OK, so let's go with this: maybe Axiom's DBX was not a valid test (a supposition I'm not prepared at this time to accept, but let's just go with it.) And maybe Alan's being a tad enthusiastic in his statement.
In what way does that invalidate the base premise that we simply don't know about which speaker is better or whether speakers are, in Alan's phrasing, "similarly good," without a valid DBX test? Are we to assume, then that reviewers magically hide their preferences and can be completely unbiased (unlike the rest of us)? THAT was the original statement that we're all arguing about, as far as I can tell.
What makes the S&V reviewer the arbiter? What makes him neutral? One simple graph? A few lines of glowing review? A few snarky lines about this design school or that one?
DON'T... call me stupid!