Should music critics also be audiophiles?


Now that I’m into audio, I’d much rather read a music review that can discuss the technicalities of the recordings in addition to musical context and achievement.  
redwoodaudio
When films are screened for film critics, I imagine that they are good quality renditions (used to call them "prints") on good/big screens with proper sound, etc. If a director or composer has made an effort to include something in the film, the playback should not obscure it. And a good film critic would know the optimal playback conditions for a film.

I see no reason the above argument doesn’t transfer without loss to the music critic. Now, whether an article of music criticism *should* discuss the audiophile technicalities is an interesting one. I’d love to see it, but I could imagine that for reviews with word-limits (i.e., all of them) it could displace important critical remarks about more central considerations.
Yes as Tom says above most Audiophile mags, print and online, do music reviews and grade on sound quality as well as performance. To me great music is great music but great recording certainly helps a lot. Likely these days most critics use headphones and it’s a bit easier to put a competent headphone system than a speaker fronted system.
I can enjoy a crappy recording of a really great piece of music.

I can enjoy a fine recording of a song that is just okay otherwise.

Just like anything else that has various measures of quality it is the masterpiece that encompasses them all.

A music critic could and should be able to discuss all the aspects of what makes a piece of music bad, good or great.