>>105948958
why did you buy that pos bro...

Ran some tests on if correcting channel balance using measurements is actually viable.
Process was as follows:
>Measure right channel
>Measure left channel (match insertion peak)
>Measure left channel with EQ turned on
>Export right channel measurement as text, use that file as the mic/meter cal file for all three of the above measurements
This gives a graph where 0 is the baseline (right channel) and any deviations above or below are the difference in SPL between the left and right channels.
I created the EQ profile using measurements of the EP-FX10 tips which is what I normally use with an insertion peak at 9K, so we can see if the EQ created for those tips is applicable to other tips and insertion depths. The results here are promising but inconclusive because the channel balance of my Q1Pro isn't totally horrible so a lot of the changes especially in the air region come down to my ability to match insertion peaks down to the Hz. Also, I was only able to measure insertion peaks between 8K-9K (medium stock tips shallow insert and deep insert graphs, all other tips were in between the two) because I don't have a jig to fix the IEM in place. Conclusions might change for insertion depths that deviate from I was able to measure.
What we can see is that up until around 8K, using EQ to correct channel balance pretty much works as expected across all insertion depths and tips. You can see in the last graph that all traces stay within 0.5dB up until that 8K point. Another thing I was curious about was confirming the effect on phase but there were no surprises here - using EQ to match the channels also helped with phase matching.
I'll probably try this again later with something that has really bad channel matching and requires high Q filters like my ND Audio Planet, that may provide more clarity. Even better would be taking measurements on couplers with different acoustic impedances but I don't have any way to do that at the moment.