His first point is definitely the biggest one to me. Points 2 and 3 (and 4, really) are decisions the listener makes. There's some "dumbing down", but that's always been the case, especially in audio. In the end, an educated listener understands the compromises and is free to choose lossless formats, devices with decent D/As, speakers as fine as wallet will allow, etc.
However, point 1 is largely a result of how the CD is mastered - the listener has no control over the compromise in quality.
I've wondered what
really makes DVD-A and SACDs sound better than most newer CDs. While, with greater quantization (bits) and temporal (sampling rate) resolutions, DVD-A and SACDs have clear advantages, I'm sure much of the real problem is poor use of the available dynamic range when the content is mixed/mastered.
Here's a nice visual comparison:
http://www.cdmasteringservices.com/loudnesgraphic.htm
It's really clear when you listen to, say an old CD from the 80s, then listen to any new one. The new one is almost always louder and clips much more often.
Of course, when clipping occurs, you're incurring 100% information loss. I wonder how much I'm missing.
I think the article would have been better if author clearly differentiated misconceptions in the consumer-space from compromises in quality audio engineers make (perhaps pressured by record companies, distribution, radio stations, marketing, etc... presumably to appeal to the largest number of <strike>listeners</strike> consumers).
.. 
