I know about nyquest, do you? 192kHz sampling rate means the highest tone representable is 96kHz, which is roughly 80kHz more then what the average human can actually (still) perceive.

For audio-postprocessing, I might be convinced that there is a benefit of raising the sampling frequency that high, but for pure hi-fi consumers? No way. This is snakeoil.

That's an unconvincing argument because the presence of ultrasonic sounds can affect human perception. It is just not perceptible via the exact same mechanism that ordinary sound is.

The argument you should be going with is that the speakers and headphones that people will be playing the music on doesn't do ultrasonic sound.

"ultrasonic sounds can affect human perception. It is just not perceptible via the exact same mechanism..."

talk about unconvincing

This is a good point. Also, I don't see the economic incentives for this to be snakeoil.

If the average human can’t hear these sounds, that’ll just make the audiophiles think they have above average hearing.

I think I misunderstood your first message. Yes, you are right.

For simple listening there is no benefit. As you pointed out it ca be beneficial if the audio is processed (for instance, slowed down).