You have an extremely strong opinion about the negative virtues of analog
equalizers, versus digital ones.

Why is your opinion so strong? Even if you are correct that a digital eq is
superior to, say, a good analog parametric unit, the differences seem rather
small. Have you had experiences that indicate strongly that a digital eq is
substantially more transparent? In my experience, eqs are among the most
transparent of audio devices, particularly when they are used in the cut
mode.

My recommendations regarding equalizers, directed at the consumer a

1. Octave equalizers are useless, except for making some bad recordings
listenable, where they may do quite well.
2. 1/3 octave equalizers are among the most accessible types for consumers
to use, although most room correction problems are beyond the reach of an eq
anyway.
3. Parametric equalizers are too complex for the nontechnical user. This
accounts for the lack of popularity.
4. Automatic room correction systems seldom agree with ears.
5. Use of an eq to achieve flat room response makes a system sound broken,
and it is not a theoretically sound way to proceed.
6. Bass equalizers are the most useful type. It could be argued that only in
this region is a parametric or 1/3 octave approach really needed. At higher
frequencies, where absorption predominates, even an octave equalizer can be
used to benefit.
7. Whether the eq is digital or analog is a minor detail. It is far more
important for the user to make sure that his equipment can drive the eq at
the expected level, which, as was recently shown on this forum, is
problematic for the consumer when he tries to integrate professional
equipment into a consumer installation.