Skepticism is generally healthy, but of course we are not discussing a scientific hypothesis per se. The question we are discussing is one where it seems fair to ask whether the skepticism is well-informed, i.e., whether the skeptic has studied among other things the mathematics of cyclic redundancy checks.
I am fairly confident that among people who truly understand the question at hand there is consensus that the specific reason I discussed, for why digital encoding of audio is inherently superior to analog encoding of audio, is the correct, primary reason. People whose interest in the question stems from their appreciation for high fidelity will generally answer the question from that perspective, i.e., the demonstrable differences in the sound quality for, most often, CD vs. vinyl. However, there is not likely any inherent reason why analog encoding of audio cannot be every bit as good as the best digital encoding, for however long the analog encoding survives anyway. To illustrate this point I will point out that it is possible to use the analog signal from a microphone to modulate the amplitude or frequency of a high-frequency carrier and record the carrier on a videotape machine similar to a video signal. Of course this is what home VCRs did, some of them at least, although I'm not knowledgeable of what level of quality would likely be assigned to the particular method used in actual practice. Whatever limitations there were, when this technology was in common use two or three decades ago, there is no inherent reason why this method couldn't be improved, essentially at whim, to the point of being entirely indistinguishable from the best digital recordings.
Thus, it is not entirely correct to view superior fidelity as the essential, primary advantage of digital encoding of audio over analog encoding of audio. I'm not suggesting that you wrote anything the least bit contrary to this, I'm merely pointing this out because the discussion wandered down a path where it now seems relevant to point this out in a plain manner. The true, primary advantage of digital encoding of audio is with the long-term survivability and preservation of the encoded information.
Of course it is conceivable that some great catastrophe will occur before 12020 comes around, such that civilization collapses. I think it would be a stretch to use this kind of possibility to argue against the assertion that present-day digital encodings of audio will survive long into the future, longer by orders of magnitude in fair comparison to the survivability of analog recordings.