Big rooms are bad enough. Small ones are much worse. Two rooms, 13x17x18 (drywall)and 24x17x9 (lathe and plaster) were where I gained my experience as I struggled with room/speaker combos that had 12+ db peaks: understand that right next to that resonant room frequency will always be "null" or suck out, making the actual note to note swing even worse.
With B&W 802 and 801, I had 18 db swings from one note to the next in the 80-100-120 htz. range. Genesis, with all their adjustments, were similar. Cls and "bass shy" Quads and Dynaudio monitors were the best. They lacked real bass, but the rooms helped them and they didn't muddy things up. As a musician adn bass player, that blew my mind. Lack of bass or muddy bass seemed to be the alternatives.
For years, I fought eq of any typ, esp digital, due to heavy investment in vinyl, TNT, SME V, VDH Black Beauty, Ensemble Phonobrio, etc. After 25+ years in "purist, high end", I bought a Tact EQ.
Even with AD conversion and "veils" on the sound, you have to be honest with yourself when you ask is transparency more important than reasonable IN ROOM REAL LIFE frequency response. Yes, BIG MONEY would let me build a better room, buy more bass traps than I've used before, more, tube traps, etc. but, for real life and affordable sound
(my system is over $50K worth, but after the fact room construction and treatment is very expensive), I'm always going to use something like this or a Rives.
Perhaps you could experiment for about $1500 or less with a Tact 2.0 with DA/AD converters and get rid of it if you didn't like it without too big a hit. It was less expensive than the ic cables connecting my pre to my power when I did it. I've since changed the ICs twice, but am convinced of the use of digital eq in normal/small rooms, probably even bigger ones.
Just my opinion.