Speaker and headphone/IEM selection is as much part of the creative process, as it is a part of the music consumption process.

[JanL]

We as music lovers have a big influence on how the music we choose to listen to affects us. We do this first and foremost through the selection of the speakers and headphones that meet our preferences and expectations the best. Back some years ago when brick and mortar stereo stores were more common we used to go to a hi-fi store and listen to multiple speakers and pick the ones we liked the best within our limitations. These days we rely on reviews and recommendations much more, but the principle still applies. We make choices based on what promises to deliver the best experience.
We also influence our experience post speaker selection through signal processing like EQ and time alignment, physical repositioning of the speakers or even adjustments to the playback level.
All these activities have a lot in common with what music mixing engineers and mastering engineers do. The end goal is to make audio and music pleasant to us. They (the pros) do it with a wider audience in mind while we are concerned only with our own experience. They EQ and compress the music according to their judgement and their taste. We do the same on our local level to an even larger degree.

So, when we read or watch a speaker or headphone review and the dominant criteria for the recommendation is the adherence to a specific engineering template or model, we should be careful. There is a chance that we might be missing out on a better experience because we went with a speaker that measured better on things like off axis response or bass harmonic distortion and we ended up with a generic and boring sounding system while the speakers or headphones that measured "worse" might have given you more joy in the long run.

 

[Palladium]

I have a 90s pop song which I really liked from a musicality PoV but its nearly unlistenable by the 20dB+ of sub-bass above midrange.

I presume that happened because it was very likely mastered on NS-10s.

 

[Chrispy]

Personally I like music and other audio for what it is, and just want capable gear for playback, I don't tune it by the gear or make gear choices by genre or artist or anything like that. I want basically accurate gear. I can tweak to preference with eq, as the old phrase goes, reference isn't necessarily preference. Trying to use the same criteria/gear as the producers, meh

 

[obsessive9119]

I used to use different headphones based on genre and mood, but that was before I discovered EQ. With EQ correcting the deficiencies, my headphones sound more similar to each other, but also suit all music.

 

[Lion♡]

with a generic and boring sounding system while the speakers or headphones

What kind of sound is “generic and boring”?

 

[JanL]

I used to use different headphones based on genre and mood, but that was before I discovered EQ. With EQ correcting the deficiencies, my headphones sound more similar to each other, but also suit all music.

I EQ my headphones and IEMs as well. But I have a couple of IEM sets that I don't EQ even though I'm sure they don't follow any of the targets. One is the Thieaudio Hype 4, another is the 64 Audio Nio, and the other one is the Dusk. All different from each other and all sounding great out of the box. If I forced them to closely follow Harman IE target, they would lose what makes them special. As a matter of fact, the Dusk comes with the Harman preset and to me it is much worse sounding than the default preset.
On the regular headphones front I have the Audio Technica ATH-R70Xa and ATH-R50, Hifi Man HE-400SE and the Koss Porta Pro. Of the four only the Hifi Man needs EQ and the Oratory1990 EQ preset is making it better for me. I tried the Oratory1990 presets for the AT headphones and while they sound good they take something away from the experience. I find myself only adjusting the bass to taste and I leave the midrange and treble alone.
As to the Porta Pros, it's pointless to EQ them. They are very much not perfect, but the imperfections is what makes them special. Using the Porta Pros is definitely an aesthetic choice.

 

[JanL]

What kind of sound is “generic and boring”?

Flat frequency response in a small bookshelf speaker that can't reproduce much below 60-70Hz is very generic and boring. The BBC dip makes small bookshelf speakers much more palatable.

 

[obsessive9119]

I EQ my headphones and IEMs as well. But I have a couple of IEM sets that I don't EQ even though I'm sure they don't follow any of the targets. One is the Thieaudio Hype 4, another is the 64 Audio Nio, and the other one is the Dusk. All different from each other and all sounding great out of the box. If I forced them to closely follow Harman IE target, they would lose what makes them special. As a matter of fact, the Dusk comes with the Harman preset and to me it is much worse sounding than the default preset.
On the regular headphones front I have the Audio Technica ATH-R70Xa and ATH-R50, Hifi Man HE-400SE and the Koss Porta Pro. Of the four only the Hifi Man needs EQ and the Oratory1990 EQ preset is making it better for me. I tried the Oratory1990 presets for the AT headphones and while they sound good they take something away from the experience. I find myself only adjusting the bass to taste and I leave the midrange and treble alone.
As to the Porta Pros, it's pointless to EQ them. They are very much not perfect, but the imperfections is what makes them special. Using the Porta Pros is definitely an aesthetic choice.

I can kinda of see where you're coming from - I have Alessandro MS Pros, which are uncommon enough that there are no measurements or EQ settings around for them. I don't EQ then (other than changing the pads) and I enjoy them for their particular sound. But, I also find myself reaching for them far less than I used to.

 

[olieb]

The BBC dip makes small bookshelf speakers much more palatable.

That is about the most generic statement about speakers I can think of.
And as the BBC dip is there (among other things) to hide deficiencies around the crossover it makes everything more boring most of the time (in particular with otherwise good speakers).

 

[JanL]

That is about the most generic statement about speakers I can think of.
And as the BBC dip is there (among other things) to hide deficiencies around the crossover it makes everything more boring most of the time (in particular with otherwise good speakers).

Yes and no. The BBC dip can serve multiple purposes and yes it can be detrimental if none of the conditions that normally are fixed by it exist.

 

[Lion♡]

Flat frequency response in a small bookshelf speaker that can't reproduce much below 60-70Hz is very generic and boring. The BBC dip makes small bookshelf speakers much more palatable.

Setting bass bandwidth extension aside, is the room you have your speakers in currently a pleasant listening environment?
Of course, individual preferences can vary. While it’s true that when you place a speaker in a room you’re listening to the speaker itself, what you’re really hearing is the interaction between your speaker and the space—in other words, you’re listening to the room.
So, while individual preferences are of course understood and respected, rather than seeking dullness or excitement from the speaker as a playback device, it might be better to think about what will have the greatest impact on you.

 

[xanalog]

What kind of sound is “generic and boring”?

Your mother-in-law preaching you in a whiny voice, and her R/C has no mute or volume controls.