Excuse me!!!!!
In a vinyl setup, the source first scenario really is most important. Vinyl's so bad generally that if you feck it up at the deck, or arm, or cartridge (in that order, try an AT95E in a top deck compared to an old Dual, cheaper Jap belt drive or something), no fancy amp or speaker is ever going to rescue it! This was something easily and repeatedly demonstrated and to this day, locked into my very being. Digital I grant you is so good at the lowest prices that there's no audible hang-up using say a Topping D10 into an expensive system - until the 'audiophool' eyes and mindset kick in of course...
The whole LP12 vs. everything else situation is a bit complex really. The LP12
DID make 70's and 80's LP's sound nicer and I suspect the colouration in the product itself, made worse with more massive tonearms starting with the Ittok and coupled with the slight wow in the drive (shared and worse in similar Thorens designs but not there in the best idler models which were noisier or direct drives which could be siting sensitive if low level feedback effects were to be avoided), maybe gave the music some form of almost subliminal ebb and flow which is highly addictive. I was in denial until an epiphany moment at Linn's factory when they cut an acetate from known master sources (I think it was an ATR 102 playback machine) two track half inch 30IPS Blue Nile master with no noise reduction (none really needed with tapes like this I was told), played the acetate (you can do it once and it sounded good on the top late 80's era LP12) - the 12" single cut I believe from the same tape sounded awful and as for the LP of the same track (Tinseltown).. Wasn't until a couple of years later than I heard a UK made but relatively unkown deck at around half the price with Rega arm ("RB arms sound so 'grey'" wail the audiophile audiophools) and same cartridge (K9) in comparison with same stylus used, that any real faith in the vinyl format was restored. Thirty five or so years on, I suspect the UK sold Roksan and PT decks really were 'better' in a subjective sense, but they sure as hell weren't so 'entertaining' in the (largely godawful?) PA-style stereo's we had back then... Maybe the slight added 'belt drive wow' I'm going on about is where some of the 'soul' comes from?
Frank - I'm not sure but I think it was Martin Colloms who started the whole Pr@t thing (Pace, Rhythm & Timing) and he even did a speaker design called The Rhythm King. For me, the LP12 was all about the 'tunes' - melodies, harmonies, singing along with the lyrics and being easily able to dip in and out of a recorded mix*, which was something I'd always done but never really consciously to that point. I can do it with live performances too but obviously 'live' has a more straight laced effect than a produced mox on a sound system.. I've been using headphones a lot recently (nothing to whet anyone's appetites here) and have been told off by my TV watching better half as I've been 'miming' along with the songs and tapping my feet - Whoops
*I'm sure it's measurable, but some 'HiFi' systems scream DETAIL at you, but just don't seem to allow you 'in' to the music being played. The best ones do, even if in 'HiFi' (not high fidelity) standards they initially sound less interesting. Domestic listening isn't the same as recording or mastering when you almost want everything under a magnifying glass, in my opinion currently anyway.