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...
artemus_5
geoffkait,
"I never said I had a degree in Theoretical Physics."
Is it too late for you to learn the benefits of knowing when to stop?

Hint: If you get mad, do not respond until tomorrow. It works.
I didn’t even have squeeze your head that time, glubby. Good show!
artemus_5,

"BTW @atdavid. Have you REALLY posted 367 times since Oct 30., 19? That may be a record."
Not even close to a record.

In that same period (October 30, 2019 until now) geoffkait has posted 418 times.
Frankly I think the author might be onto something and I’m only judging by what he wrote in some other articles I located somewhere in cyberspace, including this excerpt from one of them. It just sounds right. 

“I’m fascinated by sound baths not just for the quiet, subtle thrills that pure tones give to any breathing human. As a neuroscientist and biophysicist, I spent my career understanding the mathematical theory of how fluid brains interact with vibrating bodies, with the most relevant discoveries published in three research papers (see here, here and here). It turns out that coherent sound patterns can help nervous systems “tune” themselves, in the same general way tuning-forks help experts tune pianos or harps.”