I see what you mean. I didn’t mean to sound like AI knows best, or anything like that. But it’s easy to fall into the trap that Google digs fo you with that AI summary. I see the same thing happening in online news media, where news articles have an AI generated summary. It’s supposedly checked by a journalist, but I have seen some rather strange conclusions 
So in this case where I’ve always thought that air density is the key factor, a casual google search easily confirmed my line of thought. Lesson hopefully learned…
And just like @sobek knows a lot more about acoustics, than most people, I know a lot more than most about aviation. Not trying to come off as a know it all, because I’m not. It’s just that common knowlege in this field is pretty low. It’s easy to spot those who has bought into the many simplified theories that is out there. Even sometimes among pilots. It’s easy to see how they can falsely confirm their beliefs. It opened up my eyes a little. I guess it will be something else when AI can base its comprehension on scientific studies, rather than online hearsay.