Also, at least according to https://pubs.aip.org/asa/jasa/article/145/1/458/638769/Small...
smallest percieved time difference between ears is half the sample time of 44.1kHz
Some math [1]
44.1k file containing pulses with sub-sample delays [2]
Something similar, but square wave, and nicely showing that timing precision actually depends on bit-depth and not the sampling rate [3]
Some practical experiments with capturing the playback of such files and verifying that the delay is preserved: pulse [4] and square [5]
[1] https://troll-audio.com/articles/time-resolution-of-digital-...
[2] https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/t...
[3] https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic/58511-time-resoluti...
[4] https://www.head-fi.org/threads/can-you-hear-upscaling.97295...
[5] https://www.head-fi.org/threads/can-you-hear-upscaling.97295...
It gets much more complicated with more and modern speakers doing room calibration (at least Genelec and Neumann have their own, and Sonos also has some iphone waving trueplay thing). And just saying "Niquist!" does not help to understand, e.g., how precisely can phase be aligned by applying FIR filters, and what impact does the sample rate or bit depth have.