Records that sound better when played on vinyl

yes, but the argument goes that the much higher inaudible frequencies produce harmonic interaction lower down the spectrum, and if truncated something sounds 'missing'.

i don't particularly buy into that myself though.

Me neither but I accept there might be something in it

i've also heard Pro-tools HD advocates swear blind that bass sounds much richer and fuller at 192khz ( about 4.5 times the resolution of CD audio), but i don't really buy into that either.

I don't know about bass but I've listened to a recording of a Tibetan singing bowl recorded and played back at both 44.1 and 192 and the difference was very clear. The 192 recording was much more sonically rich and the sound was much more 'present'.I'm quite cynical about most audiophile claims, I'm still yet to find someone who can tell the difference between a 320kbps mp3 and a .wav file in a blind test even though everyone claims 'loss of frequencies, flat bass, blah blah blah', so I was quite surprised at the difference I heard.