As Cloud Hunter says, sound is analogue and any attempt to capture it digitally won't be 100% accurate. But then again, nor will tape, so many factors in the mics, preamps etc subtly distorting the original sound. It's been argued that beyond a certain sample rate, the human ear is not sensitive enough to hear the shortfalls of digital recording, similar to how 'retina' displays are higher resolution than the eye can distinguish. That's not to say a tape recording can't more pleasing to the ear for 'some reason' but let's not kid ourselves it's because it's a perfectly accurate analogy (source of that word...) of a sound.
Vinyl is simply a way of replaying that captured analogue signal and, I must say, I'm not a massive fan. Bear in mind I grew up buying vinyl records (CDs were a year or two away when I started my consumerism) and have owned *thousands* over the years. Yes, they can sound great but no better than a decently mastered digital recording (CD*, FLAC, whatever). I tend towards the kid and the emperors new clothes when people start talking about warmth and soul, I kind of file that away in the same dept as expensive audio cables giving a recording 'air'. Maybe that's what you hear, great, but not me. One mans warmth is another mans mud (I'm the first to admit I don't have golden ears but I wonder how many people do...)

* CD mastering: I think a lot of the earlier negative reactions to CD were due to badly mastered CDs. Initially, record companies just used the existing master tapes for the CD releases. These tapes had been mastered with vinyl in mind so had the required bass-cut, treble boost etc. Only later did CD specific masters get made that portrayed the sound as intended. My favourite example is Husker Du's Warehouse:Songs and Stories (yeah, the polar opposite of ambient!

Leave a comment: