What tests would you like all speaker reviewers to do for their reviews?

live sound is not the same as reproduced sound. Why is that hard to understand? your argument is therefore not valid.

@bdp24, I get your point. Sound is sound - pressure variations with respect to time. How it's processed by the ear, nerves, brain system is what we hear. Correcting a speaker for the hearing mechanism processing does not make sense to me, because any heard sound already has been processed by the same mechanism within each person's ear-brain system.

This is all wishful thinking.

As for the original question by the OP, I think we all need to agree on the objective of what a speaker should do.

From what I read in textbooks before, the objective may be stated as, 'A speaker should reproduce the electrical signal received at it's inputs exactly, as a pressure variation output.' Obviously, we all know from experience that this does not happen exactly, with less accuracy as it does with respect to electronics (pre-amps, amps). So we need a test to show that the speaker output waveform is the same as the electrical waveform input to the speaker. 

Problem: what about the microphone used to test the speaker?... What is it's transfer function? What room do we test the speaker in? Etc.

We all know that measurement of a speaker is not so easy. I suggest we look at the work of Floyd Toole, et al., as guidance for further discussion and work.

I would like to see them play different varieties of music for a change.