LP archiving
Unfortunately you have not been well informed. The issue of analog archiving, if you want to make a decent job of it, is not that simple. Let me explain
The LP was the first mass market high fidelity play back medium. It is a really high fidelity medium, make no mistake. There are some significant caveats.
The LP is easily ruined by poor handling and play back equipment. Unless handling of the disc has been obsessional, it will pick up numerous ticks pops, clicks and high scratchy surface noise. However carefully handled, the LP is one of the most durable of all media. I have LPs in my collection that I have had since a child, over fifty years, that still play perfectly. The only cleaning they have had is with a good dry brush and the use of the Cecil E Watts Dust Bug with every playing. They have never been left lying around, and always correctly returned to their jackets after playing.
The other problem is that inferior or poorly set up turntables and those with worn out styli do permanent damage to the disc.
The difference between a CD player costing a hundred dollars or less and one costing $10,000 dollars is not extreme. However the difference in performance between the turntable you describe, and a top end transcription turntable from one of the great manufacturers, such as Thorens or Garrard, with an arm from say, SME, completed with a fine pickup cartridge is light years apart.
The other thing is that setting up a turntable is a leaned skill. CD players are plug and go.
As to the fidelity of the LP, under the best of circumstances it is a match for the CD. I do have some items that I have bought on CD and the originally issued LP sounds better. That is not the fault of CD, but due to sloppy re mastering. It is true that the LP is a little deficient in dynamic range, but not by much. In the hey day of the LP, the mastering engineers and cutters were highly skilled and generally stayed in their jobs a lifetime. Most of them used manual gain riding and did not use compressors. They knew the music well and would gently and unobtrusively gain ride. They would do the same with bass now and again. However they were skilled in spacing the grooves. In the quiet passages and when there was little bass they would space the groves closer, and widen them in the louder parts with heavier bass, to avoid the dreaded grove "kissing". I have a feeling that much more care was taken with "classical" productions than "pop" ones. At least during the time of the LP. classical mastering engineers were no race to the bottom, like we have now. They generally mastered to the needs of those with superior equipment. If your turntable could not track it and plowed through the grooves ruining them for ever, tough luck! Certainly the fidelity of the LP is far superior to any MP3 file, even at the highest bit rate supported by the codec. I have verified that.
A word about cleaning. Do not clean the record with detergent and water and a cloth. That will drive dirt and deposits deep in the grooves and increase surface noise. I would try dry cleaning first, with a Hunts Brush for instance. Try and get a Cecil E Watts Dust Bug on eBay, and use it with every playing. Do not use the anti static fluid.
For wet cleaning there is no substitute for a professional cleaner from Keith Monks, Loricraft or Nitty Gritty. There are quite a few outfits that will clean records for a modest charge. If you feel compelled to try yourself, you can try a 50/50 mixture of pure isopropyl alcohol and distilled water. However without vacuum the results will be very uncertain and could drive the dirt deeper.
You don't say how many records you are planning to archive. However before spending money, I think you should see if the discs are in any condition worth archiving. I would be happy to try a couple of samples for you, and make CDs. Just let me know if you would like that.
If you want to archive, you need to know that your cartridge is in working order. The stylus should be inspected at least. Also over time the damping material in the suspensions changes compliance, severely degrading performance. Also remember Ortofon made moving magnet and moving coil cartridges, and they require very different preamps. On a turntable you describe, I doubt it has a moving coil, and feel it is most likely to be moving magnet.
If yours records are worth archiving, and you want to go ahead, then I strongly recommend you go on the site of Jerry Raskin "Needle Doctor". I have no financial interest in the outfit at all. They have been in "Dinky Town" Minneapolis for years. They have a wide range of disc equipment for all tastes and budgets. The staff are knowledgeable and helpful.
http://www.needledoctor.com/
Here are his phono preamp offerings.
http://www.needledoctor.com/Online-Store/Audio-Technica?search=Phono&range=1,50,96
He has cartridges galore and a good selection of turntables.
A word about the digital side of things. For really good results a computer has to be custom built for audio. I built mine three years ago. Also the DAC or sound card should be external to the computer, and not share the same power supply. Also the performance of professional archiving and editing software is light years ahead of the consumer products. I use Steinberg WaveLab 6. My DAC is an RME Fireface 800. As the name implies this uses a firewire 800 interconnect.
As far as codecs are concerned, in my view lossy codecs are incompatible with high fidelity sound. In the lossless formats I use Flac and vouch for it completely. Lossy codecs just change the whole balance of the music. Bass is reduced, and bass detail lost. The balance of head and chest voice of singers is changed, with overemphasis of the head voice. Strings loose their silk sheen. Brass is harsh with far too much lip over bell. There are frequent episodes of stereo collapse. In worst cases, such as heavy organ with boys voices in ambient cathedral spaces, there is gross twinking, which is excruciating. Really these lossy codecs need banishing for anything except speech. I watch a lot of opera on my system. Fortunately opera DVDs have a two channel PCM CD quality audio track, as well as Dolby Digital or DTS. I alway use the two channel PCM track the Dolby Pl IIx. The difference is obvious even to untrained listeners. Bottom line, don't archive in a lossy codec!
As far as EQ that may be required, you can do it before or after. If you are planning a lot of upgrades to your system over time, I would archive without EQ. You always EQ to the setup you monitor with.
I know this is a lot of information, and if you grew up in the digital era, may be confusing. Don't hesitate to ask questions, and as I said, I will be happy to transfer a couple of LPs before you commit any funds. By the way, I don't usually archive my LPs, I find playing them very pleasurable. If you put together a good system you may as well. Tapes are another story. Have fun!
Here are pictures of my turntables and workstation.
http://mdcarter.smugmug.com/gallery/2424008#127077056
http://mdcarter.smugmug.com/gallery/2424008#127077469
http://mdcarter.smugmug.com/gallery/2424008#127077194
Here is the turntable on my lower level system, that shows a Cecil E. Watts Dust Bug in use.
http://mdcarter.smugmug.com/gallery/2424105#127081086