Many (most) radio stations are using more or even more compression, exciters and stuff like that. The idea behind that is at least twofold: get noticed more when spinning the dial and in addition  get across in adverse environments such as noisy city spaces, offices and the likes even on cheap equipment. I understand but dread this. One of my favourite German radio statio (Radio Eins) does this very audibly, DLF* does it only modest. Some community radio stations also participate in this, though their sonic results are often even worse.
As for using digital sources, that even seems like a good idea. I have read from several producers who said, if you want to get as close as possible to what they are hearing as the finished product, cut out as much as additional factors as possible, rip your CDs to flac and listen via good computer soundcards. Even the additional factor of CD players can play a factor on changing the sound, and vinyl even more, vinyl as such is for technological reasons never true to the original signal. It's a fascinating technology, but here single components create even more very individual changes in sound.  This individual flexibility (money provided) is fascinating, but it's not "true to the original" as often claimed.
Thr Beatles always complained that the bass was significantly cut on the vinyl end product, but were always told that bass had to be reduced in order to avoid tobe arm skipping especially on those then popular cheap vinyl killers.
Just a few days ago I heard an interview with Giles Martin, son of the Beatles' producer George Martin who has been involved with going back as far as possible to the unbounced source tracks and creating remixes. Bouncing was a necessity in those days when working around the limitations of four track tapes, esp. for complex recordings such as Sgt. Pepper. Going back to the source tracks alone brings us significant sonic improvements, where he sais he gets praise for the great sound of his remixes even though that is nothing he has any influence in, the original recordings are just that great.
He also said he loves how his Sgt Pepper remix sounds on vinyl, even though it does sound different. The reason he was told is when mastering for vinyl they still need to cut some highs and lows. He too said, vinyl does sound different than his sources, but he too liked it.
A very interesting approach, I think. Another aspect that needs to be added to this discussion that still CDs get at least a small dose of added compression to the final mix, which often is not being done for vinyl. This makes comparisons even more complicated.
I find the HQ download movement interesting, but still they need to drastically ramp up the "packaging". There are many indie labels / artists who are doing it right and using the digital realm to their advantage: PDF booklet, readme text files, additional goodies such as graphics that can be used as backgounds, slide shows etc ... source stems for do-your-own-remix, ...
We are living in interesting times with a lot of choices. Let's use these choices creatively and consciously for each use case.