What should be mandatory in every professional published review-

Nope, there isn't. And trust me....I read and think about this stuff WAY too much. You simply won't ACTUALLY know the sound of a thing unless you give a component time in your system...If a lot of reviewers say the same thing about something you can make reasonable assumptions, but that isn't actual "calibration," it's just allowing logical influence...I bought a Pass XA-25 after countless positive reviews knowing full well it would compete with a treasured and amazing sounding tube amp I already owned, and it did...lucky me as I didn't have to send it back. I think speaker systems are likely the most risky, and I've proven that to myself too many times.

i would also like more reviews that test in typical compact amuuurican living rooms of typical americans with a mortgage, not auditorium-sized venues in manses.  

"Gear that sounds good"

That is so different amongst listeners that it would help to know what the sonic preferences of the reviewer actually are.

You simply won’t ACTUALLY know the sound of a thing unless you give a component time in your system...If a lot of reviewers say the same thing about something you can make reasonable assumptions

@wolf_garcia And that’s the whole point. I’m not saying it’ll be certain that this will necessarily coincide with your hearing, but it certainly gives you a possible indication of what you might expect to hear or want to audition. Nobody’s saying the reviewer should be the final arbiter of what you should think because that’s ALWAYS up to you and your ears, but if you read consistent impressions by reviewers you can certainly include that in your arsenal as to what you might or might not be interested in. To me, that’s as far as the benefit of reviews should go given all the variables involved, but I hope you can agree that used for the information they can potentially offer within their limits they can still be very useful.

El redundo los bloviato a mundo.