@johnread57
@thespeakerdude
I did not present an opinion. I presented verifiable, researched, well understood, mathematical facts. Facts not disputed by those with the deepest understanding of the underlying math, and those able to adapt the math to practical implementation.
Below is an opinion. It misinterprets personal opinion, narrow market popularity, and different to "something". That something is only described in easily falsified claims, falsified with math, not an appeal to narrow market popularity.
Perhaps @Fair, can enlighten with at least 2 or 3 of these research papers he claims are hard to find? A new paradigm with 3 decades of research that legitimately calls into question all current signal processing and hearing knowledge should have many available sources to reference.
>>> I see it differently. The old paradigm is falsified by phenomena
>>> for which it gives invalid predictions.
>>> For instance, according to the old paradigm,
>>> LPs shall be long gone, the way of cassette tape recorders
>>> and VCR video tapes. Yet LPs persisted,
>>> and the classic paradigm produces no convincing explanation
>>> as to why.
Very well. This 2016 review A Meta-Analysis of High Resolution Audio Perceptual Evaluation contains references to
"18 published experiments for which sufficient data could be obtained ... providing a meta-analysis involving over 400 participants in over 12,500 trials"
Conclusion is:
"Results showed a small but statistically significant ability of test subjects to discriminate high resolution content, and this effect increased dramatically when test subjects received extensive training."
Pair of charts below illustrates my statement about the growing LPs popularity and vanishing CDs purchases. In a wider context: digital streaming appears to be decimating CD sales, yet LPs have not been affected by that (or maybe even helped?).