Your understanding of the use of EQ to correct for speaker-room interaction response anomalies above the modal region where specular behavior dominates is incorrect.
Thus the question of "which speaker do I choose" is not a valid approach to solve the problem.
Except in very limited cases where a minimum phase condition exists amidst a complex characteristic non-minimum phase soundfield, EQ is not appropriate nor effective for affecting correction of specular speaker-room interaction issues above ~200-300 Hz.
What all this means is that EQ affects only the direct signal of the speaker. It will NOT correct for modifications to the sound you hear that results from the interaction of the direct signal with high gain indirect reflections at the listening position. EQ is the wrong tool for this.
For any given speaker(s), such issues are properly addressed via analysis and the subsequent surgical application of room treatment addressing high gain reflections.
Thus, instead of EQ, the solution to the problem is (in part) to perform analysis* of the specular region at the listening position, and to identify anomalous high gain reflections and to treat them appropriately with either absorption or diffusion, so as to mitigate the cause of the response anomaly.
As far as EQ, here is a short list that mentions limitations of EQ as a solution from Toole's The Acoustical Design of Home Theaters:
"...there is no doubt that equalization has acquired a bad reputation over the years...
There are four principal reasons :
1. The popular measuring instruments, 1/3-octave real-time analyzers, do not have enough resolution to describe the problems accurately.
2. The popular equalizers, 1/3-octave “graphic” equalizers, do not have enough resolution to address the problem resonances specifically, without doing a lot of “collateral” damage.
3. Attempting to fill deep frequency response dips caused by acoustic cancellations or nulls is an absolutely futile effort, because no matter how much sound energy one pumps into a room the cancellation persists. All that happens is that amplifiers clip, and woofers distort, or worse, destruct. The only solution to this kind of problem is to relocate the loudspeaker or the listener, whichever is sitting in the null.
4. Equalization is attempted at too high a frequency. Low-frequency room resonances behave like minimum- phase phenomena, and addressing them specifically with parametric filters is a true solution. Above a few hundred Hz, the situation is very different, because we are using steady-state measurements to examine a complicated combination of direct and reflected sounds – time domain phenomena. The measurements may show “comb filtering” that is alarming to the eyes, but the ears hear only the natural sounds of a room – not necessarily a problem at all. If the reflections are perceived to be too energetic, the solution is not equalization, but rather the addition of some strategically placed sound absorbing or diffusing devices. As stated earlier, if there are obvious sound quality problems at middle and high frequencies, the only true solution is a properly designed, room friendly, loudspeaker."
*A freeware program such as RoomEQWizard and a mic pre-amp such as an ART Dual USB Pre-amp (~$69 at B&HPhoto), an calibrated Dayton/Superlux EMM6 microphone (Parts Express or Cross Spectrum for a calibrated version) and a laptop computer are a sufficient entry level package capable of doing this.