If it sounds good, but has glaring technical problems, would it sound better if they fixed those glaring technical problems? Why put up with fixable / avoidable glaring technical problems?
If Beringer can avoid them for $29 it seems to imply that cost is not the issue in avoiding the problems?
If you have a defined test regime, then you can apply the same tests ( + measurements) to different devices irrespective of the cost of the device, and compare them.
In the absence of measurements, how do you get a (process/product) improvement feedback loop to make better stuff?
As Lord Kelvin said
"If you can not measure it, you can not improve it."
You can argue about measuring the right things, would the same approach be justified if he warned consumers against expensive gear that measured and sounded bad, when there was better sounding gear that measured better for less?
I'm looking forward to Tyll measuring the Bose and Beats headphones