All the old issues of Stereo Review are online!!

Does it though?  Perhaps there are some who are interested in both the measurements and the listening.  I know I certainly enjoy John Atkinson's objective analyses of equipment that have long accompanied other reviewer's subjective evaluations in Stereophile.

Of course it does. People will always gravitate, toward those with like opinions/references/experience(not to mention: aural acuity, or- lack thereof).

The measurements have little to do with opinion/references/experience or aural acuity - quite the opposite.  If the measures are validly obtained they provide information that I can choose to regard or not.  That's my, or anyone else's, prerogative.  It was true in the days of Stereo Review and remains true today.

"Perhaps there are some who are interested in both the measurements and the listening.", and- as I stated, "That also explains why he had followers....". My last post directly addressed that statement and the prior, "Does it though?". Measurements, by definition, are a reference and one can, "choose to regard(them) or not." Are you being intentionally obtuse? How much separation is there, between the prerogatives you exercise and the opinions you express? Another waste of keystrokes. That Julian Hirsch was a bad joke, is my personal opinion.  It was true in the days of Stereo Review and remains true today(my prerogative to retain that opinion).

That Julian Hirsch did not rely exclusively on measurements in his reviews is fact, not opinion.  The point of my initial post.  Why so hyperbolic?