Thanks for contributing to the discussion, Jan! I'm downloading your file now...
 
Steve, I suspect the problem is that they just haven't scaled up their server(s) yet for gobs of data going in and out. Buying hosting services is expensive, and it's unlikely theirs is a profit-making enterprise yet.

Just saw this, here's some 'auto mastering' in plugin form. This new technology should be the next best thing since Auto-tune.
http://www.tb-software.co.TBProAudio/products.html

Jan's version came out really nice. Comparable loudness to the Landr version, but slightly higher peak levels (-0.09 vs. -0.29 vs. -1.0 in my original master). Jan went for a more balanced EQ, slightly brighter than mine but not to the point of harshness. Dynamic range was reduced, but to my ear did not harm the song at all.
 
All in all, Jan's treatment was just brilliant. Metaphorically, that is, not spectrally. Here's a link to a 256 kb/s MP3 (to match the other versions) so you can give it a listen.
 
[NOTE: SoundCloud streams at 128 kb/s, but these files are all downloadable in their original resolution of 256 kb/s, and in the case of the unmastered version as a lossless FLAC]
 

I need to listen to Jan's version at the studio. On my iPad it sounds a bit harsh and over limited...natch. Probably sounds fine on decent speakers. But then that's why we check our mixes on crap speakers...that's where they get listened to the most.

Cosmos is a true wonder. Killer diller.

Have in mind that I did this as a quicky :-))
Bombarded the track with various plugs and used the elimination tactic :-)
"Does this sound good , yep ...does this help the track , na no soup for you etc...." :-))
All I say , go with the flow and be moderate with what you throw at a track :-))
Somtimes nothing at all .
All the best
Jan

Really interesting guys, and on my "crappy" Computer speakers Jan's does sound good - i think best is a bit subjective as to personal taste but I feel the main stuff I want to hear does sound a bit clearer / sharper - does just border on the harsh but on my system very acceptable.
I wonder if anyone had seen this - I had an email from JJR shop(I think) about it a few weeks back but never got around to checking it out
http://www.jrrshop.com/rob-chiarelli-signature-series-mixbuss-lite
Nigel
 

Thanks Eddie
I have to say I did view this with a little suspicion! And pretty much assumed it would perform as you have described - so thanks again, you've saved me the trouble of looking into it!!!
Cheers
Nigel
 

Eddie TX
Har-Bal ... I've heard a lot about it but never tried it (seems there is no way to demo?).  Can it really do things that other tools like Ozone cannot? 
 
Cheers,
Eddie
 

I believe that there is a demo of Har-Bal that you can try.  The unique thing about Har-Bal 3, is the ability to split the track along song structure, to be able to work on different parts of the song.  Here is a link to a fascinating tutorial that Pavo did, remastering a U2 song: http://www.har-bal.com/help/tutorials.html
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KUj9MUODEU
 
 
 
 

I've always maintained that if the mastering actions are drastic it's a sign that the mix isn't done yet.
 
Some elements of the mix did sound better with the brighter master, but not all of them, so it made sense to revisit the mix and brighten up those things that seemed to benefit most, mainly drums. I've done that now, but I won't post the new mix lest I muddy the waters for this mastering experiment. But my gosh, it's apparent that I've learned a few things, or at least gotten better at them, since I first mixed this one just four years ago. Gives me hope.
 
Thanks for joining in, Soundblend. Not bad for a living-room mix! A little bright to my ear, but very dynamic and punchy with high crest factors - just the way I like 'em.
 

I gave Bitflipper's track a go as well. Here's what I came up with. I used HMB to master this. I would be interested in anything, good or bad, anyone has to say.
 
BTW Bit. Excellent bit of tunage there. This could easily translate into a Reggae song. The only thing I didn't like was the hand claps. I thought they could either be eliminated or set off to the side and rolled the bottom off a bit more plus a touch of reverb.

Really good song, bit!  Liked jan's version, but to me a good song, trumps a great mix or mastering job!

I could never become a mastering engineer because those people need to stay objective to the material in hand .
Boring if you ask me :-))
All the best
Jan

Guitarpima
I gave Bitflipper's track a go as well. Here's what I came up with. I used HMB to master this. I would be interested in anything, good or bad, anyone has to say.
 
BTW Bit. Excellent bit of tunage there. This could easily translate into a Reggae song. The only thing I didn't like was the hand claps. I thought they could either be eliminated or set off to the side and rolled the bottom off a bit more plus a touch of reverb.

Cool, I finally get to hear the magical Harrison MixBus. Sounds good. Louder than mine - I'm guessing you used a bus compressor, judging from the compressed dynamics - but still in the sweet range (IMO) and conservative peaks. These images show how you get more loudness without actually changing the average RMS (at the obvious cost of reduced micro-dynamics):

I also hear a little additional brightness. Can I assume that some of that can be attributed to the console emulator? Sounds like you also gave the very low end a little boost.
 
One thing I've picked out to listen to in comparing these masters is the quiet organ and subsequent build-up to the crescendo at the end. Pulling up overall loudness can have the effect of diluting the impact of such risers because the quiet part's less quiet and the loud part maxes out too soon. Yours preserved that dynamic well, I think.
 
Interesting comment about the handclaps. Yeah, they're cheesy (TTS-1) but I'd mixed them low and in time with the snare with the intention of adding texture to the snare rather than being identifiable as handclaps. I'd even forgotten they were in there. When you mentioned them my first thought was "wait a minute...there are handclaps in there?" and had to go look at the project.
 
But since nearly all of the remasters have involved boosting the upper-mids, and the handclaps already had a 4 KHz boost on them, they have consequently become more audible than in the original. To the point where, like you, I no longer like them so much because instead of reinforcing the snare they now stand out on their own. And I absolutely hate that tired old Roland fake-handclap sound!
 
The lesson here is that mastering choices can (and usually do) alter the mix. I think it's a good argument for mixing into a mastering chain even if you don't intend on doing the final mastering yourself.
 
BTW, at 3:47 those same handclaps are heard in reverse, which I thought was a cool effect.

And turning out great music to boot!