Interesting read, and I'm still going through it now (slow reader, reading over things a few times, plus busy day). Not sure I completely agree with everything in it though. Using the same analogy of light/colour and sound. People can see the difference between 16bit colour, 24bit colour, and 32bit colour. They are even expanding that with HDR. People can also tell the difference between audio the same way. 16bit sound cards are a thing LONG in the past. People can easily tell the difference between the same stages, 16bit audio, 24bit audio, and 32bit audio. That being said, 32bit audio is relatively new, and the Samsung S8 is one of the only cell phones that support it, and even then, I believe you still need an app to play it. It can play smaller bit files and upsample them, same kind of idea as a 1080p being upgraded to 4k. It's not true 4k, but depending on the software/hardware, it does look (or sound in this case) better than the smaller resolution. Many people can also tell the difference between MP3 and FLAC files. If the article was correct, the sampling would be captured perfectly and completely by sampling; an infinite sampling rate is not required. That sounds like he's trying to say that the compression is perfect and uncompresses to a lossless format. Obviously far from the truth.
Another point of contention is the difference in audio from DVD to BlueRay. Yea, you can argue BlueRay is newer, better recording equipment, etc, etc when the audio was created. But on a good system, you will hear a huge difference in audio quality in the same movie, going like for like on the same system. I'm still reading through the article, and I got to the point of him saying 16bit vs 24bit and him saying it's useless. Sorry, I know many people, gamers and audiophiles alike, will disagree with that.
