This tells me you prefer the same kind of sound the rest of us do and not the raw response of your speakers. Your target curve looks really good.
Indeed it does, and by looking at the response alone, I'd be willing to bet that 9H sounds great in there. What's interesting is that ignoring the bass(dominated by room), there are speakers that measure (and thus sound) like his EQed curve out of the box, and those are the types of speakers that Toole's research showed that most people prefer, but, assuming that one is willing to EQ, does it really matter?
@Impossible (as Chromatischism pointed out), judging by your after Trinnov curve, and your "to get the sound that makes me happy" reasoning, I'm guessing you're actually part of that "most people" group that prefers neutral speakers. Most of us are
. You're essentially using Trinnov to alter the Paradigm in such a way that it measures similar to how a Genelec(for example) would measure out of the box, and in truth, I see nothing wrong with that. The more I play around with programs like Dirac Live, Accourate, and Audiolense, the more I start to think that directivity is all that really matters. Assuming that the 9H has smooth directivity(like the Prestige measured here does), frequency response errors can be easily fixed(as you know).
Going 1 step further, if the Paradigm has smoother directivity than the Genelec, then perhaps the EQed Paradigm will sound even better than the EQed Genelec to most folks. Not saying it does, more just thinking out loud.
@BYRTT posted this in the Paradigm review thread:
The Revel is clearly the better speaker out of the box, and I'm sure that most would prefer its sound over the Paradigm. After EQ, though, I'm not so sure. To my eye, the Paradigm has smoother a directivity index. Does that make it the better speaker for those who will be using EQ? I think you can argue that it does.