I think of soil kind of like a complex living thing, not unlike a person as far as "feeding it." If you were to eat just a few things, you would not be as healthy as if you eat a huge variety of various fruits, veggies, proteins, and bits of various greenery that we call herbs.
Adding this 1 thing or that 1 thing is not how I approach it. I try to retain all of the organic material that grows or comes to our property (like kitchen scraps) and compost all of it, except for a few things like bones, meat, big thorns, very, painted/waxy cardboard, large pieces of wood. The compost then has a comprehensive variety of "stuff" in it that, when spread on the soil surface, will be processed by the soil dwelling critters, and rain, into a form that roots can use, and moved to a location where roots can access it. It's the way mother nature does it in areas where people just visit but don't try to control things.
I've never tested soil because I wouldn't understand the results. And which soil would I test? The mowed area, vs. the front area where very little compost has been added, or other cultivated areas where a lot of compost has been added? Since the results of putting same plants in those various locations varies so wildly, I am confident that soil tests from those areas would also vary wildly.
Nothing against the very important subject of chemistry, or the noble pursuit thereof, and I hope my comments don't give that impression. I say these things in support of my rejection of the notion that a gardener of ornamental plants or even a casual "veggie patch" must self-educate in regard to soil analysis or piecemeal "amendments" to succeed. I never see any discussion about comparing the results of soil testing to the soil in a pristine (unaltered by disturbance or the removal or addition of soil or amendments) natural location. The ornamental and veggie plants that are common in commerce/cultivation come from all over the world, from all kinds of soils. So it seems very reasonable to me that although they may be in the right hardiness zone, not all of the plants I like will like the local conditions where I am.
Sometimes a plant will (allegedly, in discussion) exhibit an imbalance that isn't necessarily remedied by adding more of something, but said imbalance can occur (allegedly, in discussion) because there is too much of something else. If that is going on, adding the "missing" thing might not help.
I've absorbed enough from reading articles and forum comments to recognize that 10-10-10 isn't a brand or kind of fertilizer, it's just a measurement of 3 (out of possibly thousands) of substances that plants need. An organic or synthetic fertilizer could be 10-10-10. I do use fert for potted plants, so I want all 3 of those things to be present.
The necessity of using tap water on gardens at times can add an additional layer of complications in regard to likely high PH, chlorination, fluoride.
Maybe I'm just lazy and want to let Mother Nature do things for me? IDK.
Mucking around with this stuff if you don't know what you don't know, don't have a comprehension of every thing a plant needs, how they obtain those things, and everything that is in those packaged products @ a store could do more harm than good. When I have a plant that doesn't do well, it's so much easier and cheaper to try something else than to try to analyze the cause of the unsatisfactory result and attempt to alter that.
Pat, I may have missed it if already discussed, but what are your daylilies doing that you feel like they need fertilizer?
. Good luck with your garden 
. Stay healthy and safe 
.
