ron17,
Thanks for your info on digital EQ. This requires further study, but at the moment with my non computer based old fashioned CD, DAC, EQ, amp system, I don't see how the Roon can be utilized. I am certainly interested in digital EQ. I met with Bill Parish at his home a few years ago when I was considering the Mola Mola Kaluga amps. He didn't know of a digital EQ for my purposes back then. Bill is a wonderful guy with great knowledge. The Mola Mola Kaluga is a great amp with my neutral tonal preference, so it is still under consideration.
I agree that for EQ, attenuation is useful, although my overall use of EQ goes far beyond what many people are doing with room correction for limited freq in the lower freq. For example, I was able to make my Mytek amp sound more neutral (less sweet) by attenuating 200-600 Hz a little. I use my ears to suit my preferences, and would not care what microphones measured as some kind of "ideal" to be imposed on the system. Such software systems might create improvements in some ways, and I am not claiming that my adjustments are the theoretical correct way, they are just what I want to achieve musically to my standards/preferences. I am still interested in digital EQ to tailor the tonal balance to my needs, but the end result is still obtained by listening. Perhaps electronics involved in the digital process is superior to my Rane with its analog electronics, so I have an open mind. Unlike others, I like to boost HF above 10 Khz significantly to offer much more brilliance in recordings that are laid back (which is most of them), which has the effect of extending down to the midrange to a lesser degree. The midrange is affected in a reasonably subtle manner, always consistent with musicality, not a hifi disco type of distortion.
I also realize that rock/pop/jazz recordings in general are hotter than classical recordings, which is why many people here who like rock, etc. are puzzled why I am really out on the fringe by boosting the HF the way I do. Many classical listeners sit far back in the concert hall and prefer the sound they are used to, which is laid back sound. But listeners to jazz are usually closer, and the music is more upfront and exciting, so they find EQ is not needed. For jazz, the mike is often right at the bell of the saxophone, much closer than for brass instruments in classical pieces. I am just one of those unusual classical listeners who listens at close distances in an attempt to get the close perspective of the performer when I am wearing my other hat.
Also, do any of your acquaintances have digital preamps/amps that are truly superior to analog? Can you name the equipment that they have? If so, this is another reason not to spend too much money on today's dinosaur electronics. Progress often happens faster than most of us can stay solvent. (RIAA will recognize my paraphrase of an investment strategy to take reasonable losses in order to survive in the game.)