Are todays digital recordings engineered to sound best on a smartphones?

I finally found some new hard rock that I like. Greta Van Fleet. I found them on YouTube and they sounded awesome on my LG V30 and some modified Grado SR60s. On boy I thought how they would sound on my 50k system. Strolling through Wal-Mart I saw both their albums and got them. I enthusiastically slid the disc in my SA-10. RIGHT BEFORE MY EARS I had one of my most anticlimactic disappointing musical experiences. It sounded flat and compressed with the vocal mix farther in the background. Pretty much uninvolving. If I had heard the CD first on a decent home system I wouldn’t have bought it. I will try my headphones into the SA-10 and see how it goes. Is YouTube streaming hi-rez I wonder???
I’ll say straight up that I am not a big fan of Greta Van Fleet....but I am a huge fan of a band that tours with them from time to time called the Struts.

Same thing happened to me with them. Sounds fine in the car. Sounds okay on ear buds. Sounds like crap on my hi-fi system. Loudness through the roof. Almost too loud at the lowest volume setting. Turning it up makes it worse.

I do not have trained or golden ears when it comes to nuanced listening but I can hardly tolerate overly compressed stuff. Which is almost everything new. I can mess with some of it with a digital equalizer and make it palatable but only just. What follows is a list of great acts with dismal DR on their albums:

Greta Van Fleet
The Struts
Tedeschi Trucks
Gary Clark, Jr
Alabama Shakes
Neko Case
Leon Bridges
St. Paul and the Broken Bones

Just to name a few. Instant listening fatigue.

But here’s the thing, sometimes the DR will be bad on all sources of a band’s album: CD, hi-res download and vinyl. That is the most common. But, in some cases one medium will have much better dynamic range. Gary Clark Jr.’s album Blak and Blu on CD is terrible. On HD Tracks it is considerably better.

I was researching the Tom Petty anthology The Best of Everything and the HD Tracks file has excellent DR. The DR of the CD has not been posted but some reviewers have said it is terrible. I hope that is not true.

Edit: The HD Tracks file is $38. The album set is over $60. The CD is $16..............but it doesn't cost a penny more to record a Cd with good DR than it does to make on with poor DR.
Thanks for your response. I listened to them on my Grado PS 500s and wow. I don't think the compression matters as much with headphones. What is your opinion on that? Also the Grados are midrange forward and that explain some of it. Id like to hear them through a Klipsch horn! I'm hearing their first album now and I have the same experience. I also hadn't heard my headphones in a while. Maybe I have overdamped my room. 
I only have Sony MDR 7506 headphones and don't use them much so can't really say much about DR compression vs headphones.
Pop/rock has always been compromised! Classical and jazz have fared much better soundwise!
roberjerman, That might be true but I have plenty of rock and pop albums that were produced at the highest levels possible and with extraordinary DR. Mark Knopfler and Steely Dan are standouts in that respect.

I am particularly disappointed in Tedeschi Trucks since it is my understanding that they have their own studio so that they have control over the production process and still make overly compressed albums.

Even the hi-res version of the Tom Petty album I mentioned above is produced with very high DR.
I have Tedeshi Trucks live, Gary Clark Live, and I am listening to Tom petty 'Hypnotic'  right now and I will have to respectfully disagree that the recordings  I have of these three artists are bad. 
Some of us have systems that are very revealing of not so good recordings.Some of us have sensitive hearing or (me) hyperacusis(spelling?) so that overblown frequencies make us cringe.For me I can enjoy certain music on lower resolution devices but never on my rig at home"shudder!"
@gawdbless : I should have been more specific. Both the Tedeschi Trucks and Gary Clark, Jr. albums I was referring to are studio albums. Their DR has been tested and in some cases by more than one person. DR is terrible.

As far as Tom Petty, I was only referring to the CD of "The Best of Everything". But that was just based on reviews. DR testing has not been reported on the CD.

I will also say that compressed DR does not seem to bother some people, even people who seem to be picky about lots of other SQ nuances. It baffles me how though. When DR is compressed nothing in the component chain can bring it back. And when the tonal range is compressed there is ’less’ to hear in terms of tonal variation.

There are some very very experienced people here who also suggest that by room and system tweaking a low DR recording can be made to sound good. I don’t have the experience or knowledge to refute that and none of us has any basis for questioning someone else’s ears but I still don’t see how you can significantly improve something that simply is not there.
oh the loudness wars continue. But I bet a majority of pop rock rap ect is mixed for headphone listening as 75% of those targeted listeners only listen through headphones- computer - Bluetooth speakers. ( ok I'm ready for the other 25% to lambaist me here)
@n80- I apologize, I do not have the CD ’the best of everything’ or the studio versions of either Tedeshi Trucks or Gary Clark jr so I cannot comment on those.
I think its not a case of Improving something that is not there, just making what is there musically acceptable. Better quality Hi-FI component’s will be better at extracting the Information that is there that some lesser qualitied components are not very good at.
glennewdick, You might be right. But it still doesn't make sense. Most of the folks playing through the computer or cell phone probably have Sound Check or some version of it turned on and don't even know it. So the attention grabbing effect of high compression is completely neutralized. Radio stations essentially do the same thing so no advantage there. 

And all that makes me wonder why this technique is so ubiquitous. It is an added step in the production process, not something that has to struggled against. So even from the prospect of production cost it does not make sense. So far I have heard no reasonable explanation why this phenomenon persists.

gawdbless, I understand what you are saying but when critical tonal variations, which are probably one of the primary components to rich, lush sound, are not there, maximizing what is left seems fairly futile from a hard core hi-fi perspective. Not saying it can't be improved. As mentioned, I can improve things a little with judicious EQ. I'm assuming that takes advantage of the fact that the perceived loudness of various frequencies is different even at the same output volume. (There is a name for this but I forget). In the end though, without critical variations in tonal range (probably not the right is all complicated) it seems like pretty much else we do to the signal is, pardon the vernacular, polishing a turd.

And when I say that I'm talking about recordings with average dynamic range in the 4-5 range, which is common now. I think when a recording is in the 8-9 range more can be done with it and those, even though many consider that range to be unacceptable, sound okay to me.