I like the original too. That's why I mixed it that way. :-)

I'm trying to accommodate my friends. And maybe learn how to get it sounding better. With any mix, depending on the stereo or headphones you may want to apply some eq. The question is, which are you mixing for. Ear buds? I also think people in general are applying EQ less often.

Maybe loading up the bass more is a good idea. As long as I can listen in my car without using EQ to cut the bass, I will be happy.

always try to get your sound,
without any processing, 
first.
 
outside of the box.
 
this is the 'purist' way.
 
 
do not apply 'mix tricks' to dial in your sound.
 

@bats brew
I agree. For me, getting a good bass sounds is elusive in part because what I feel is good bass others feel is light. So I try to get it to be more audible without ruining the mix.

One of the listening environments it must sound good is my car. It's a controlled environment where I listen to tons of music.

I rarely use ear buds.

With the bass in the louder range, k12 makes more sense.it pushes down all other frequencies as I keep average loudness uniform.

Hey Geoff, ever measure your car's acoustics? I did (my car, not yours), and it was an eye-opener.

Okay... I'll bite (nice teaser, BTW)... what did you find eye-opening?
 
I have always been under the impression that a modern car cockpit is usually a good "test bed" for things (especially since it is one of the most common environments for listening to music). Convertibles are obviously not included in this (nor cars with bad sound isolation from the environment in general).

I did a test - in the garage tho - where I played pink noise and recorded the result with a mic in the center of the car.
 
Me in the car changes things a bit, but it's actually pretty fair. Not flat of course, especially as you get higher up the ranges. But it's not bad. Maybe I can find it and post the result. Or just do another.

Bit ~ you think 1 figure 8 right between the two front seats makes sense for capturing the car's sound, or put it where my head goes?
 
 
My car is a Honda Accord sporty 2 Door with the package for sunroof and nice stereo. It's stock tho. A stereo that Honda sells in it's package. 2005. I got it second hand.

When I did it, I initially made a mono recording with an omnidirectional microphone placed where my head would be when I'm sitting in the driver's seat. I used a boom stand stuck through the window, which was rolled up as far as possible and still accommodate the boom. I played back a CD that I'd made for the purpose that contained first white noise and then a series of 2-second sine waves of incremental frequency from 40 Hz to 500 Hz.
 
Realizing that I was taking a significant acoustical variable out of the equation, namely my own body, I later repeated the test using a borrowed portable recorder that I could hold at ear level while I sat in the car. As expected, I absorbed a lot of upper mids and high frequencies, but even my 200+ lb. mass had almost no effect on low frequencies.
 
What I concluded from those experiments was that a car's interior is about the worst possible acoustical space for music. Which paradoxically makes it a good test for mixes, even if it's not a reliable reference: if it sounds good in the car, then it's likely (but not a given) to also translate well to better acoustical environments.
 
You just don't want to make changes to your music specifically to suit the car's uneven response, because that's a rat-hole you'll never climb out from.
 
A great deal of attention is given to acoustics by automotive engineers, but isolation is the priority, not music. Isolation means external sound is kept out for a quiet ride, but it also means sound is trapped within the cabin, assuring extreme resonance issues and drastically uneven frequency response.
 
Speaker placement is all about making the speakers invisible and unobtrusive. That leads to acoustical atrocities such as tweeters in the dashboard pointing up at the windshield, and woofers mounted in doors that are actually resonant chambers designed to give a satisfying "thump" when you close them. Not to mention subwoofers in the trunk that rely on conduction through the car's chassis to be heard.
 
None of this is conducive to a flat frequency response. Then you've usually got a second pair of speakers in the back with L/R reversed, guaranteeing that no one in the car hears a proper stereo image. One good result is that you'll know right away if your mix is not mono-compatible! 
 
And the problems don't end there. Because very low frequencies are physically impossible to support in a space smaller than a quarter of their wavelengths, they have to be artificially helped by EQ. Most factory-installed car stereos therefore have a built-in boost between 60 and 150 (!) Hz. There is also a built-in compressor, which fortunately many players allow you to switch off but are likely enabled by default. And don't forget those dreadful graphic equalizers, but of course WE are smart enough to not use them, right?
 
 
 
 

I continue to get wrapped around the wheel with this paradox, since the most common listening environments are not ideal. For me this has always been the pursuit of (mentally) correlating my monitor environment to generic listening environments.
 
 

bottom line:
 
you need a good treated room, and good monitors,
to make mixes that have good translation.
 
all the rest, is just a clusterphuck