Analogue warmth

[f1eng]

With the utmost respect to the OP, this sounds like a load of rubbish. It’s just a rehash of the old Tube vs. Solid-State debate
Analog warmth isn’t the addition of artefacts to the sound, rather its ‘lack’ is the removal of ‘naturalness’. Like trying to reproduce the smell and atmosphere of a pine forest, you can analyse and remix the components of the ‘smell’ all you want but you’ll never artificially recreate that special magic and you’ll always prefer the real thing. 
In digital, you’re not listening to music, you're listening to maths. It’s far, far removed from the original music
Take a great analog system, reduce or remove as many of the artefacts as possible discussed in the article and does it sound more like digital? No. It sounds more like the original, in other words it doesn’t loose warmth, rather it gains in naturalness. 
The first attempt at digital sounded horrible. Over the years that gap has closed and it now sounds less horrible and at times quite excellent. But a good turntable with ALL its physical limitations and clunky ‘antique’ technology still sounds better. Added artefacts? No. Less subtractions.....less distance between  the original and reproduction. How do you improve analog? Less of everything discussed in the article....not their addition.

Sorry the article is correct and you are not.
I have both worked in the business plus been an amateur recordist for over 50 years.
You have obviously never made a recording from microphones and compared the microphone output to the output of the recorder.
Even the finest reel-to-reel recorders I used, even spending considerable time and expertise getting a good compromise of level setting between tape overload and hiss are not transparent to their input - ie the output of the recorder does NOT sound like the microphone feed. A digital recorder can produce an output indistinguishable to the microphone feed, and even the fairly early ones could, so this idea or early digital not being good is a myth perpetuated by people who have done no recording of their own.
The shortcomings of LPs (they are not even as accurate as the reel-to-reel tapes) were well known to the people working in the business when I joined in in 1975 and are capable of explaining all the euphonic aspects of LP replay so many enthusiasts (including me) enjoy.
I have sufficient experience to know it is the shortcomings of LPs I like and don't pretend there is some other mysterious magic aspect which is yet undiscovered by man.
If you don't like digital either your system isn't transparent or you don't like what the engineer and artist released, because with digital you get exactly that and there are few ways to tune it to taste, whereas with record players there are not only cartridges almost as transparent as CD but also ones with tailored responses, some slightly, some extreme, so you can change the sound to quite a long way from that the engineer/artist released if you so wish.