Yes I suppose that is true that 1:1:1 may not be important but I went through a phase in imaging with a Tak BRC250 where it became very difficult to get reliable colour combines and that was with Baaders. I got weird posterisations in blue very often. That stopped when I switched back to Astrodons. I see very occasionally but now its rare and usually a processing error beforehand black clipping the histogram.
So there can be a real issue there if the colour is skewed in the basic data.
One way is to measure weights required to match a G2V star and then weight your coloured filter exposure times appropriately.
Just from recall Baaders were 1:.7:1.2 RGB weights. So you would take less green and more blue subs.
Here is the blurb from Astrodon. There are more benefits to 1:1:1 than mentioned.
http://astrodon.com/e-series-lrgb.html
I have used Custom Scientific, Astrodon Gen 1 and 2, Baader, Astronomik Gen 1. Astronomik are quite good but only up to 6nm for narrowband. Astrodons are also parfocal with their narrowband filters which is a huge plus as I focus in Luminance then image in narrowband and focus is spot on. Its hard to focus a narrowband filter by itself. I got a dodgy Baader 7nm Ha filter once also that gave salt and pepper spots in the images. Astronomik sold me 1mm thick filters without spacers to make them fit the bog standard 3mm filter holders and a couple got wrecked and then Gerd got some spacers made up and charged a US$100 for them. Bits of square plastic. Didn't leave a good impression. Don (astrodon) has always been super helpful and I've met him up at the Gold Coast and he's a great guy.
As far as bleed from other the other colour filters his website says the opposite. I imagine there is always some crossover otherwise you could miss a slice. But in my experience I get less filter related imaging problems using Astrodons than any other filter mentioned. They simply do their job without further attention apart from a cleaning. They also seem pretty tough.
Greg.