Is it? The ~128kbps multiformat test proved that MP3 held its own with Ogg Vorbis and AAC, and that many people found ~128kbps to be transparent. For this reason 128kbps is still an important bitrate to test. I can only assume that the reason Ogg Vorbis is not being tested is that this is an MP3 listening test.

I have just re-read your original post. From your curious explanation 99% of VBR files are 320 VBR, as they don't specify an alternative maximum (thankfully). If you want to call them 320 VBR then by all means please do, but it is a severely confusing term to cover 99% of all VBR files!

If you use -B 320 to restrict the maximum bitrate to 320kbps you do not have a 320kbps file, unless you used -b 320 as well. If you encode multiple albums using -B 320 they will all have different average bitrates, none of which will be 320kbps. I understand your confusion, but my point is simply that you cannot use VBR properly and then refer to an exact bitrate. That's CBR, or even ABR, but certainly not VBR.

Because 100x more devices play MP3 than Ogg Vorbis?

The test is a blind test. Why compare how encoder A sounds at 128kbps against encoder B at 192kbps? That makes no sense at all. If the previous multiformat 128kbps test is anything to go by more people should use 128kbps as many find it transparent. Your comments regarding 128kbps MP3 and audiobores conflict - although I agree with the sentiments.

VBR. Variable BitRate. You can tell the encoder to not go above a certain bitrate, or below, as you say, but the whole point of VBR is that you are after a certain quality, not bitrate/filesize. 320 VBR is an oxymoron.

The files played are not MP3, they are WAVE. This is necessary to ensure that the decoder is not an issue and, more importantly, as you have lossless (perfect/not lossy) reference files to compare to.

Hmm. Troll much?