There shouldn't be a debate about whether certain types of pre-ringing due to digital filters are audible; it's perfectly within the realm of the industry to test if people can actually hear anything, be it comparing two music samples or listening to a null file. The current status seems to be that people can't hear any differences (pre-ringing or not) between hi-res formats and Redbook. Even with my now-gone setup of a Bifrost + V200 + HD800, I could down-sample things to 38k and not even hear anything in the null file, let alone in an ABX comparing the two music files. If someone tells me "well you need to hear how X-type cymbals sound", then I say, do the experiment on a decent sample of people and cement the legitimacy of hi-res formats. It never seems to get done. I mean, it really only takes one hi-res sound sample of an actual musical sound to do the trick.
I agree with you - except for one detail - which sort of depends on what you're trying to establish.
From a marketing perspective, proving that a significant number of people can hear the difference would serve to establish that "there's a legitimate market need for high-res files"; however, to prove that an audible difference exists, all you need to do is produce one guy (or gal) who can consistently hear the difference with at least one file. As long as even a few people can hear the difference, then that difference may be worth the extra cost and aggravation
for them. The reality is that the folks who sell high-res files have little reason to do a study - because their business is predicated on the
assumption that the difference is real (so the results of a study might hurt their business, but have little likelihood of helping it). I don't know of many people who stand to profit from proving that high-res files
aren't worth the bother.
My personal experience is that I have absolutely heard high-res files that sounded better than their 44k "equivalent counterparts"; and those high-res files sounded different when they were down-converted to 44k. However, I'm not at all convinced that the differences I heard were attributable to the difference between the sample rates rather than simply because the 192k version file had been more carefully mastered; and I'm also not convinced that the differences I heard when I down-sampled the file weren't due to the inevitable slight differences that get introduced whenever you perform any sort of conversion. Therefore, I'm not 100% convinced that, as a general statement, "high-res files sound different/better than 44k files"; however, I am convinced that at least some high-res files sound better than their 44k equivalents, for whatever reasons, which is enough reason for me to be willing to buy those files, and also enough reason for me to want my equipment to be able to play them without subjecting them to an extra conversion.
Since both bandwidth and storage space have gotten so cheap, I simply don't find it significantly more difficult or costly to use the high-res versions when they're available. (And, yes, I've even heard a few high-res reissues that sound
worse than their Red Book counterparts, and those I don't listen to.) Back when vinyl was all there was, I used to buy MFSL half-speed mastered records.... I'm not really sure they sounded better because they were half-speed mastered, or because they used virgin vinyl, or simply because they were mastered better... the point was that they offered a different version which did indeed sound better... and I find this to be the case today with at least some high-res digital audio releases.
I would also disagree with your blanket statement about people not hearing any difference... a lot of people don't seem to agree with that statement... and that isn't limited to audiophiles. (For example, the latest version of Dolby's "Professional Audio Encoder" includes an option to up-sample 48k video content to 96k through a filter that they claim produces a reduction in pre-ringing (at the expense of more post-ringing), and which they claim "makes the audio sound better".
Personally, I'll reserve judgement until it actually does get tested, but, until then, I wouldn't assume either way.
