Suggest you take a look at my system's link and my response graph, w/o DSP.
ACK, I have reviewed your frequency response graph and am convinced that your system would benefit from digital room correction. You have a significant dip between 60 to 100 Hz and a significant bump for 40 to 50 Hz. These are over long and significant areas. In addition, you have reversed the phase of your sub to reduce a bass bump and to extend the lower frequency response. I have done the same thing. It makes your frequency response look better, but it strains the dynamics. If you played your sub in phase with your mains and then used digital room correction, you would be shocked at the improvement. Your system would sound much more dynamic. In addition, digital room correction seems to have even better improvements with dipoles. Did wonders years ago for my Genesis 300's. By the way, digital room correction DOES work in the time domain. That is why it is superior to simple equalization. I have been using digital room correction for almost 20 years. Remember the SigTech. I now use Dirac which is integrated with my music server. I have a dedicated room which is fully acoustically treated. I have no deep nulls or very tall bumps. I do have some dips and small bumps. My room was measured by the chief acoustician from Hyundai. (They wanted ideas to design a room in Korea to study acoustics for their autos). Concerning the frequency response, he stated ( with a thick Korean accent) "almost perfect". Despite that, I am able to improve the sound with digital room correction. Dirac is only a couple of hundred bucks and they have a free trial. I agree that the colorations imparted by the speaker room interaction is the main problem that audiophiles face. I believe that digital room correction actually will get you closer to the original recording, not take you further away.