Some comments

The booth model

The present far field model simulating 'the cabinet in a booth' problem gives a response being too dry and lacks some kind of dimensionality. Probably a penalty for being too simple, so the modelling strategy may need to be updated. The dissipation phenomena present in a room is a bit tricky to numerical nail, but vital regarding the acoustic footprint of a room.

The speaker & cab model

The acoustic near field model handling the speaker responses is fairly okay as the resulting FFT-plots resembles, in large part, real charts.  Using wavelet-theory when analysing the responses may reveal some useful information regarding the transient behaviour of the near-field model.  On the upside is the fairly rapid and, surprisingly, transparent response in the upper frequency range. The low frequency response contains less energy in comparison to a recorded one, as expected. In a microphone situation we are dealing with an integrated response (the force 'seen' by the diaphragm due to the presence of an acoustic pressure distribution). The calculated response is relaying on a value extracted at a single point and is unaffected by any, 'inertial', effects related to the recording chain.

This acoustic project shows that a numerical approach may be used, to some degree, to get a hint of the sound characteristic of a general speaker & cabinet set-up.

Finally

I doff my cap to Oliver Larkin for the excellent work related to the IPlug2 coding structure, offering me the luxury to, initially, focus solely on the acoustic modelling part of this project.

 As probably been noticed, media related materials like website, sound clips, videos etc. are all a bit amateurish. However, the computational part is, to some extent, counterweighted by years of experience solving advanced physical problems using different numerical methods (but that is not a guarantee for a good-sounding cabinet model).