinyl is an incredible medium but it takes work to optimize it.

These results are inevitably some combination of: 

• You might simply prefer the tyically "clean" sound of digital
• The kind of music material you enjoy has generally good mastering quality on digital; at level with or better than the vinyl alternatives
  • I enjoy a lot of 60 - 80s pop & rock - and this material fares much better on vinyl, IMO (on average)
  • Some of the 1990s+ Redbook CDs I have from Japan sound just as good as vinyl
• Poor isolation. A good headphone setup can reveal if that’s the problem or not!
• Your analog rig might not be that great. It could be one weak link in the chain, multiple pieces, or a bad match between anything. That said, if the above factors don’t swing you to vinyl, then there’s little point in spending gobs of time & money to improve your vinyl chain. 

And yet another opportunity for one of my favorites:

Typically, these days you can equal things by carefully choosing and investing about the same amount as your analog rig. For me my digital and analog sound simply stunning and the same... as I desired. You can see my systems under my userID.

For systems that are more budget oriented, sometimes you may need to spend a little more on digital... say maybe up to 20%. But this is changing rapidly. 

So roughly: Turntable + Phonostage = Streamer + DAC. 

You have to put the same effort you would into choosing a TT, cartridge and phonostage into the Streamer and DAC. My rough rule of thumb for a digital system is 30% speakers, 15% amp, 15% preamp, 15% DAC, and 15% streamer, 10% cables and interconnects. Really generally. Same for analog 15% TT and 15% phonostage. 

It can't be done. You could spend $100K on the most esoteric turntable, cartridge, tonearm, base, cables, and phono stage, and its potential sound quality will never equal that of spending $10K on a network player/streamer and DAC. It just is what it is.

Phono stage is extremely important.

Some Japanese CDs do sound relatively good, and my old CEC TL5100Z player is not too bad, but vinyl always sounds better with Nottingham table, often much better.

I no longer see the point of bothering with vinyl unless you have the funds to go first class with both vinyl and digital. A first class digital setup will not have you longing for vinyl so why bother. Now I can see going for the vinyl assuming one has both the funds and a large vinyl collection. I have around $25k in my vinyl setup, over 3k albums and rarely play vinyl.

ONE. MILLION. DOLLARS.

Seriously though. Despite what @ntpc4 claims (and baseless generalizations like that suck anyway), my $60K analog front end still completely smokes my $16K network streamer every day of the week. It’s not even close. :)

Vinyl sounds so good on my system I rarely even bother with digital, unless I want to audition some music I might buy on vinyl, or I want to play music that was recorded digitally in the first place. Vinyl for me is just about always more satisfying for listening to music. But I've been doing it for a long time, and have some 5000+ LPs.

Vinyl can never sound like SACD on a good player 

Before you spend any more, ensure your set up is spot on. If you aren't comfortable doing this yourself, enlist the help of someone who can. Pay them if you have to. Making sure you have that last ounce of performance out of your current rig can help you decide if you want to go further.

And I also agree with comments regarding how important the phono stage is.

Thanks, BigTwin. For a newbie who’s never seen it before, you made my day!

@lousyreeds1 

There is a great deal of good information and opinion in the above comments (thanks jpan, ghdprentice, mulveing, et.al.).

One key point - the gear is sounds no better than the source!  Always consider the quality of the recording that you are hearing BEFORE AND AFTER focusing on the gear...

After decades in this hobby, I strongly disagree with the statement that "You could spend $100K on the most esoteric turntable, cartridge, tonearm, base, cables, and phono stage, and its potential sound quality will never equal that of spending $10K on a network player/streamer and DAC. It just is what it is." 

To me, that is simply uninformed hyperbole: My experiences lead to the exact opposite conclusion.

For perspective - I attended a recent HiFi show, listening to dozens of modern digital systems (usually music-servers) from prominent manufactures.  I heard systems from most of the great manufacturers, plus many could-be-great-someday brands.   

ALL of the digital music was flat, homogenized and unengaging (always playing simple jazz - the 'slow pitch' of musical reproduction). 

I asked a couple vendors to play something more demanding, e.g. symphonic music.  NOT ONE of the digital systems (10k to 50k) sound sounded good, and certainly not as good as a 12K analogue system (~ 4k TT, 2k cart, 4k Phono-Pre). 

The next day I  listening at the doors as I walked down the hall.  I could immediately tell if the music was from a digital source (most were). Sadly, they were all-of-a-kind.  I could hear differences in speakers, but the sound was always quite limited. No point in entering the room...

Is Analogue is always better than digital - No. 

I once listened to a great digital-system in a showroom that was on-par with a good analogue system, but digital front-end cost >60K (total system was >1120k).  Still, it did not better sound better-in every-way than a typical 20k analogue source.  The digital sound had excellent resolution and truly 'black-backgrounds', but it did not match the harmonic richness of good analogue sources.

Sorry if this upsets the apple cart, but I encourage you to listen to more analogue systems, playing well recorded music.  I think that you will be pleasantly surprised.

Happy hunting.

P.S. my 2024 hearing test results indicated that I had markedly better-than-average hearing for my 60+ years.

@inagroove - One might also add that the gear sounds no better than the room, which is the biggest influence on sound. 

The price of a good new record.

to answer the OP question why not try this.....if you have a local Rega dealer chances are they will have a P6 with Exact on demo, see if you can borrow it and simply listen.....and three responses to look for

1...it sounds better or even much better

2.   it sounds about the same

3. it doesnt sound as good

avoid the black hole of endless terms used in the audio world to describe the sound

does it make you want to play records or even play record after record...... 

then it sounds better

do you kind of alternate your hands up and down.......

it sounds about the same

do you kind of scratch your head while listening....

then it sounds worse

the above comments about room acoustics, phono stages and isolation are all very good points....but one needs to start somewhere. 

and simply trust your ears.      Just my .02

If I hadn’t spent countless hours in record stores and reading The Penguin Guide to Classical Recordings, I would never start with vinyl now. 

I have the TT & Cart, had this same issue. Wanted my vinyl to sound better. 

Here is what I did.....

Upgraded my TT with upgraded cable, alm sub platter, acrylic platter, Sumiko Moonstone, lastly hi-power power supply. 

Everything helped a little, the cart was the biggest upgrade. Sadly the TT has a lot of noise, and no matter what will always be a low end TT.

Upgraded my TT to a Pro-Ject X2, with Amethyst cart & alm sub platter, along with a referb on my pre-amp. power supply & cable moved over to the X2. Everything is on another level, much lower noise, more detail, just sounds better everywhere. Sounds on par with my digital front end. 

IMHO, to really get the big before and after, you need to spend 2-3X as much as you have now. Would say you are in the $1500-2000 range.

I grew up with vinyl an aside from the scratches and snap, crackle and pop was the fact that I had to flip the LP every 15 mins or so.

When CD came out I wasn't a fan, it sounded harsh, but now with modern DACs it sounds great.

Most modern vinyl had been cut from SACD/DSD masters so cut out the middle man and rip SACDs and CDs to an Aurender or similar and have a playlist that'll last a week or more.

@lousyreeds1 To be expected these days, your post has ushered forth a few digital vs. analog trolls and a few comics.  What do you think sounds better, "analog done right or digital done right", is like asking "does a hotdog with only mustard on it taste better than a hotdog with only ketchup on it".  There are so many factors and variables involved in your question that those who've already stated there is no easy or quick & dirty answer to your query are correct.

Maybe I missed it in this thread, but I am convinced that in order to get records to sound "better" than digital you need to, first and foremost, start with clean records and, of course, the quality of the pressings, sound engineering, mastering and all of that matters, as well, just as this does with digital recordings but more so with records.  Even brand-new records need to be cleaned, preferably before played for the first time.  So, this is where that analog ritual should start.  Then, there is a bunch of stuff I am going to assume you are already aware of (e.g.  storing records properly using good quality anti-static inner sleeves; outer sleeves if you want to preserve the artwork; using a good quality anti-static record brush before and after every play or, as some prefer, some sort of air blowing device to get as much airborne dust off the records as possible; cleaning your stylus before & after every play; etc.).

IMHO, ultrasonic cleaning is the best way to go, and this is not going to be inexpensive.  Many audiophiles love the Degritter machine, which does a good job and is about as easy and convenient as this gets.  I've A/B tested it against the lash-up record cleaning system that I put together at about half the cost, using components from CleanerVinyl Ultrasonic Record Cleaning, an ultrasonic cleaner and a Knosti Disco-Antistat, which is similar to a Spin-Clean but uses goat hair brushes instead of microfiber cleaning pads.  The lash-up system I use achieves results as good as the Degritter.  However, the Degritter is infinitely easier & more convenient to use and less labor intensive or time consuming.  About the size of a toaster, it also occupies less space than all of my equipment.  This is why I am still considering purchasing the Degritter at some point.  After investing in a record cleaning system, upgrading to a better TT, cart and pre-amp will, IMHO, definitely get you closer to that Holy Grail.  If you want to do this without spending mucho dinero, then consider the Spin-Clean (if it comes with good quality brushes now) or the Knosti Disco Anti-Stat.  Incidentally, the Knosti folks have come out with an ultrasonic cleaning system of their own at around half the price of the Degritter.  I've never used it and have not read any reviews of it, yet, but this would be yet another option if their machine lives up to the advertising.

Have you compared same recording on vinyl and digital? For example, have you tried Miles Davis Kind of Blue album on your rig against digital playback of the same? Another example, Dave Brubeck's Timeout album. My CD is HDCD encoded and no need to say it has better bass than analog version.

It is difficult to answer your question when you say digital has "Far better imaging/soundstage and much tighter bass." Digital has more bass compared to analog counterpart. So first let us know specific albums that you compared on vinyl and digital that gave you above impression.

+1 @inagroove 
I like digital and all that, but my vinyl systems sound better on good recordings. Yes, there are disappointing recordings and bad vinyl. I prefer older near mint used records. Ultrasonic cleaning helps. Spotless stylus is mandatory. Remastered digital records sound greyer (digital hash) to me than older analog records. I guess it depends on what you listen to. That said, if you do want to upgrade your entry-level turntable, especially as you’ve pointed out "warbling", a Technics direct drive unit like the new Technics SL-1300G may suffice. Tube phono preamp may help. Don't be afraid of MM cartridges--removing the whole MC end can improve sound.

In this game it’s all dependent on your budget 

As you know the sky is the limit but your budget probably isnt

I would say $3k table

$1500 cart

$2k phono pre

would get you in a pretty good place 

Then you can begin to get into cables and isolation to get the best out of the components

Good

luck.  Willy-T

@lousyreeds1  - You mentioned your TT and cart but didn't mention what phono preamp you are using. Is it a separate , if so what? If not, might the cause of your issue be the phono stage included in your preamp? Also, what cables are you using from the TT to the phono preamp/stage?

When I first started the quest to make my analog sound as good (or better) than my digital I bought a very good phono amplifier (Sutherland).  It made a big difference but not quite as good as digital.  Then got a new turntable (Dr. Feikert) and arm. Finally, I got a new cartridge (started with Hana then Clearaudio.)  A total expense of about $8000. The results are wonderful.

You don’t have to spend that much, but I would start with a new phono amplifier like I did and build from there.

“I no longer see the point of bothering with vinyl unless you have the funds to go first class with both vinyl and digital. A first class digital setup will not have you longing for vinyl”
+1000 @sns … couldn’t have said any better. 

Vinyl does have its charm—tactile engagement, analog nostalgia, and sometimes a unique sonic character—but its full potential only reveals itself with significant investment in a great turntable, tonearm, cartridge, phono stage, and setup. Otherwise, it can easily underperform even a modestly well-optimized digital system.

A first-class digital front end today—especially with top-tier DACs, streamers, and careful system matching—can deliver extraordinary realism, nuance, and emotional engagement without the maintenance and variability vinyl demands. It’s no longer just about convenience; it’s often about performance parity or superiority.

@lousyreeds1

A better turntable plus Hana ML would serve as good base line to further improve your vinyl experience. Think of TT as life long investment so spending more initially into TT would go long way in your bid to enjoy vinyl. Once you a solid deck, you can ‘play’ with cartridges and phono’s as funds permits. 

10x the cost of digital to make vinyl sound as good and even then it’s not worth all the headaches that go along with vinyl. I had 3x the cost of my digital in vinyl (digital at that time was close to $10k) and I got rid of my vinyl. I have friends with 10x the cost of my vinyl and it might be close. But then all the headaches, not worth it.

same goes for r2r. I had a commercial Otari 5050bll and was taping my vinyl before I sold my vinyl. After ripping a few albums, buying costly good new 10” reel tapes, and tape didn’t improve the sq, I sold that medium too. 

@OP To answer your upgrading question, a Clearaudio Concept and Hana SL will be massively better sounding than your current setup.

If your budget allows it, the Concept Signature is worth the extra spend relative to the standard concept - more sophisticated motor control and suspended motor.

First step isolation base for table look for a black diamond racing source shelf

Then new  phono stage 

Dave and Troy

AUDIO INTELLECT Nj

@zx10 

Vinyl can never sound like SACD on a good player

I agree completely. SACD is so underwhelming on my system I never bothered to buy a player, and am glad I saved the money on hardware and software. It definitely wasn't any better than the streamer I had at the time (which I have since upgraded to better). I'm glad vinyl doesn't sound like SACD. That would be most disappointing.