As alway UM products are a long wait but boy are they worth waiting for. I just wanted to tell everyone and feel free to pm me if anyone has any questions.
Only because people like pictures.
IEMs will never show a flat response (the chart is uncompensated, meaning that it isn't equalized according to some hearing field model, e.g. diffuse field, free field, independent-of-field, etc.) --- if it looks completely flat, then it will sound nothing like flat, and instead very bassy, midforward, and very warm. They have a specific boost to compensate for the lack of outer ear involvement. The response there looks right, from my experience with UM's measurement printouts. They always have an artifact from 6-8k, part of the way the insert the earphones into the measuring coupler. I'm a little concerned about the treble extension, looks slightly different, but it's probably okay. Measurement rigs are somewhat inaccurate in the highest frequencies.
They're all put at the front because that's the way FitEar does it with their CIEMs. Different tube lengths/diameters impart fairly different resonances, as well as minute timing differences. This is the way FitEar chooses to design their IEMs, and as such, UM adopted the same philosophy to get it to match the original response as much as possible. My guess is that you weren't the first to get one reshelled --- this seems like they've already taken a long, hard look at the MH334 before (which is good for you).
It's too bad they didn't keep the titanium treble tube (or did they? The pictures are kind of blurry).