Which is more accurate: digital or vinyl?

Digital is only a way to store the information, not less accurate. If the sampling rate is high enough and the bit word length is long enough, say 24/192, or more, or SACD, done well, analog is just too inconsistent, and a bad storage medium. Master tape is very good, but degrades over time, and is not convenient. How many people are rushing to turn in or yard-sale their inaccurate digital cameras of 15+MP for film ones???? Digital cameras are just evolving faster than audio is, but hopefully audio will catch up and digital will obsolete analog once engineers adopt a good format like SACD, and implement it correctly. And yes, I have both analog and digital, and like them both, but like digital more and more. The future is digital, and CD's are on their way out, once inexpensive storage is available, in quality, and simplicity, it will happen very fast. I see many .99 cd sales. Sell them fast or better yet, store them on a hard drive, like a mac mini. jallen

Once the original signal goes to the mic, accuracy is lost, engineer twiddling on the eq also departs from accuracy. So the question should be..... what screws up the signal less, digital or analog. The high rez digital I have heard recently equalled the best analog I have heard and exceed lesser analog by a good margin. The best is the one which uses the best mic and has the least recording engineer editoralizing. Both digital and analog can be great, but will the engineer allow it?....jallen