KPerry
Wouldn't the *worst* be interesting too (for obvious reasons)?

Yeah, what's interesting about this, is there will be winners and losers, and I'd hope for the sake of the NYC Mastering Engineer, his/her master wins. If that's not the case, it may make him/her look bad when compared to the 3 non-professional masters, and the 2 that were submitted to LANDR.

For me, if I could download the unmastered version, I'd like to compete with what's been done here.

I will only say that some of you all so far have decided that I'm right in my choice.

Skyline_UK
Good idea, and I don't want to sound awkward but 'sounds best' relative to what? Everyone has different musical tastes depending on a myriad of things.

Not awkward at all, because it brings up a point that a lot of people have overlooked in the LANDR threads. There are many valid ways to master a song, depending on the artist's vision and the target audience. 

brconflict
Yeah, what's interesting about this, is there will be winners and losers, and I'd hope for the sake of the NYC Mastering Engineer, his/her master wins.

It depends on which criteria s/he is mastering to.  If it's loudness at all costs, there are sacrifices to be made that will turn off those of us who prefer clarity, space and dynamic range.  But mastering for these and will cause some to say the song lacks thickness and punch.
 
Some of the tracks were pretty rough on the ears.  And what is that awful noise at the very beginning ?  Kind of turned me off the song before I'd heard anything else.

Paul P

brconflict
Yeah, what's interesting about this, is there will be winners and losers, and I'd hope for the sake of the NYC Mastering Engineer, his/her master wins.

It depends on which criteria s/he is mastering to.

Very true. However, with the genre this falls into, the compression on the kick, coupled with the NYC Mastering, one might assume this was meant for radio airplay. That being the case, I would offer it needs to be loud. If the kick is too punchy it will pump the radio station limiters too much and offer a pretty weak 80's style broadcast.

Soundwise
I like #3 the best.

Me too, even though a recent hearing test showed that I no longer have "Hi-Fi" hearing. Be interesting to see the results.
 
Walt

# 3 here too, with 6 and 5 following behind.   # 2 and 4 seemed to lose some of their transient attack/punch compared to the others. 
 
Of course, if I were to listen to the same tracks a week from now my preferences could be different, as could my listening environment.  

The problem is not with the mastering, it is with the song itself. It is so boring that I could not listen all the versions.

Tibear
The problem is not with the mastering, it is with the song itself. It is so boring that I could not listen all the versions.

I decided to only compare that "Into".

Tibear
The problem is not with the mastering, it is with the song itself. It is so boring that I could not listen all the versions.

Excellent reason to NOT be a professional mixing or mastering engineer. Tough to turn down paying business just because you don't like a potential client's material. Even worse, turn down paying business from an existing client because you don't like the new material. 'Like' has nothing to do with paying the bills. Better off to be neutral, anyway.