First, how does one qualitatively measure "objective" value as it applies to superiority in cultural expression? Objective, presumably, refers to an independent metric of evaluation, wherein bias is shielded from unfairly influencing outcome.
To that end, it's probably unreasonable to marginalize (or uplift) cultural expression on the basis of popularity. Surely, one must realize that visibility is the first step to discovery and; ultimately, praise. One could produce brilliant, illuminating examples of transcendent self-expression, but if one is unable to find a marketable audience to display said expression, the global accessibility of his efforts are all but nullified. As such, efforts go undiscovered. Is that a remark on the eminence of his culture? Of course not. There's simply a clear cooperation between artist and market, should ultimate recognition and success ever be realized, that has nothing to do with the inherent inter-cultural superiority.
Not that such a metric doesn't necessarily exist (perhaps one based on subsequent inspiration/advancement exposed culture realizes as a result of the contributions of a few notable thinkers), it just defies contextual hemming in when you try to make a comparative contrast between cultures on the basis of "objective" evaluation markers.