First things first: I mix with the exact same speakers as you, so I don’t have any translation issues across different playback systems. Smartphones, in particular, aren’t the most challenging in this regard.
For smartphone translation, the solution is simple: apply a mono utility on your master bus and use an EQ with a low cut at 150 Hz. If your mix retains enough harmonic content under these conditions, it will translate effortlessly to smartphone speakers. Clearly, if your bass is a sine wave at 40 hz, it will never translate to a smartphone speaker. If Andrew Scheps is avaible to have an amazing translation mixing on cheap headphones is mainly because he know perfectly what matter in the midrange to have great translation.
I’m always cautious when I hear statements like: "The acoustic treatment of my room is okay—could be improved for sure, though. I've done some EQing with the hardware EQ on the Focals. I tried using Sonarworks, but for some reason, it wouldn’t work because it couldn't get a proper signal during one step of the process."
If you have measurements of your room, please share them. Otherwise, it’s impossible to determine whether your space actually sounds ok for a mixing room or not. The average untreated room exhibits ±10 to 15 dB of non-linearity across the frequency spectrum—and that’s not even addressing time-domain issues, which tend to be worse. Nothing like foam panel or little rockwool panel can solve the low end issues. Often, it will worsen the unbalance between the RT in the low and in the mid / high register.
It's very difficult to achieve a neutral frequency response in the lower spectrum. When using porous treatment (such as rock wool), you need at least 30 cm covering the entire ceiling and walls to start having a real impact on the low frequencies.
As a result, it's far more likely that your translation issues stem from your room and your experience, which probably has peaks and dips exceeding 10 dB in the low end, rather than from your speakers, which cover 40 Hz – 35 kHz with a tolerance of ±3 dB.
That being said, while the Shape speakers are good, there are clearly better options available today—especially speakers with narrower directivity (particularly in the vertical plane) and better group delay, which I consider the main drawback of passive radiators.
However, if your goal is better sound and improved translation, I would start by taking measurements (unless you've already done so), addressing major room issues, and then considering new speakers—potentially ones that can compensate for your room's challenges.
For example, cardioid speakers can help mitigate reflections from the desk in the midrange, and if you have an unsolvable rom mode at 35 Hz, there’s no real advantage in getting speakers that extend down to 30 Hz, as they wouldn’t effectively improve the situation and there is nothing in this area that can't be fixed in mastering. (most issues are between 40 hz (low E of the bass) and 150 hz) If i was you, in a rental situation, honestly, my choice will be a pair of KH150 and a pair of PSI AVAA in adition to some decents panels (10 cm thick mini) to create relexion free zone until the low mid at your listening position. Desk design and stands are really important too.
Finally, be cautious with recommendations from well-known engineers. First, because they are often endorsed, and second, because many make their choices based on what others use, without necessarily having had the chance to listen to different monitors in their own space.
It is very rare—if not impossible to find a store nearby with a properly treated acoustic environment where you can compare 5-6 speakers priced above €2000 each, all positioned correctly.
As a result, some speakers become "reference monitors" simply because many people use them, even though they are actually suboptimal. A good example is several PMC models, which don’t measure well but are still widely found in studios.
Where does a phone roll off 500hz?
