I would just assume that any data being trumpeted as "engineering data" actually be real engineering data. While I am an engineer, I suspect that any sound professional would also prefer that the data be based on real readings instead of marketing's dream of what they wished the data looked like
But a real engineer will not want to look at the full freq response in an unsmoothed format.
When doing real engineering-you will zoom in on particular areas unsmoothed to get a better idea what is going on. Not the whole thing.
Look at it this way-look at the door in your room-it doesn't matter. Now step up to it and put your eye as close as you can to it-does it look different? Now let's take a magnifying glass and look at it. How about an electron microscope?
If you want the REAL data-then the electronmicroscope is the way to go...
But what if the question is -"Have I sanded the door smooth enough to to paint?".
If you look closely you will still see ALL KINDS of imperfections-and you will never get them out. But for the intended purposes-eyeballing it several feet away is just fine.
HOWEVER-if you are a paint engineer and are looking at the surface to see how well different formulations of paint will stick to different surfaces-then looking a lot closer is important-but not to the average person.
There is a thing as to much data.
As the old saying goes "What are we here to do?". What do we really need to see?