Enjoyed this PTA piece very much. I especially embrace his analogy to images by Ansel Adams vs. Andy Warhol. (I own both.)
Being a degreed electrical engineer, a musician, and having spent years around recording studios, I find nothing to disagree with in this. It is nothing short of enlightened. And, it is well written.
I mostly listen to symphonic, chamber, and jazz music. In these genres, producers are likely to stick to the facts on a recording. Yet still, there are a hundred variables that are to be managed. They include studio acoustical environment, close vs. overall miking, talent virtuosity, and on and on. If I listen to a multi-dozen miked recording vs. a single Decca Tree, for example, each can sound good -- but they sound completely different. Just recording solo piano presents lots of options. (The piano, like a struck string instrument, must 'play the room' as a necessary acoustic. Even a Steinway can sound like a $500 electronic instrument without the 'room'.
To the isolated audiophile, "natural" sound is a goal. Yet, in practice, it isn't. Not even in classical music. In pop music, few want to hear the Rolling Stones as they sounded to a fly on the wall in the studio. And they probably wouldn't buy their albums. Older von Karajan/Berlin classical albums sound like they were recorded in a hollow acoustic. Just as in feeding your face, the flavor is largely in the seasoning. And the sauces.
-Just one man's view.