>>105963718
i can see that, even i don't eq that much
i have a collection based purely on isolation and build quality
>>105963745
jm1 assumes that there is no need for further compensation (ie that iems and speakers will sound the same provided they measure the "same" in their respective sound fields)
i think more testing should be done, but the variants on jm1 seem to perform quite well against other targets so we'll see
>>105964007
>>105964025
if possible show it with the shallowest/deepest insertion, i want to see how the feature is alone
also are your measurements usually this noisy? i know it's not smoothed but that seems like a lot of noise in the midrange