is it possible to make digital audio sound like vintage vinyl

sam here,something else i noticed that i believe is hampering my efforts at making digital audio sound more like vintage vinyl              https://postimg.cc/LJQZYNF2 

and even when you lower the volume on the digital file the compression remains?

for some reason when the audio has more dynamic range as with vintage vinyl the sound stage is more open with less distortion.

 i believe if i can remove the digital compression this will get me closer to the sound of vintage vinyl.

i have tried numerous denoisers and declippers however they seem to make the audio sound worse? or at best different like somethings missing?

after doing some experimenting i stumbled upon a free foobar2000 filter called IIR dsp plugin. it has a preset called allpass  and when i run the digital audio through the allpass filter the digital compression is gone.

i'm not sure what the intended purpose of this filter is? the difference in the before/after sound quality is amazing here are my settings for the filter. https://postimg.cc/jCbxQmTv

i had to use replay gain to prevent clipping due to the increase in dynamic range. to check that my results are correct i ran another test using the worst loudness war offender i could find. metallica death magnetic. https://postimg.cc/bSvSYwzY

before waveform: https://postimg.cc/VdKvL8T5

allpass filter applied: https://postimg.cc/NLYRKQNx

No.

plus compander like DBX-3BX

Sorry but they sound shocking, sound goes through 2 million or was that 3 million of the worst 1970’s opamps ever made.
http://www.ka-electronics.com/images/jpg/3BX.JPG

Cheers George.

Use a good tube preamp, plus compander like DBX-3BX

guitarsam OP
is it possible to make digital audio sound like vintage vinyl

You can get it to sound much closer to older recorded vinyl richer sound, especially with early digital that were remastered to give that shocking pseudo ping pong stereo effect.

The output of the dac or cdp you use will be more than >100db channel separation, you’ll need to "kill this down" with a left to right bleed passive/or active network to "mimic" vinyl’s best of 35db in the midrange, and best 12db at highs and almost mono at lows.

Here is the best channel separation a Lyra Dorian cartridge can do https://ibb.co/Vtm8bNx this if it’s done to a digital output will richen things up especially at the extremes as they get mono’ized for want of a better word.


Cheers George

Keep at it! If nothing else, it is a lot of fun, and if you come up with a formula that improves your listening enjoyment, then you have accomplished something and perhaps others will enjoy it as well.

guitarsam OP29 posts05-19-2020 6:52pmsam here when i made this post i was referring to a very specific sound that vinyl creates and i don’t care what kind of turntable setup you have there is an indefinable sound and that’s what i was trying to create. no i don’t think i’m there yet however i will keep trying and posting my before/after results to get feedback from the experts. i suppose if i was less nieve i would just accept the facts and move on however i can’t help but believe i will one day hit on the magic combination friends.

sam here when i made this post i was referring to a very specific sound that vinyl creates and i don’t care what kind of turntable setup you have there is an indefinable sound and that’s what i was trying to create. no i don’t think i’m there yet however i will keep trying and posting my before/after results to get feedback from the experts. i suppose if i was less nieve i would just accept the facts and move on however i can’t help but believe i will one day hit on the magic combination friends.

So really you just want to define the program that will recreate the indefinable. Magic, indeed.

Personally I have no interest in flavoring digital files to simulate the "vinyl sound." It is more interesting that an ADC can accurately transfer the "sound" of an LP to a hires digital format. If successful, this demonstrates that the vinyl source is an affectation, but a pleasing one.

I record vinyl to DSD128 on a modified TASCAM DA-3000 synchronized to a Stanford Research 10Mhz rubidium clock powered by a Paul Hynes SR7. It’s a labor-intensive process that is worth getting right once and for all with the best equipment you can afford.

sam here when i made this post i was referring to a very specific sound that vinyl creates and i don’t care what kind of turntable setup you have there is an indefinable sound and that’s what i was trying to create. no i don’t think i’m there yet however i will keep trying and posting my before/after results to get feedback from the experts. i suppose if i was less nieve i would just accept the facts and move on however i can’t help but believe i will one day hit on the magic combination friends.

I will say one thing that really cracks me up is all this argument about lossy formats when listening to mid ranges that are out of phase ( breakup ) 1/3 of the time.....

I respect Mike for sure and have myself gone down the triple path of high speed tape, Digital and LP. The quality of the A2D converter is everything, I use three: Wadia 17, Pro4000 and an Ayre..... they all sound different thru the same Aesthetix DAC.....
the formats have various strengths and weaknesses, iF you think digital can’t throw a massively deep soundstage look no further than 2L the Nordic Sound :-)

Fun, enjoy the music not the dogma 

I respect his personal opinion, but as pointed out, we don't know if the MSB DAC is programmed to be technically accurate or true to the signal. I remember some tests of a very high end MSB that showed significant IM distortion, not something one would expect with the figures they were presenting. I am not knocking its sonics, just pointing out incongruence. If it is tuned sonically, not for technical accuracy, then it will color, however minimally, whatever goes through it.

I would give credence to Mike Lavigne’s listening experience. Having only digital, I liked that he once said his new digital setup is "staring vinyl in the face". He may find digital to be really good, but when he goes on to say that, after a high level of commitment in his system to both formats, vinyl still cannot be equaled, his findings deserve respect.

Mike’s experiments are conducted at the state of the art of both formats. At less than SOTA, YMMV.

BTW, Mike: what digital recorder did you use?

I would give credence to Mike Lavigne’s listening experience. Having only digital, I liked that he once said his new digital setup is "staring vinyl in the face". He may find digital to be really good, but when he goes on to say that, after a high level of commitment in his system to both formats, vinyl still cannot be equaled, his findings deserve respect.

Imperfections can be beautiful. Old Masters knew that very well. Go to England, visit City of Wells, enjoy the Cathedral. Yuri Norstein, a famous animated cartoons maker, asked his primary artist to use her weak hand for certain scenes and frames - he asked for an imperfect line there ('Hedgehog in the Fog' on youtube). Art Nouveau was very much influenced by Japanese art of the day, and Japanese appreciate a good imperfection here and there. Americans cannot stand imperfection, that's why the ratio of churches to orthodontists' offices is close to 1 (at least, in California) 

What I do to make my digital sound like vintage vinyl is....While playing my favorite digital music, I pour a bowl of Rice Krispies, add milk and place the bowl next to my ear. Give it a try :)

atmasphere

LPs since the 1960s have had bandwidth to 40KHz and beyond- I suspect that is one reason they are still around, as they have the widest bandwidth of any format.

Ralph, I’m really surprised to see you say that. There’s no way you can get 40 kHz from analog tape at 0 VU - that’s why FR specs for analog tape are always done well below 0 VU ... usually -10 dB for reel, iirc, and -20 dB for cassette. So if you want the best, pure-analog LP, you have to live with the limitations of tape. Hi-res digital can easily be flat out to 40 kHz and beyond.

Recent advances in pressing technology (mostly at QRP) have allowed the pressings to be considerably lower noise, rivaling Redbook. Most of the surface noise of an LP is produced during pressing; almost none from mastering.

You’ll get no argument from me there. As I’ve said, I’m an analog guy. Typically, I prefer LP to digital.

I think it’s important to keep perspective, and to claim that the resolution or performance limits of LP exceed that of the best digital just isn’t supported by the numbers. On the other hand, many of the potential technical advantages offered by digital far exceed that required by the music. For example, the LP has restricted dynamic range compared to digital, but that’s of no consequence with most recordings. And it’s the same with channel separation and with w&f ...

I am still going to go with "far exceeds". Note I used hi-res digital as my comparison point:

• 24/192 sampled is capable of 80KHz bandwidth at 3db. Practically no one is going beyond 40Khz.
• While LPs "may" have bandwidth out to 40Khz, the best cartridges are down what 30? 40db?  Some of the best "rated" cartridges are down that much at 30KHz (or less)
  
• Those 1960's LPs, what was the bandwidth of the tape machines feeding them at 40KHz. Combine that with cartridge frequency response.
  
• That high frequency response also comes about via RIAA equalization, i.e. pre-emphasis on high frequencies

• There is, to my knowledge, not one valid example of human's being able to perceive in any form, frequencies over about 22-24Khz. Those frequencies can cause subharmonic distortion of speakers though. That 22-24Khz is for young ears too.
  
• While QRP is impressive, it's still not remotely in the range of 24/192, especially if you rolled off the bandwidth of 24/192 to match vinyl.

That RIAA equalization is of course akin to "compression", akin to basic Dolby noise reduction.

As has been pointed out, digital copies of vinyl can be nearly indistinguishable if not indistinguishable from the direct vinyl output. I don't think anyone would say vinyl sounds like digital though, not even if the mastering is exactly the same.


The big variable is crosstalk, and even that varies considerably from system to system and out of phase crosstalk can do some interesting things acoustically.

I personally don't think the OP is on the right track for recreating vinyl from digital. My main impression of the applied filter the op uses is reverb, which will give a more 3 dimensional feel to the music, a not uncommon mixing and mastering technique. However, I don't think the exercise of recreating vinyl from digital is unwarranted. One can consider something like crosstalk a format limitation, but one could also consider it a mathematical function that may be beneficial.

No, you don’t. The s/n, FR, and resolution of a hi-res digital file far exceeds that which can be pressed to LP. No information is "discarded."

This statement is problematic. LPs since the 1960s have had bandwidth to 40KHz and beyond- I suspect that is one reason they are still around, as they have the widest bandwidth of any format.


Recent advances in pressing technology (mostly at QRP) have allowed the pressings to be considerably lower noise, rivaling Redbook. Most of the surface noise of an LP is produced during pressing; almost  none from mastering.


Phono sections themselves can be responsible for ticks and pops without the help of the LP; this is due to poor HF overload margins; and that due to the fact that many designers don't take into account the simple fact that cartridges are inductors and tonearm cables have capacitance. If your phono section can't deal with the resulting resonance, it can make ticks and pops independently of the LP surface.


Tradeoffs, but not 'far exceeds'...

sam here at 58 years old i grew up on vintage vinyl and am very familiar with the sound of vintage vinyl however when i switched to cd in the 90’s i never thought about it until many years later when i heard a vintage vinyl rip of styx the grand illusion on youtube and all the memory’s came back so i grabbed my cd version to compare and sure enough the vintage vinyl version seemed to turn on a switch in my brain that the cd version did not? i now realize what i was experiencing was the hypersonic effect and digital audio with mono depth perception will not create this effect in the brain ? and i believe it was designed that way friends. and new remastered vinyl to my ears does not create the hypersonic effect because of the mono depth perception

Why would you want to? When you can just buy a quality turntable paired with a quality cartridge and play a vinyl record....I don't understand all the fuss and major expense to get something (digital) to sound like something else (analog) when that something else (analog/vinyl) can easily be had the conventional way.  Don't get me wrong, I love my cd player and transport and my dac, but analog or vinyl it Is not...not even remotely close, and I don't care because I can just throw on a record to get it, much easier imo. 

sam here for some reason i could not see my public post until now?

i use the word vintage vinyl because to my ears new remastered vinyl sounds different and here’s how i can describe it

vintage vinyl = stereo + stereo depth perception. (soundstage}

new remastered vinyl = stereo + mono depth perception.

digital audio = stereo + mono depth perception.

digital audio + vintage vinyl frequency impulse = stereo + stereo depth perception

stereo depth perception is a made up word i use to describe what i’m hearing. and this is what i like about vintage vinyl. i’m not talking at all about tone just stereo depth perception. if new vinyl had stereo depth perception i would be very happy.

if the master tape is transferred to digital it should have stereo depth perception and it doesn’t?

if i transfer vintage vinyl to digital it does have stereo depth perception ?

this tells me the record company did something on purpose to convert the stereo depth perception to mono depth perception on both the digital copy and the remastered vinyl?

if i import vintage vinyl into izotope rx5 software and use the automated phase button both the left and right channels will now have the same phasing and i no longer have stereo depth perception and the audio sounds just like new remastered vinyl. if i import digital audio and do independent phase correction one channel at a time using auto phase correction, 99% of the time the phasing will be different for each channel and if then process the audio that way i will now have stereo depth perception just like vintage vinyl. and if i use the auto phase on both channels together the phase is always the same giving me mono depth perception.

when i check digital audio run through the impulse file with foobar2000 using the convolver dsp filter 99% of the time the left and right channel phasing is different and when i check the original commercial digital file before applying the impulse and the phasing is always the same?

here is the 1 second impulse file i created using vintage vinyl frequencies extracted at 32 / 88 wav for the convolver dsp filter for foobar2000 in case anybody wants to run there own test. i used the surface noise intro to pink floyds us and them before the music starts as the source 1973 1st press harvest label with the volume turned all the way off (0) for some reason when dealing with frequencies i lose the sound if there is any volume at all. here is a photo of my impulse settings for foobar2000 conolver dsp filter https://postimg.cc/sBtCffpY
here is the download link for the impuse file i'm calling digital vinyl http://pc.cd/Gcl7

He made the post 36 hours ago. I don't know his timeline. Maybe he has a life?

Did anybody listen to the OP's files?

@mikelavigne

it is hard to find an Lp and digital file from the same mic feed, yet both native analog and digital. and that is what you need ideally, but it’s easy to find a digital file and vinyl pressing from the same tape master, and when you do, the vinyl will sound better than the digital file almost 100% of the time.

Hi -- in my case I would paraphrase the last sentence to "the vinyl will sound *more pleasant* than the digital file..."
Unlike you, I have had only one experience comparing vinyl and digital on a top-tier system, and my conclusions were different (surprisingly!).

A few months ago I witnessed a comparison on a number of tracks between Air-Force-2 / Graham and the "Absolute" DAC (then unknown to me). Soulution amplification, big Magico speakers (M6?). In a friendly atmosphere, the programme included the usual R Pigeon, Mahler, Jazz, et alia hi-end approved tracks. One that I singled out is Brubeck’s "Take Five" because purportedly both vinyl & digital file came from the same master (the file was a 24/96k). Many others supposedly did as well, but this one was a sure thing--apparently.

The surprising conclusion overall (and on Take-5 specifically) was that the DAC was more "accurate", slightly more dynamic, more open, and extended esp in the bass. My personal take was that the vinyl was, nevertheless, slightly more pleasant to listen to, although I admit the dynamic impact of the digital was prodigious in that system as was the energy, especially in the lower frequencies. (I began my research into exotic DACs then!). I might say the Absolute was slightly drier than the Air-Force, but I can’t actually say it sounded "dry", in & of itself.
So, after this lengthy rigmarole, my answer to the original question is: No, you cannot, but they can be close, and both can be musically pleasant.

Didn’t I read a recent review of a DAC that has a analog turntable filter?
Was it the Weiss?
Don’t know how it works or if it works.

Probably need to develop a program to inject static, clicks and pops too, if anyone wanted them.

Results are on a sliding scale, depending on the quality of the vinyl front end, phono stage, digital recorder, server, streamer, and DAC. IME recording vinyl to DSD128 can be quite faithful to the vinyl source, and more important, surpass the experience of hi-res PCM downloads.

Man from a simple no, to..... read for yourself.. Gosh gotta love Agon..

I guess it's one of those, "here's a stick kid, go hit that hornets nest"

But more like a butterfly nest... full of fluffy wings and colors... 

Got to see it, to believe it..

Regards...

One problem is see in your comparison Mike, is you have chosen a DAC that euphonically matches what you prefer in vinyl. For you, that is the best sound possible, but to make the most accurate comparison of digitized and played back vinyl, a DAC that is as analytical as possible would be the most faithful. Your DAC may be implementing "tricks" that create a very pleasing audio result, especially for those that prefer vinyl. However if you record vinyl and play is back on that DAC, the result is likely not as technically accurate as possible.

i have a hard time connecting the dots on your supposition. not sure the point you are making. i'd say that the general feedback on the MSB Select II is that it has a neutral presentation. 'tricks?' huh?

and obviously; dacs can't record vinyl; you need an ADC for that. MSB does not make an ADC. 

my result of vinyl being better is a 20 year experience, with multiple dacs, transports, and servers. as well as multiple turntables, arms, cartridges, and phono stages, as well as different rooms.

i've chased excellent digital performance all these years, and would happy to list the dacs i've used. 

I think that you feel this way validates the importance of this thread. Can you recreate this in digital, at least for those that prefer this presentation.

but it's easy to find a digital file and vinyl pressing from the same tape master, and when you do, the vinyl will sound better than the digital file almost 100% of the time.

Mike Lavigne has a nice digital system including MSB Select II.

My story is in the link.

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/msb-select-dac-vs-vinyl

Thomas

hello Thomas,

thank you for the link to the story, which i did read. obviously, i think very highly of my MSB Select II and it is the best dac i have yet heard. and i’ve also invested in the Taiko Audio Extreme server, which takes the digital performance even higher. so i know just what this formidable product can do.

but.......sorry to say that the comparison in your story has a fatal flaw as evidence of digital equaling vinyl. the Reference Recordings Lp you used for that comparison, one i own and am very familiar with, is 176/24 sourced. i know this Dick Hyman ’In The Age of Swing’ very well as i have used the CD and HRx 24/176 file as a reference for years.

these 33 rpm and 45 rpm pressing from Reference Recordings for the last 10 years have all been digitally sourced. and mostly i find i prefer the digital 176/24 file to the vinyl, sometimes by quite a bit. the vinyl cannot add what the digital file missed. when i go to audio shows and see Marjorie from Reference Recordings, i always complain about this. here you have Prof. Johnson, one of the great recording engineers, who has a great mastering analog tape deck, not being willing to use the tapes for the Lps. really upsets me. my friend, Paul Stubblebine, does the vinyl masterings for these Lps.

it is hard to find an Lp and digital file from the same mic feed, yet both native analog and digital. and that is what you need ideally, but it’s easy to find a digital file and vinyl pressing from the same tape master, and when you do, the vinyl will sound better than the digital file almost 100% of the time.

i have 2000-3000 examples.

One problem is see in your comparison Mike, is you have chosen a DAC that euphonically matches what you prefer in vinyl. For you, that is the best sound possible, but to make the most accurate comparison of digitized and played back vinyl, a DAC that is as analytical as possible would be the most faithful. Your DAC may be implementing "tricks" that create a very pleasing audio result, especially for those that prefer vinyl. However if you record vinyl and play is back on that DAC, the result is likely not as technically accurate as possible.

Mike Lavigne has a nice digital system including MSB Select II.

My story is in the link.

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/msb-select-dac-vs-vinyl

Thomas

I know just the name for that new digital format: Zeno.

You know, the Greek philosopher Zeno of Elea. Aw come on, you know. The runner can never cross the finish line guy. Because in order to cross the line he must first run half way to the line. Then half of that. Half of that again. All he can do is half. Never quite gets there. Just like digital.

mikelavigne

... what i find is unless i can get someone into my room and we can listen together it becomes such a circular discussion ...

I understand completely and it's why I hesitated to ask my followup questions. Kudos for you for responding.

... having a top level vinyl reference is not trivial ...

Absolutely agree.

... digital is fully satisfying to me as it is ...

Absolutely agree even though, as I've said, I'm an analog guy.

it’s only when someone drags this old idea out that we then do this familiar dance again. there is no commercial reason to create a new higher format ...

To be clear, I've never said that, and I know what you mean about the "dance." That's exactly what I was trying to avoid.

Also, when I said that I wasn't familiar with your system, I meant that I wasn't familiar with how it sounds.

I’m not familiar with your system and have no reason to doubt what you say you hear.

https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/615

Do you know what quality of LP playback renders a digital copy audibly inferior? In your opinion, where would digital have to improve to overcome that limitation?

for over 20 years i’ve been posting and talking about why the best vinyl sounds better than the best digital. what i find is unless i can get someone into my room and we can listen together it becomes such a circular discussion. then when we listen together; it’s like bringing a pencil to a gun fight. not even a knife. and that’s because really having a top level vinyl reference is not trivial. for my own self, i have chased digital music reproduction perfection with the same degree of commitment i’ve given to vinyl. and it’s got lot’s better over the years. but so has my vinyl improved too.

i’m not a techie. i have my own views of the components of what vinyl does better. a digital copy lacks the nuance and completeness of the music. it lacks capturing the ambiance and breath of the music. it can’t get the same musical weight, timbre, density and tonal complexity. it misses the sparkle and fire. it falls short in flow and energy projection. these things all are present in digital, just short by degrees. but these degrees bring vinyl across a threshold of realism digital cannot cross.

and unless i show you, i have no illusions you might change your mind. it’s an experiential thing.

i do think that converting music to numbers and back to analog that a degree of reality does get lost. and the analog tape or direct to disc technologies are able to preserve what the number crunching loses. not that analog recording is perfect. this is just what my ears seem to tell me.

IMHO digital would need a format created that does not yet exist to get to the level of vinyl. and really........digital is fully satisfying to me as it is. it’s only when someone drags this old idea out that we then do this familiar dance again. there is no music delivery market demand or commercial reason to create a new higher format.......a ’Holodeck’ sort of techie break-thru. maybe the movie or gaming or defense industries throw money at the question and something new gets born. like Bell Labs and telephones and later the computer age and how hifi rode the coattails of those techie break-thrus to where it has come.

follow the money.......and right now there is no pot of money to go after for a higher format.

mikelavigne

i have over 1000 2xdsd rips of my own vinyl, none of which measure up to a direct comparison of my vinyl. and many hundreds of high rez tape transfers from the same tape as my vinyl.
i enjoy those digital transfers all the time. they can be and mostly are excellent. but when i pull out my vinyl it’s another level when compared directly ... the best of vinyl is just another thing.

I'm not familiar with your system and have no reason to doubt what you say you hear.

I'm going to ask you a question that often annoys me when it is asked by others, but I'm genuinely curious and sincere about this: Do you know what quality of LP playback renders a digital copy audibly inferior? In your opinion, where would digital have to improve to overcome that limitation?

I usually ignore questions like that and wouldn't blame you if you do, too.

@cleeds

You’d be surprised! I can make hi-res digital copies of an LP - played back using a very "high level vinyl playback system" - that are indistinguishable from the original. No special skills are required.

I know that can be a disturbing thought; it was a discovery I found difficult to accept. But it’s true. Feel free to try it for yourself.

no, i would not be at all surprised.

i have over 1000 2xdsd rips of my own vinyl, none of which measure up to a direct comparison of my vinyl. and many hundreds of high rez tape transfers from the same tape as my vinyl.

i enjoy those digital transfers all the time. they can be and mostly are excellent. but when i pull out my vinyl it’s another level when compared directly. happy to demonstrate this for anyone interested.

my digital source is top level as i do mostly listen to digital. it's really fine. but.......the best of vinyl is just another thing.

millercarbon

Michael Fremer has been making digital files from records for years. Very few of us ever will hear some of the super high end cartridges he reviews. But we can hear them via digital files. He’s played them for many people at many shows for many years now and always easy to hear the differences in the cartridges.

Digital certainly is good enough to be used to compare like this. But, indistinguishable? Let’s not get carried away.

Before you become too certain, I can only suggest that you try it for yourself.

Remember, I’m an analog guy. I’ll always be an analog guy. But it isn’t that difficult to make a digital copy of an LP that is indistinguishable from the original. I understand that it pains some vinylphiles to acknowledge that truth. After all, I’m one of them!

To be clear, you’ll need hi-res digital for this to work. 16/44.1 won’t be sufficient.

Michael Fremer has been making digital files from records for years. Very few of us ever will hear some of the super high end cartridges he reviews. But we can hear them via digital files. He's played them for many people at many shows for many years now and always easy to hear the differences in the cartridges. 

Digital certainly is good enough to be used to compare like this. But, indistinguishable? Let's not get carried away.

mikelavigne

it all depends on your reference for how vintage vinyl should sound.

Quite so!

if you actually have a high level vinyl playback system and actual vintage vinyl to directly compare it to......then hell no! you are not going to make digital completely sound like that

You’d be surprised! I can make hi-res digital copies of an LP - played back using a very "high level vinyl playback system" - that are indistinguishable from the original. No special skills are required.

I know that can be a disturbing thought; it was a discovery I found difficult to accept. But it’s true. Feel free to try it for yourself.

stevejewels

Simple question. What does sampling rate mean? The rate at which the original analog source is SAMPLED. The digitizing process only keep data which occurs at the sampling interval. The rest is ignored and lost.

What you state seems intuitively correct but is a common misnomer.  Only data outside of the bandwidth of the system is "ignored."

Please study up on digitizing.

If you care to follow your own advice, this video explains why you're so mistaken.

Please study up on digitizing.

Simple question. What does sampling rate mean?

The rate at which the original analog source is SAMPLED. The digitizing process only keep data which occurs at the sampling interval. The rest is ignored and lost.

it all depends on your reference for how vintage vinyl should sound.

--if your vintage vinyl reference is some computer algorithm process or pro audio tool.......then sure.

if you actually have a high level vinyl playback system and actual vintage vinyl to directly compare it to......then hell no! you are not going to make digital completely sound like that.

if you have not heard really great vintage vinyl......then your opinion does not count.

mostly.....subjective opinions about quality come down to the quality of references.

stevejewels

Is it possible to make a digital file sound like an analog LP? Indistinguishably? No

It’s not only possible, it’s not even that difficult to do.

When you digitize a file you select some of the information to keep and some to discard.

No, you don’t. The s/n, FR, and resolution of a hi-res digital file far exceeds that which can be pressed to LP. No information is "discarded."

If there was a perfect way to do it why are there so many DACs and methods?

It’s probably not possible to make the copy "perfect." But it is possible to make it indistinguishable from the LP.

As I already mentioned, it pains me to admit this. I’m an analog guy from way back when and remain one still.

My ad hoc tests with audiophiles says otherwise, however, you start from 2 false premises. 1) that a turntable has not already thrown away information. It has thrown away a ton of information.  2) That given a turntable has already thrown away a ton of information and the ear/brain has some limits i.e. bandwidth, can a digitized system collect all the usable information on a vinyl system such that the output is indistinguishable from the input. You haven't presented an argument that that is not true.

Indistinguishably? No

Adequately? Possibly

When you digitize a file you select some of the information to keep and some to discard.