I came across this a while back:
 
http://sonarworks.com/
 
I purchased the Headphone version recently. They model several widely used headphones and use some really precise EQ (something like 1000 or 2000 points) which is used to emulate several different listening environments all within your DAW. I have to say, it has made a difference for me. It has allowed me to get to know my setup. I use it in conjunction with Magic AB and I'm already adapting much better to my environment. Apparently the Speaker version is also pretty good.
 
Here is a review by MusicRadar, they also have some pretty nice things to say about it, so you don't have to take it from me:

http://www.musicradar.com/reviews/tech/sonarworks-reference-3-624375
 

Yes, that (Sonarworks) was brought up in one of my other nuisance threads about mixing (damn... did I ever reply to that post?).
 
I did take a look at their site. Very cool premise. Not going to ship my headphones but the plugin looks cool. Gonna have to dl the trial and see what's up. I have the VRM box but obviously this is different and since I own HD280's which seem to be notoriously "not flat" even though they are supposed to be I could use something like that... if it works which based on most of what I've read it does.
 
It's like ARC for headphones. ARC of course being another thing I'd really like in my kit but that is more than three times as much and requires the ability to mix through monitors (impossible in my poorly soundproofed apartment).
 
Of course something like Sonarworks (for headphones) is no replacement for a properly tuned room and good monitors but I'm a ways off from that becoming a reality. That "hit" record just hasn't dropped (or even been produced) yet allowing me to purchase the finer things in life. lulz
 
Cheers.

It gets back to what I have been saying too about listening to your mixes on a very small mono speaker at low volume.  It is just amazing to say the least.  I see Auratone are re releasing their original speakers.
 
It shows up what I call the critcal mix.  The actual balance between everything in your mix.  Often when you have everything sounding great in your main speakers when you go onto the little speaker in mono down soft all the problems show up.  Snare hits jump out like mad, vocals will usually be too loud, bass parts too loud, guitars too loud you name it.
 
Once you get everything sweet in the little speaker when you go back up onto the mains what often happens there is not much has changed other than your mix will sound a little nicer.  Except now you have satisfied both the main speakers AND the little speaker.
 
Turning your main speakers down low is good for sure but I still prefer summing the stereo mix into mono and into one small speaker. (with restricted bass and high end too of course)  I have just mastered a real nice album too and the little speaker in mono revealed a few things too I needed to change slightly.  It is good for a lot of things.  A lot of the great engineers do it.

batsbrew
short answer = pro mastering.
 
they actually know what they're doing.

^^^^ this, and before this it is also professionally mixed. (JE has a good post above about mixing)

with my nearfield JBL's, which are matched to the size of my small tracking room;
with my ARC2 setup, which easily lets me fold down to MONO;
with wavelab, which is setup with Waves Plugs, including a nice phase meter;
and dual volume presets on my sound card (low volume mixdown, Full volume mixdown),
i can check against fletcher munson, phase, balance, all the things that you have to do to get that mix to happen properly loud and soft....
 
 
but even without all that,
i can say that LISTENING, to as much pro material as you can,
out of your monitors, in your room,
will help train your ears to how things should translate....
and listening low volume, and at mixing volume, and comparing those two situations against your own mixes,
is time well spent

It is quite common now to master for low end systems that may lack bass response.  Tools like Waves Maxx Bass technology trick people into believing they are hearing more bass by strengthening the bass harmonics which will give it more energy at low levels and cheap systems.  "Real" bass will be attenuated on most speaker systems until enough power is present to allow the speaker box itself to resonate.   Some speakers systems which use "transmission line" designs like PMC monitors will have an even ratio of bass output even at low levels.   
 
If you don't want to bother using Maxx Bass.  Control of the fundamental is crucial.  Compression of the low end, separate from the rest of the music, will bring up the average loudness and the bass response to a good level at a higher frequency which will sound more prominent on low-bass systems.  

So I don't think after a long day of really going nuts on some other stuff I'll be unable to really dig into some of the topics presented here and reply articulately.
 
I am realizing now that I have indeed come across the Fletcher/Munson thing before and actually used it but it was presented as a straight (but diagonal) line. Not all wiggety wack like in that article. So I've got some followups on that.
 
As well, I am now starting to scheme out how I can mimic the "Mono Aurotone" effect with the gear I currently have. I have some ideas on how to fake it and I have indeed intended on bouncing back and forth between mono and stereo (or starting out in mono then only near the end going to stereo... or any number of crazy ideas).
 
But as I said... brain burn.
 
It may seem like I am always asking the same questions here and maybe not absorbing stuff but I have definitely been trying to pay attention and in my sloooow uptake way understanding it.
 
Just want to let you guys know all this help is appreciated and slowly getting put to use around the Beeps household.
 
I'll let all this simmer as I sleep and respond properly (hopefully) in the morning. I am about to undertake a huge mix as a learning exercise and I want to use some of these concepts (as well as the mountains of other stuff I've picked up around here and elsewhere over the past couple years).
 
Ya'll rock.
 
;-)

A general truism is that if it sounds good quiet it'll sound better loud, but the reverse is very often not true.
 
Our natural instinct is to turn up music we like, but we have to fight that urge when mixing. No poll exists AFAIK, but it seems most audio pros do seem to prefer mixing at low volume and mastering at moderately high volume.
 
Given that audio professionals also lose their hearing more rapidly than the general population does, low-volume work also makes sense as a defensive measure.

I'd say any stuff with wide dynamics requires either enough volume or loudness boost to sound full.
So, maybe the pro stuff you mean is compressed better/more than the reference material?
When I listen to, say, old Jethro Tull CDs, I very clearly notice how I have to raise volume to make them sound full.
They have very wide dynamics which can be seen in the waveforms as well.
 
What is "loud enough"  or "quiet" is the question, then.
 

Tull stuff is an excellent example. It sounds great loud (can you resist turning up Locomotive Breath?). Compare it to more recent material that you have to turn down. Once they've been volume-matched, there's no question that the more dynamic standard makes for a far more satisfying listening experience. I'm a fan of modern progressive such as Dream Theater and Liquid Tension Experiment, but I can't listen to it loud for long periods because the nonstop onslaught is ear-fatiguing.
 
But all that's straying somewhat from the topic, which is how to make a mix sound good at any volume. Compression and EQ are the keys, I think. Much as I love dynamics, a well-compressed mix will retain fullness at low volume better than one that's gone for maximum dynamics. And of course, there are the shifting EQ requirements. Mixing at high volume will tend to produce bass-light mixes because you hear bass better when it's loud. Conversely, mixing too quietly may result in excessive bass as you unconsciously compensate for Fletcher-Munsen.
 
The solution is to find a nice compromise that works for you, a monitoring volume that's neither too quiet nor too loud, and then consistently stick to it.