A frequency plot of which it is not known how it was created (well.. with a KU100 but not which compensation method), and only one channel at that, is not enough to make a decision about SQ or other qualities.

It doesn't say anything about the taste of the listener with respect to its sound signature, distortion products, comfort, quality control, build quality of the entire device, driver matching, possible driver defects, cable connector problems e.t.c.

It only says something about the sonic character (of one channel).

Too smoothed over. One of the things I look for is the location of the "ortho kink": http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,204.0.html

I'm pretty sure mine's un-veiled, at the very least, so here's my chart thing if it helps at all:

Hard for me to say. Specially since I've heard more LCD-2s than 3s.

These look like typical uber-smoothed Audez'e plots. They were proly measured w dummy head/ears + some sort of compensation.

The measurements that Marv did on some LCD-3s to me portray a dark headphone with some air to them:

http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,17.msg43.html#msg43
http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,171.msg1643.html#msg1643

The Audez'e plots seem to portray a headphone with more mid treble presence and less air... Would have to hear them and compare them.

Based on what I've read from the above threads, my understanding is that non-veiled LCD-3s seem to show about 3 to 5 dB more power from 1.5 to 4 kHz, i.e. ~2 dB drop from 1kHz (instead of  5 to 8 dB). From the threads above:

Non-veiled LCD-3 (good):



Veiled LCD-3



As far as how representative Audeze plots are, or how relatively close they are to the measurements here, consider these measurements for the same LCD-X:

Changstar:



Audez'e (to me these look more like what I would expect from an LCD-2):



The measurement approach is different though, so that is part of the reason it's hard, at least for me, to say.