No sir/madam, have not. In-ears just aren't for me, though i have of course read impressions/seen relevant DIY threads here for amplification.
* you could call me old school on that one, but.. dispersion and propagation have their very distinct set of rules. You do not bend time within the human experience field, you do not bend space; and they do require both!
** but i'm an old fart, so yes, there is the possibility i'm missing out!
As to EQing, again, call me a dinosaur, but how do we EQ? By compressing first. Physics. Would i want to do that to my sound signal (degrading) so i can then play with said degraded signal some more? Personally no, though i do understand its allure.
I try to stick to hardware EQing, costs more, but i dare say it's worth the time and effort. Even sticking to the digital domain as one primarily does, when talking about electrostats.
We agree on tuning, i hear you.. I fear it's a correlation of factors beyond our control..
1) see recent recording "trends" (vastly cheaper, switching power supply based crappola recordings, "heard" on vastly cheaper pseudo-'monitor' headphones).
2) see recent listening trends; digi-can samples cooked on a Mac, expected to be heard from an iPhone. 15K total recording costs? Yes, why spend more.
3) see recent types of music; minimal number of instruments (if any real ones at all), specific frequency fields -mids- they operate at.
Does a "high end" audio company follow suit? Can it? Not sure if that's a solveable one!
And my humble apologies for perhaps typing too much, by all means send an expletive or two my way, shall rectify accordingly in the future, lol