That means, graph that you've attached is target curve of flat loudspeaker in room?
then, you can't evaluate the headphones with those curves you've attached
yes, the graph is part of a tutorial I have up somewhere else and not a holy grail by itself, I merely touch on the subject and use it to illustrate.
It's NOT a reference I feel is a holy grail at all.
It seems to represent an 'average' MEASURED frequency response you would see on your analyser when you measure an 'officially flat' speaker (in outside or anechoic circumstances) at 1m on axis from that speaker with a certain dispersion pattern in a 'standard possibly treated' listening ? room (if there is such a thing) with 2 or more octave smooting (so not 1/3 or other).
Someones speakers in their rooms, however, will NEVER be anything like the 'target' some claim is a holy grail for perfect sound.
IF one wants to 'emulate' such a response in a headphone it needs to 'follow' that curve acc to some, others think it needs moar bass, and others feel it needs more treble.
It's just a 'target' to some and nonsense to others.
The early HD650 is pretty close to it when measured on a flat rig but lacks the subbass.
I think headphones that measure like some of the 'target curves' on a rig that measures equal SPL could potentially sound nice and warm with smooth highs which may be a holy grail.
Average recordings may sound decent and excellent recordings may sound too bassy and maybe somewhat too dark.
I prefer a brighter signature, closer to the GE target (flat from say 300Hz and some bass boost).
With such a clearer sounding headphone some recordings sound crap (bright, shrill) but good recordings sound heavenly.
pick your poison.
So for me the whole 'room correction' that acc. to some should be 'incorporated' in the headphones frequency response to emulate speaker sound (what's average speaker sound ?) is nonsense with a bit of merit to it.
From what I know from my own experiments (I don't give a crap about opinions of others) the AQ target (which is what this thread is about) is fishy at least and to me it may sound wrong in tonal balance.
That is wrong when assuming a flat line on THEIR measurement rig (so with the correct compensation) is a flat line in their plots.
So... I hope to see measurements made by others OR they show measurements made on their rig of well documented headphones (HD00 for instance) and also state which headphones they were.
not just say ... 'a flagship's perceieved response as a comparison' that is saying absolutely NOTHING at all.
If its only tonal balance where it is faulted it could well be 'corrected' for me personally with some EQ, mods or a combination.