It seems like it would help if there was actually a consistent explanation of what "digitalitis" from the audio side. I think these are the main components to it:
1. Digital devices are complex and produce and accumulate a lot of low-level embedded noises that robs the overall sound quality (contrast, detail, etc), while analog formats have an audible noise floor that is separate from the important audio. It takes a lot of work to remove this digital noise, and it comes from power supplies, clocking, jitter, networks, USB, etc.
2. Brick wall or sharp digital filters used in ADCs and DACs flatten the image, remove spacial cues, and confuse transients which qualitatively makes music seem harder, less fluid, three-dimensional and open.
3. Digital formats have plenty of resolution on paper, but except for DSD, aren't able to capture the most subtle details that make sounds seem lifelike. This is a complex topic since it goes against the math, but DSD is a good example where the specs can be lower than a 24/192 PCM file, yet the level of detail is higher.
4. No matter how much correction you throw at a digital system for noise, jitter, filtering, DAC quality, file resolution, etc you are still at the mercy of the analog to digital converters used in the recording and/or mastering, that in most cases are going to be less resolving and classy than the
average WBF system. Virtually every professional ADC or DAC used in studios is build on off-the-shelf chips, and relatively cheap electronics.
5. Digital masters also push pretty hot levels, which can be fatiguing, whereas you just can't do that with a vinyl master.
I consider digital a work in progress, and because of my musical tastes very little that I listen to is on AAA vinyl pressings. Besides that, I think SACD/DSD are the best we've got, and with a good DAC/system that is enough for me. But if my tasted leaned more classical or jazz, and I favored a warmer sound, you still can't beat vinyl.