Bandwidth and harmonic responses is the reason the pros record 96K-192K. Its quite the difference in sound going to 96K.
How...how is it "quite the difference"...?
What harmonic response is needed that only 96k-192k Hz can provide...that you will actually hear?
That greater bandwidth needs to make an obvious difference.
48k Hz provides both the dynamic range, bandwidth and harmonic response that is well beyond the hearing of most people.
Unless you want to talk about some psycho-acoustic "feeling" that is provided by the higher stuff...I'm not seeing much of an argument for it.
Like I said...pros do it because it's expected, that is the limit/state of the art, and the higher numbers are available to them, so clients just want it...and in some ways the pros may even be thinking it's an insurance policy for the future, when some new discovery or invention makes obvious use of all that stuff above 48k Hz.
It's possible...science is always finding new stuff...but for the most part, here we are talking about Rock/Pop music, and the heart of it, IMO, doesn't come anywhere near 96k or above.
The real point is about the obviously discernible net value of the formats used...not some theoretical "what if" and "maybe".
So to get back to your tape analogy...some of the most iconic Rock/Pop/Country/Jazz/Rap/etc music was/is made on a medium that falls way short of the dynamic range/response of even 48k digital. Why is it now that we have the higher numbers available to us, suddenly they are *needed* for music to be recorded well and sound well?
I think if they up the numbers 2x, 3x and even 4x higher...people will always chase after them, but to what real benefit?