Well, it is equivalent. Not in terms of what a played back sound is like, because tape and digital both introduce characteristic artifacts, but in terms of "thi

Well, it is equivalent. Not in terms of what a played back sound is like, because tape and digital both introduce characteristic artifacts, but in terms of "this signal peak is so many dB above the noise floor." If you actually code some audio DSP(and I do), you quickly learn that there are a lot of ways to color sound that aren't quantified except in a very broad statistical sense, but are measurable in audition. What digital is very good at is the basics of reproduction with a (statistically) uncolored result. At artistic effect, it is somewhat more limited; a lot of compute time and engineering has to be thrown into reproducing some straightforward analog world things and model accuracy still has room for improvement even now. If you want to quibble with the video, do so on its terms. It isn't saying that digital is better, it's saying that digital is better at a very specific task.