The thing is, “good” is subjective. I'm old too but so far as sound goes I'd have a decent CD over a record any day.
To answer your question, there are three main issues:
1/ In the “old days” when records were the only way for most people to listen to decent quality music the people involved in mixing, mastering, operating the cutting lathe, pressing etc. were experts with maybe decades of experience. Those people are long gone and, with maybe a few exceptions, there are no people around now with much experience.
2/ Records were made for discerning listeners with reasonably good quality equipment (of course, that doesn't apply to all record buyers in the 60s or 70s but that was the type of consumer they aimed at). Nowadays, and I mean no offence here, the “typical record buyer” is a young kid with a Crossley record player who has never heard decent music reproduction and is used to listening to MP3s on a cheap set of ear-buds. It's also these younger people who are gullible enough to pay the ridiculous prices records sell at.
3/ Nowadays most music is recorded digitally. Old master tapes have been re-mastered and “digitised”. This means that just about every possible negative is present: the original tape noise with be there, any advantage offered by an analogue recording (real or imagined) is gone, because it's a digital recording now. It's then transferred (possibly badly) to a record so that the surface noise, wow and flutter and clicks and pops are added to all of this.
So I'd say that in most cases records now are not as “good” as they were when there was no alternative for most people.