Agreed ... Just can't be so ... when it comes to analog in the here and now, Tape Rules.
Two things to think about, in that respect.
The needle does not travel across the surface of the vinyl at a uniform speed. It has a higher surface speed at the outer groove, and it is gradually reduced as the needle moves towards the inner groove. (Don't confuse 33 1/3 with distance traveled across the surface.)
Tape moves across the playback head at a uniform speed.
This alone makes the notion that vinyl is capable of a matching performance more than strange, as the frequency resolution of vinyl is not uniform, no matter what your rig is capable of. The limitation is in the medium, not the playback.
Second point. Lathe dub masters had the frequency headroom limited on purpose, in order for the cutter to stay inside the envelope of the lathe. They reduced the frequency content of what was on tape, in order to stay inside what vinyl could reproduce during the golden age of stereo.
Later, in the 70s, they developed methods that made it possible for lathes to cut finer resolutions with greater accuracy, but these were usually derided as producing vinyl that was too sharp/bright, compared to the audiophile treasures. (Later to be called "too CD-like.")
It was, however, much closer to the frequency headroom of the tapemaster ... and the original instruments.
Tape died as a medium for wide commercial distribution not because it was inferior to vinyl, but because it was much more expensive to manufacture, process in copying, and buy - and because it wasn't as convenient as "just flipping over an LP."
Stamping vinyl copies was much faster and a lot cheaper than making tape dubs - and that's why vinyl won out, while it also sounded "good enough" for the mass market.