With regard to speaker reviews, I usually skip straight to the comparisons page, where the reviewer compares this particular speaker with one I am familiar with.
With really convoluted reviews, you usually have to read for the underlying tone of the author. You can't believe the words you read on the surface. Usually you can get a feel of what the author really thinks of the speaker by counting how many times the author defends some of the deficiencies of the speaker. I've noticed that's a common tactic, where the reviewer acknowledges some weakness of the speaker, but then glosses over them by pointing out other good attributes that make up for those deficiencies. To me, if they are deficiencies, they are deficiencies, no matter what pretty language the reviewer uses to cover it up.
I was reading an amature review of a Lavry DAC, in comparison to a Benchmark DAC1. In the review, the reviewer admitted to the below par workmanship of the Lavry DAC, but tried to gloss over this deficiency by pointing out that the Lavry DAC is more curved, therefore "sexier" looking than the square edged Benchmark DAC1. Give me a break.
The same reviewer also admitted that although the Lavry DAC does not resolve the details as well as the Benchmark DAC1, nevertheless he points out that the sound from the Lavry DAC has a silky smooth quality. Hello, that's just saying that the Lavry DAC has a lower resolution than the Benchmark DAC1, and it is inferior in sound reproduction. Forget the crap about the "silky smooth" sound part.
I never believed another word that reviewer have said since that I read that review.