Since you've mentioned the Yamaha NS-10 I wonder if you've read this piece extolling its unique set of skills and fitness for purpose:
THE YAMAHA NS10M: TWENTY YEARS A REFERENCE MONITOR. WHY?
Philip R Newell, Keith R Holland, Julius P Newell
Hi, I know the document and I know the authors. There is much to say about it, including noting the comment early on that the Yamaha NS-10M "appeared to have a sound character that mixing personnel had been looking for" - in other words the speaker was selected for being a pleasing equalizer for pop/rock music, not a neutral revealer of recorded "truths". There is the admission later on that the obvious mid frequency excess will be reflected in recordings, saying "the resultant balance of low- vs mid-frequencies will probably be correctable using equalisation should that be deemed necessary during the mastering process". This is a classic "kick-the-can-down-the-road" attitude. They assume that mastering engineers will be using neutral monitors and therefore might hear the coloration and can fix it.
This is precisely what professional recording engineers should not be doing - in my opinion . . .
It is important to understand that loudspeaker performance at low frequencies is minimum-phase behavior. That is, its time domain performance is predictable from its amplitude response. Apply ANY EQ and the time domain behavior changes - are there any control room systems that do not have some EQ?. Woofer performance is predictable from contemporary mathematical modeling of transducer/enclosure interaction. Of course, superimposed on speaker behavior are the medium-to-high-Q room resonances. Listening at about 1 m over the top of a console work surface is one thing. Listening a 2 to 3 m in a normally-reflective domestic space is another. All their measurements were on axis only; no off axis data that might have added insights. Anechoic chambers are not anechoic at low frequencies, and even attempts at corrective EQ have limitations (I know because I have "calibrated" chambers for use below cutoff frequency).
Section 12.5.1 "Old-School Monitoring" in the 3rd edition of my book shows measurements on several relevant loudspeakers, showing clearly that the Pro version of the NS-10 was modified to do an even better job of imitating "ye olde original crappy speaker" the Auratone 5C, an inexpensive 5-inch full range paper-cone speaker that was widely used in CRT television sets of the period.
BTW, the designer of the NS-10M and the NS-1000M visited me at my NRC lab in Canada to experience the measurement process and double-blind listening tests. They left with many physical measurements and photographs intending to duplicate some of the facility and processes. The original speakers were designed to exhibit flat sound power (believed, incorrectly, to be what listeners heard in the far field), which my measurements showed they did extremely well. The problem was that the two-way NS-10 ended up with a very non-flat on-axis response, but the three-way NS-1000M, with more uniform directivity with frequency, was an exemplary loudspeaker at the time (1974) - see Figure 18.3 (e).
I could go on, but fortunately I don't need to because the recording industry has done it for me; it has moved on. The fad has substantially passed, and the current norms for monitor loudspeakers (including Yamahas) are not different from the current objectives for neutral sounding domestic entertainment loudspeakers, which is as it should be.