For a jukebox, one might make field recordings that are much closer
to sound-sources rather than attempt to capture and reproduce larger
spaces. It might be important that the sounds contributed by the
jukebox “pop” with more dryness and purity in order to blend
convincingly with the train station ambience, other sound sources,
etc.

Likewise, in a controlled monitoring environment, when everything
works, the experience of the room becomes “confused” with the
impression of another space. Both applications of speakers rely on
sound waves figuring an actual space, less so, “recordings.” This
confusion even happens within the tiny spaces of headphones like when
a close PA speaker or other pin-point sound source cuts throug

I’ve never surveyed listeners, but I always assume they’ll be hearing
my material on computer speakers or possibly cheap ear buds.

FWIW, I edit/mix on a pair of ancient Yamaha NS-10 M near-field
monitors, with frequent reference checks on Sony MDR-7506 headphones.
I also check my work on the built-in speakers in my MacBook Pro. My
current space is a 10′ x 10′ spare bedroom with lots of stuff in it
and very few reflections. I would argue that the key is understanding
– by experience over time — how your material will translate from
your work station to other playback systems and making adjustments
along the way. In the end, I figure the best we can do is to refine
our guesswork.

I’ve come to suspect that the final “transducers” or speakers used,
from inexpensive headphones to $3000 monitors in a treated studio,
are, by far, the weakest link in the sound reproduction -> audience
chain. Field recordings typically present very dense blends of sounds
congealing in the lower mid-range (125 Hz – 700Hz) and these sounds
are not only the hardest for the best gear to image with clarity but
also the first to get mangled by speakers and rooms. The challenges
with field recordings is very different from robust sound sources
that are mixed for “pop” playback. I describe the experience
difference as wanting to hear the _space_ that is being created
dynamically “behind” the speakers, not feel as if the sound is coming
OUT of the speakers. True with phones too.

There must be many successful ways people on this list have bridged
the monitoring gap with a specified audience. I’m anxious to hear
what others have discovered. In my experience, no solutions have
been easy and they all were very situation-specific when it was over.
The most expedient solution I’ve used was to mix on headphones and
use a 6 channel stereo headphone amp and supply 6 folks with matched
headphones. After I got the gig, I had to individually remix every
single track for the installation space to produce the nuances. That
said, I feel headphones are very misleading to mix/master with if one
hopes that others will be able to appreciate some of the details
using the highly varied monitoring systems they’ll employ. I find
speaker monitoring much more reliable and faster if mixing for
general use, but with the following caveat.

I never felt confident that my mixing/mastering judgements were
translating well on other monitoring systems until I finally got the
chance to build and use a fully treated studio with
industry-standardized monitoring speakers. The studio, though built
in a rural location with inexpensive materials, is a lot more
considered and well-treated than all of the apartment/artist space
“studios” I tried to “treat” and work in through the years, and,..
its a TON quieter. Being able to hear sounds played at realistic
levels and not louder than normal to be heard “above” a bunch of
disruption in the background makes the listening experience a lot
more “realistic,” easier and less stressful/fatiguing on the ears.
Of course, others usually can’t listen to the mixes in the same,
“ideal” condition, they probably have to play them louder or use
phones, but I think the judgements I make are better and the outcomes
benefit. [I'm very sorry to pontificate from position of privilege,
but I don't know any way around it. It was some consolation to
learn it wasn't _all_ my poor judgment to blame for so many iffy
mixes. ]

I know of one answer to the “no budget/must make it work in this
installation space” situation. One can use modest speakers in an
untreated room and as long as the listener-to-speaker distances are
much closer than all reflective surfaces, one can use very careful EQ
adjustments and mix each piece to play very well _in that specific
situation_. (Very different from putting speakers on the floor in the
corners!! ) It requires setting up your laptop with a good EQ
plug and spending a lot of time in the ideal listening position
making each piece happen. Unfortunately, you’ll probably find there
isn’t a general EQ setting that will work across all of your
recordings in the space because field recordings present too many
complexities in the lower midrange where rooms are really active

Did once put survey/poll questions on some London-based forums, asking ‘How do you listen to internet-based music and other sounds?’ The answers were pretty much what you’d expect.

Earbuds/headphones when commuting or at work, speakers when at home, seemed to be the general rule. Some seemed to think the latter was a better experience, and would occasionally make a point of listening to something ‘properly’ later at home which they’d come across during the working day.

Only one person out of maybe 60 or 70 respondents used any kind of surround sound setup.