The fsb said, " ... the measurements crowd could profit from tackling the question of what ... do they want to listen to, which is a fundamentally aesthetic problem ... "
Imagine the mastering engineer playing through his final file one last time ... sitting back, nodding to himself, and hitting "send". That is the file I want to listen to, exactly, with nothing added, nothing altered, and nothing taken away. That's a purely technical issue, not aesthetic. The aesthetics are in the mastered file. I might like them or not, but always the credit or blame lies with the file, not my gear.
The only way I know to achieve what I want is the suite of measurements we have developed. The question of audibility is a good one. I would argue that science per se says go for the max. It's cost-conscious applied engineering that says no, stop when it's good enough. I get satisfaction in getting the best margins available, purely in principle, partly for peace of mind, and partly to reward the efforts of designers I value.
The alternative is like walking up the steps of the Louvre in Paris and having an attendant hand you a pair of rose-tinted glasses, and being told that because some of the paintings look a bit stark, it's better to view the whole collection through the filter.