While it is true that given ideal circumstances, records can sound better than any digital system, getting that level of sound quality requires a VERY expensive music system. You need a really good turn table with a really good stylus, along with high quality throughout the other components, including (preferably) a tube amp, if you want to keep everything analog.
Meanwhile, a 2-300 dollar digital system will sound pretty damn good to most listeners.
It is also absolutely true that no digital recording will ever capture completely an analog recording. The following image explains why:
The curving wave is the analog signal, the rectangles the digital sampling of the original analog signal. Obviously, there are gaps where they don't match up. This is why higher sampling rates on digital tracks are far superior, as the higher the rate, the narrower those rectangles are, and the better the approximation. (and the bigger the file is, too). With a sufficiently high sampling rate, even though the track isn't an exact duplicate of the analog original, you will find it very hard to hear any difference between the two unless, as I said, the pure analog one is played on a sufficiently high-end system.
Anyway, it's also true that the last bastions of LPs are audiophiles and DJs. I know a lot of local DJs, though, since I was fairly plugged into the local rave scene for a lot of years, and there's actually been a growing movement even there to go digital. Not universal, by any means, but it's a lot more common than it was 10 years ago, that's for sure.
Now, serious audiophiles, them can be some nutty people. You can easily drop, I shit you not, $100k on a turntable, if you're that serious. Hell, if you want, you can drop $650k. Same thing with speakers. There's tons of speaker lines that run over 100k. Now, I'm not saying you'll need to spend THAT much to get analog to sound better, just illustrating the lengths some people will go for audio quality...
-Arlos