Well Peller, my apologies to offend your work. The post above mine says that your conclusions are that the plugin is basically equal to tape. This is an impossible statement.
I did however just read your article and it seems that your conclusions are that the Plugin exhibits compression characterstics very similar to 456 @ 15ips, although not quite the same.
These two statements are vastly different. I wrongly assumed that the poster was being factual.
I didn't bother to listen to your samples since a big reason to use tape is for it's resolution, not it's compression characteristics. If you consider that there are 80 million N-S binary transactions per second at 15ips on your typical recorder, you posting sound samples at 44.1 or 96k of tape recordings and then comparing them to digital recordings is nonsensical because now your just comparing digital to digital. IE, you are now just comparing the tape artifacts to the plugin.
Which is absolutely fine if presented this way. The proper thing to say if your trying to be intellectually honest would be that the UA plugin faithfully captures all the negative artifacts of tape recording. Otherwise you are misleading your readers who might not know better.