[speak_on]

If you are looking for studies, this one comes to mind: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/289039184_The_audib...

A quick search returned this PDF with a nice diagram of what aliasing looks like: https://download.tek.com/document/76W_30631_0_HR_Letter.pdf

To draw a design parallel: pixel-perfect design isn't something we are born with, noticing tiny details is a developed skill.

And yes, you are on point: oversampling is used extensively, but this just points at the exact issue: Nyquist theorem gave us a math algorithm, we still need to account for the electronic component imperfections. And then we are entering a different space of quality/precision/psychoacoustics/perception/etc. Meaning, not all converters, not all pre-amps, not all mics "sound" the same, even when they use same types of components on paper.

[vor_]

Oh, dear, that AES 2014 paper from Meridian (which was trying to push its controversial proprietary MQA audiophile system the same year) was widely criticized on audio forums when it came out, ranging from the rectangular dithering method to the use of a hard metal tweeter that could cause IM.

Do you have more convincing sources?

[speak_on]

I don't. Do you? I am not a researcher. Saying that, do you have a double-blind study handy on MP3 256 vs 320 actual audible differences? If not, can you yourself hear the difference? If you can - it might be an illusion.