"In normal rooms the on-axis frequency response is not the dominant physical factor. However, the direct sound has a high priority in perception, establishing a reference to which later arrivals are compared in determining such important perceptions as precedence effect (localization), spatial effects, and timbre. In this example, the poor off-axis performance dominated the in-room measurements and in listening tests caused audible timbral degradation. Equalization of the room curve will destroy the only good performance in the loudspeaker—the on-axis/direct sound response. Equalization cannot change loudspeaker directivity; the remedy is a better loudspeaker. Adequate anechoic data on the loudspeaker would have revealed the problem in advance of measurements or listening."

"It is essential to separate events above and below thetransition/Schroeder frequency. Above it, at middle andhigh frequencies, constructive and destructive acoustical interference occurs when direct and reflected sounds combine at a microphone. If the frequency resolution of themeasurement is sufficiently high—typically 1/3-octave orhigher—the resulting peaks and dips can look alarming when seen in room curve. The tendency for a calibrating technician or automated equalization algorithm might be to attempt to smooth the curve. These are non-minimum-phase phenomena that are not correctable by minimum-phase equalization. However, the direct and reflected sounds generally come from different directions, which a microphone cannot differentiate, but binaural hearing can. References [1, 2,12–14] focus on several of the perceptual consequences of reflections. It turns out that in most small to medium-sized sound reproduction spaces human listeners find these multi-directional reflected sounds to be mostly benign, even beneficial if the loudspeaker has relatively constant directivity. A common perception is spaciousness—information about the listening space, not timbre-damaging comb filtering. This is certainly true for recreational listening, but professionals may find that a less reflective space is preferred for mixing but perhaps not for mastering recordings [12].These measurements are therefore misleading, and even if equalization were capable of removing such reflections, there is the decision of whether it is necessary. Overall, equalizing the spectral fluctuation “errors” found at a few measurement locations, can add new spectral variations to the total sound output of the loudspeaker that is radiated to all locations throughout the room. There is a significant risk of degrading the performance of good loudspeakers."

Yo creo que está bien claro lo que quiere decir.

Una cosa es una EQ concreta para cierta sala y cierta caja (B&W 802) y otra es la opinión en general. Como en todo hay excepciones, pero su opinión en general es que hay mucho riesgo en ecualizar por encima de la Fc (tanto si lo hace un "técnico calibrador" como si es automática).

Tampoco es lo mismo recomendar para una sala totalmente dedicada (porque podemos exprimir al máximo de cara a la calidad de sonido). Esto no quiere decir que en una sala normal no se pueda conseguir una excelente canlidad de sonido, perfectamente satisfactoria. Lo principal son las cajas, si son buenas ya tenemos mucho ganado y si son malas lo tenemos muy complicado.