Never tried math audio, but I dare say the primary aspect affecting SQ in the Roon setup is how the filters are created. I’m happy with the REW result from the procedures outlined here but from memory Dirac was better. That said REW is free and Dirac isn’t. Also this REW technique deals with frequency/amplitude only (at least the main steps).
Those that have tried more advanced filter creation tools like Acourate swear by the results with Roon.
So I’m not saying Roons convolution is the best there is as there’s no way I could verify that, but it does seem people with high standards can get very good results from it. But something like Acourate involves a spend and some time investment.
Did you have any specific issues with the process here or it’s just the resulting sound you’re not happy with? What are the differences you’re hearing between Roon and Mathaudio. Maybe it would be worth posting your REW measurements?
The only other pointers I can think of is the target curve - perhaps the REW and mathaudio ones are dissimilar? I’ve been playing with targets since setting this up, and am only now just zoning in on a favourite. Really quite small adjustments - particularly bass - can have quite an impact on both short term and longer term enjoyment of the result and there’s quite a balancing act between what I want, and how my speakers/room react to it. At least in my setup anyway.
Without Dirac or Roons convolution from REW I just can’t turn my hifi up loud. It’s too boomy/muddy in the bass, and the treble far too aggressive. In fact it could well have caused an increase in tinnitus. With the REW/Roon room correction, I can rock out! Well, I could if I didn’t now have a baby! But when I get the window it goes loud and I smile. Good enough for me for now although one day I’ll try Acourate.
@AndersVinberg’s Acourate topic is here if you’re interested. He may be able to offer other opinions/advice as I believe he started out with REW.