I'm not sure but I think you are replying to u/Pbman2 and the YouTube link he posted, I haven't seen that content. So apologies in advance if I'm being unhelpful here.

You referenced an AP News article that someone was drawing from (and not getting it right it sounds like you're saying?)

So I just added the CNN link and I wanted to also put you and everyone else onto this article, which is pretty in depth and germane to our discussion:

https://asiatimes.com/2024/07/was-there-a-second-shooter-new-acoustic-evidence/

There is actually another link to the CNN article there in his first sentence. The author doesn't give any revelations here but he does cover the entire situation in-depth, its a fairly long but comprehensive read.

Of note:

Only one shooter has been identified and the FBI says he acted alone. The bureau may want to reconsider its conclusion....Obviously this controversial audio forensic analysis needs peer review. But there are other questions beyond the audio forensics that need attention.

In fact, we don’t know if any of the bullets have been recovered. Fired and recovered shells, if found, could potentially be matched to the weapon or weapons...

Fairly bland but if you keep reading he does offer some worthwhile questions based upon the information we have heard so far.

Only trying to help or at least verify that this other audio study was done by researchers at University of Colorado.

Here is the CNN link also.

Hope this is helpful.