Why not copy the greats- vinyl LP question

There are places where people post hi res digitizing of classic LP's. In reading the notes, They seem to be decent analog rigs but not very high end.

Might be fun for a listen but I'm of the belief I want my analog to a stay analog and if I'm going to to listen to digital it should a legit hi res release be from the master tapes, without the inherent LP flaws. 

Yes good point about the shape of aging masters. However the thing about most LP’s from many years ago, is that cartridges of the era weren’t able to handle low bass and dynamics (as opposed to today), so there was very often a dub of the master mixdown made for LP cutting. So aside from extra limiting/compressing there was also an extra tape generation or more. Compounding the problem, many engineers that did work liked to label the tapes they worked on as "master," so it could be confusing to find and use best available tapes for reissues over the years. That’s why I like to have a great analog system and a great digital one as well (within limits). Galvanic isolation (like the Etheregen I use) go a very long way to making digital enjoyable.

Speaking of going back to multi track masters with digital mixing, I recently got a copy of Zappa's Roxy Performances, where Craig Parker Adams went back to the 16 track 30 IPS multi tracks, digitized at 24/96 and re-mixed (not sure of process,  I haven't read the below article yet)

The fidelity is outstanding, and far superior to any previous Roxy release.  Unfortunately it's only 16/44.1. but if enough people request a hi res Like I did, who knows.

Craig was nice enough to email me back, and mentioned he did very little cleanup wise, and he thinks he might not have even used compression!  If only all live recordings sounded like this one.  But it does speak to all the typical intermediates and generations used in LP process causing huge sonic loss.
https://www.soundonsound.com/people/craig-parker-adams-mixing-frank-zappa