[DrWho]

I think the biggest thing missing here is an actual interpretation of the measurement. And just to strike a contrast - we have lots of people interpreting lines.

I suppose one might try to argue that there is some kind of correlation between the lines and what we hear, but there is so much more going on than just a single line going across the screen. I can think of a few instances where similar looking lines can sound very different...especially when you start introducing smoothing.

I think it makes a lot more sense to become familiar with the actual real world acoustic behavior and then learn how those real behaviors might reveal themselves in the measurements. And with REW, we have more than just one measurement to look at, so interpretations can take all perspectives into account.

So basically, a measurement should be seen as a tool to aid the identification of problems and then provide verification of the solutions.

Instead of discussing "number of filters" and "the shape of the curve" or changing the limits of graphs to "make the curve less scary", why not start asking questions about what is causing what you see? And then from there, we can discuss possible ways of addressing the real world problem - not ways of making the line "prettier".