Vote Your Ranking -If you have an opinion on this digital subject

For most of the last 50 years vinyl was the best (not including reel to reel). Digital has gotten better and better… particularly in the last ten years. But the change first happened in the $1/2 million digital systems and worked down. 

‘’Just think about the question a moment. There are hundreds of brands of turntables, phono stages, DACs… and thousands of users that have different values on what “great” sounds like. I know some people that systems scraping up the last bit of detail is “great”, and I will go running out of the room with my hands clasped over my ears yelling “make it stop”… ($150K).

So it depends on the price point and the components chosen and the listeners values. But, in general you still will get a bit higher performance out of the vinyl side for equivalent investment. This is particularly true at the lower cost levels. You can see my system under my user ID.  at this time my digital and analog end are equal in there performance… they are pretty similar in cost at ~$40K each. I know folks with $500K systems and they say analog performs better, requiring a 10% - 20% premium. People I trust. 
 

But at this time I am absolutely sure if you spend the time and effort you can get spectacular results from either in systems from $25K - $250K. I think the nod goes to Ana log below that.

One other thing. In todays world (as in my system) streaming (with same red book quality) equals CD player (higher Rez files streaming wins) = analog. I have a new tone arm on the way… analog may pull ahead a bit. But probably just a bit.

I looked at this question again and realized it is two questions, conflated. One of sound quality of different methods of reproducing a digital file. Second of the sound quality of different resolutions.

So first holding the file type constant at red book CD. You can purchase components where:

CDPlayer = Stored File = Streaming.

With today’s technology all three are the best they have ever been… amazingly satisfying.

If your system or experience has not shown this then if you swapped a component or two it could. The problem can be capability or the components you own are / were not tailored to the sound qualities you like… warmth or detail… etc.

As far as file resolution the higher the better in general. But, of course it is equipment dependent on how obvious the difference will be. Often mastering can make a bigger difference in the SQ. Typically the more detailed oriented the equipment the more obvious the difference the SQ due to file type is perceived.

More detail is not always good in a high end system. It is really easy to get so much you destroy the music and overly highlight the detail. One of the big challenges for most audiophiles is the get the balance right… with todays equipment greatly detailed and musical fully bloomed sound is possible. But as always… its going to cost you.

The point here is that we are talking about computer files. Are those files located on a silver disk, a bunch of disk drives, a USB thumb drive, or streamer from a central server through a service like  Qobuz it is all the same… but every part has to be done well. A good streamer (there is on in each of these scenarios… as well as a DAC) will buffer the incoming file, provide absolutely quiet power to the circuitry that streams it to the DAC. So, given the current state of technology it only makes sense to put your efforts into choosing a streaming solution… unless you get a real kick out of fiddling with a disk. 
 

My streamer sounds as good as my vinyl… my vinyl rig is very good (see my user ID for my systems). There are many price points that streaming can equal other methods. 

The only controversy comes from what equipment you own and your experience level.

If you have the equipment: Streaming is now capable of sounding better than Red Book in any format with High Rez files and equal to high Rez files of the same resolution from other sources.