hmm Ive actually had a class that talks about these concepts in a way thats unrelated to audio engineering, it was more electrical engineering. Couldnt an album full of tape recordings that never was converted digitally benefit from the medium given that the analog frequencies could be reproduced? Ive only skimmed what you linked but plan to read it all later
First off thanks so much for posting this Jason, I think this argument is super relevant with the vinyl resurgence, and I think its interesting to hear the debate between what people perceive as "better". If the analog tapes were never converted digitally, then yes, more of the original waveform that was recorded will convert to the vinyl cut. Most people these days however, do not record to analog tape, and even labels with back catalog are having their albums archived digitally, since analog tapes dont hold up well with time. The problem is that an analog recording, be it tape or vinyl, can only reproduce around 75 db of dynamic range. This is much lower than the 96 or 144 db we get from a digital source (6db per bit of bit depth). Most(actually all that I know of) places that cut vinyl these days, cut lacquers from a digital file, meaning the analog waveform has to go through two d/a a/d conversions before the waveform will be replicated again. This of course loses some fidelity in the process.