Please note: I despise vinyl due to its inherent flaws, but accept the current situation of the formats. Due to this it is extremely likely I will be purchasing a turntable within the near future.
There is no [or should be no] question that CDs are technically superior to vinyl and have potential for higher sound quality. Ironically, this technical superiority hold CDs current downfall - the ability to increase compression has led to the loudness wars. These 'wars' are not physically possible to the same extent on vinyl because of limitations in the technology. Due to this current issue with CDs and vinyl's 'immunity' to this problem is why vinyl, can and in many cases does, sound better [more lifelike] than CDs. Of course, for the previous statement to be true quality gear must be used along with a well kept album.
Of course there are still high quality recordings being released on CDs, but this practice seems to be falling out of favor in the mainstream being forced to 'audiophile' companies, sadly.
Don't be so quick to despise it Andrew. I think the LP record almost defies logic. On the face of it the engineering challenges seem insurmountable. But when the right compromises sum to greater then the sum of the parts, the LP sounds wonderful.
The issue of CD dynamic range compression was addressed at the Amsterdam AES. The problems it causes are worse than you think. Fortunately, I don't have CDs with these problems, as classical engineers use the full dynamic range potential of the CD, which is significantly greater than the LP.
Unfortunately there is a tendency to think older technology not much use. Actually that is usually not so. That is why museums where items are put to work are so important. Museums of working electronics are rare. That is a pity.
When people actually can see what the technology of older generations can achieve they are astonished more often than not. A lot of people when seeing breaker ignition for the first time think it must be pretty useless. Actually a well set up breaker ignition starts and engine quicker and more reliably than the best computerized solid state ignition. My breaker ignitions are set to make my old engines start hair trigger, almost always starting with the first piston to come to compression. All solid state ignitions have to crank the engine for at least a a couple of revolutions and often more. The engine has to have a good cranking speed to. Breaker ignition will start an engine even when the battery is very flat and barely has the power to turn the engine at all. Solid state computer ignition systems can't come close to matching that.
Some could look at it and say intrinsic defects. However those ignitions ran engines that fed the populations during WW II and won the day on land sea and air. Especially on land and in the air. And you can go back further and just look at the power of steam!