One problem you might have is that it can be very difficult at first to figure out which articles/posts can be trusted (as in, solidly grounded in verifiable evidence) vs. ones that are more like ungrounded opinions or just
plain unadulterated bullshit. Sadly, the audio world is littered with the later, more so than other fields in my opinion. It's a lesser problem here on ASR of course, but still, it's a bad idea to take what people say at face value if their posts don't come with solid citations/references. Especially when it comes to perception.
Always be sceptical of everything you read. In order to make progress in audio you have to assume misinformation is everywhere and people are out to get you. Sometimes to sell you stuff, but not always - quite often it comes from well-intentioned people who have been thrown off target by other charlatans (and so on).
Also keep in mind that
it's much easier to assert something than to refute it; this is why you will sometimes come across statements made on this forum that are highly questionable and not backed by evidence, but combatting these statements head-on is difficult because there is no evidence to the contrary, either. If you give such statements any credit you risk getting confused very quickly because they will likely contradict each other and you will operate with a mistaken notion of what is fact vs. some guy's opinion.
To avoid this problem I tend to follow a simple rule of thumb: if I can't figure out if a given post is grounded on solid evidence, I just act as if that post doesn't exist. That tends to make things much clearer. For example, I tend to ignore all posts that are about anecdotal/subjective impressions, especially if the post does not explicitly mention the test was done blind. Example topics where many articles/posts can be ignored for lack of evidence are audibility of non-linear distortion and time/phase distortion.
To go back on-topic: when it comes to speakers specifically, I think reading
"the book" is one of the quickest and surest way to get you started on solid ground. It's quite easy to read even for beginners. And it meets the above rule of thumb by backing all claims by specific references to solid peer-reviewed research.