Here's a plot of the raw woofer, woofer with EQ and crossover and tweeter with EQ and crossover. Gated response is only valid over 200 Hz.
Not an inquiry, but did you also measure vertical towards up and a little bit to the sides, horizontally?
There's so much theoretical talk about this speaker, if it is beautiful, and how bass shy it is in all its excellence on paper.
But is such a wide dispersion really desirable? It realizes +/-100° (-6dB) roughly, while a KEF R series would do +/-50°. And if I read it right, the LS1 was ousted by the Kii, cardioid etc/, same developer?
It may also raise the question if the more discriminative test listening in mono is as easy as it sounds ;-) Such a wide speaker ;-) would feel better to the ears due to many reflections, less sharp, less empty in comparison to again a KEF R series.
Not the least, to put a speaker into a well filled ;-) bookshelf might have a similar effect as the wide baffle. But that is an antiquarian idea ;-) me thinks.
ps:
- may it be worthwhile to exchange the ceiling bounce with the floor bounce and vice versa; could be done via a software update
- the wiggles in the nearfield bass response in higher frequencies may originate in the residuals from the midrange speaker
- bass response, if meant to be anechoic, is perfect for room integration; distortion taken in percentage will drop by a factor of two or more in-room, and bass mangement will ask for extra subs distributed around the room anyway, as always, and then equalize to individual taste