How Science Got Sound Wrong


I don't believe I've posted this before or if it has been posted before but I found it quite interesting despite its technical aspect. I didn't post this for a digital vs analog discussion. We've beat that horse to death several times. I play 90% vinyl. But I still can enjoy my CD's.  

https://www.fairobserver.com/more/science/neil-young-vinyl-lp-records-digital-audio-science-news-wil...
128x128artemus_5
Post removed 
Amusing but i'm worn out--my IQ must be below 100.  Attempting to distill all of this down to its essence i conclude that no one has really refuted atdavid's argument--which i have further distilled down to: "Neil Young is full of s**t"--well, heck--we all knew that to start.

I'm going to the bar with avsjerry to live with it 😀

Neil Young would probably have had a much different outcome had he known any audiophiles who were into tweaks. As I’ve oft observed not much good can come of playing untreated CDs on stock un-tweaked systems, especially in-tweaked CD players. 
I doubt he has any hearing left anyway--especially after all those sessions with Crazy Horse--i suppose i could cut him some slack and interpret his rants as being solely about compression of dynamic range in digital?  Nah, even though i like his early work he's still full of it...
"...not much good can come of playing untreated CDs on stock un-tweaked systems..."
Would Neil Young's CDs become good if treated, or it is a little too much to wish for?