$500, I can see it, but $700, I don't think so.
Yeah I agree with most of this. But then we're talking at cross purposes for most of the disucssion. Like when you say you don't attach value to connectivity options for what are both considered desktop speakers. I find that a bit odd (then we're not talking about the same thing, especially when you consider we're talking about portability as well). So I think we need to settle that issue, we're either talking about portable, or desktop speakers? I'm more referring to something small like a desktop speaker, AND small enough to be "portable" in a classic stereo configuration if possible. The ones listed from the links, hardly get there, and could also be similarly criticized in the same way you criticized the Zero's that you say aren't the same size (or not similar enough to be a valid comparison I suppose). There's just too much of a mix of price, size, and use-case/category of speaker to properly even discuss the topic at the moment.
It's just simply that, given the choice, I will gladly exchange the convenience of built-in connectivity for performance. As I said, dongles for conversion to bluetooth and such are cheap and unobtrusive these days.
I know there are more premium options, I just don't see the need as most portable bluetooth speakers, are mostly there just to provide convenience rather than performance.
Why not both for the same price? That was my point in bringing them up for comparison. Should you succeed in a jerry-rigged bluetooth 8010A with a battery pack, you'll be getting something highly comparable in size that sounds intensely better than other bells-and-whistle ridden portable speakers. Sure, the process of jerry-rigging isn't convenient. But, the end result would be.
I also am still lost as to why the Vanatoo's at half the price aren't close enough in form factor for consideration
Mostly because the iLoud Micro Monitors exist. Cheaper, smaller, and with highly comparable measurements to the Zero's. Would probably score slightly higher than the Zero due to deeper bass extension.
As far as critcizing the panther score. Yeah, you hit it on the head, that was the main critique. I just don't get what the use case for these would be. If it's desktop, you can get relatively good performance for less, and with the other things you said you don't care for (but I am assuming people buying such speakers would care, as the audience is generalized), if you're looking for something portable, I would imagine you would want a few other things as well like truly portable designs that don't need to be small (small doesn't equal portable necessarily). I'm just having trouble understanding the target market for $700 is all. And that's why the panther was puzzling. Though as to the critique about panther scores scaling with preference scores linearly - completely against that assumption - as I didn't have preference scores in mind, nor did I want to mention them at all, it's just you challenged me for something similar, so I did a little hunt was all. I don't really care too much about preference score (in the same way you don't care much about connectivity) mostly because I don't have a setup where EQ isn't an option, thus that can be handled, provided THD isn't through the roof with peaks and valleys.
I've heard amir say he takes the conclusion and eventual scoring seriously as he appeals to a larger audience than himself, and takes value into account. A soccer/golf panther I assume knocks it out of the part in two ways, either extreme value, or extreme performance (or some other things like tons of features with the prior two being middling). I just didn't see that here, so with that I will say again, you're correct that: I am puzzled by the panther, but not due to preference rating at all.
You keep glazing over the size for some reason. An example of the use-case would be someone in this very thread posting a pic of 8010As being used with his piano. Sure, he could spend a lot less and squeeze in some Vanatoo Zeroes, but he'd be missing considerable performance. To me, a with-sub score that's 1.4 better for $400 more is nothing to snuff at, regardless of price bracket.
On EQ, a lot of producers can't bother with it due to the latency it adds. Even 3ms (what the MiniDSP 2x4 HD adds) can be a lot, depending on what you're doing. As far as personal entertainment, I can't use EQ for the rhythm games I play where every ms of latency matters, which is why I'm excited to get the Micro Monitors and Hifiman HD4XX so I can lose the EQ when I need little latency, and put it back on when I need quality more than low latency. I already do that now, but my Beyerdynamic DT770 600 Ohms, while generally measuring pretty close to the Harman target, are too bass-heavy by default (even the recommended bass boost of the Harman target is too much for my very bass-sensitive ears, but the rest is fine), and my Klipsch R-41MPs are well.... Klipschs. So, it's a fatiguing experience without at least 10 band parametric EQ for the DT770s and at least 20 for the gruesome R-41MPs.
Also, EQ cannot fix everything that the preference score accounts for. But, when it can, even room-EQ is still likely going to do a better job EQing a high scoring speaker than a poor one.
I think we see panther scores the same way, though. To me, the extreme value lies in the form factor. But, you think the price is a bit too steep for that in it of itself. Considering absolutely no speaker as small performs comparably, I think it's fair. We'll just have to agree to disagree.