EDIT: Track deleted.....

There is a basic principle that spans all engineering disciplines, which is that the earlier in the process you get it right, the better. Imagine the cost of making an automotive design change when the car's still on paper versus a global recall.
 
It's harder to fix a badly-recorded track or a sloppy performance through editing than it is to just re-record it. It's harder to fix such a track in the mix, which is why "we'll fix it in the mix" became an ongoing insider joke. (Frank Zappa once quipped "we'll fix it in the shrinkwrap".) And of course a bad mix can't be saved in the mastering stage any more than a weak record can be improved by playing it on a high-end audiophile system.
 
That said, I'm not sure your sample track illustrates the principle very convincingly. The "bad mix" simply isn't nearly bad enough. It's actually not bad.
 

A friend of mine here in Norway hired someone to do the production of this song in USA
all the sounds and mixing was done there...

He did receive one un-mastered file, and one mastered, he was unhappy with the mastered version
Way to much boomy and low end

bitflipper
There is a basic principle that spans all engineering disciplines, which is that the earlier in the process you get it right, the better....

Spot on. AT&T (well, Bell Labs), did a study decades ago on the cost of fixing software bugs.
 
Crudely stated:
the cost to repair a defect in high level design is X
the cost to repair the same defect in low level design is 10X
the cost to repair the same defect in manufacturing is 100X
the cost to repair the same defect in the field is 1000X
 
My experience has proven those orders of magnitude to be pretty close to real world.
 
VW is going to find this out. The hard way.

I will receive the master, that my friend got from the " Producers " in USA
later tonight.

I have not yet heard it yet, for a reason
so i could  master with my own fresh ears.

looking forward to hear what they have done !!!

EDIT: the master was not good at all...

bitflipper
There is a basic principle that spans all engineering disciplines, which is that the earlier in the process you get it right, the better. Imagine the cost of making an automotive design change when the car's still on paper versus a global recall.
 
It's harder to fix a badly-recorded track or a sloppy performance through editing than it is to just re-record it. It's harder to fix such a track in the mix, which is why "we'll fix it in the mix" became an ongoing insider joke. (Frank Zappa once quipped "we'll fix it in the shrinkwrap".) And of course a bad mix can't be saved in the mastering stage any more than a weak record can be improved by playing it on a high-end audiophile system.

I totally Agree

bitflipper
 That said, I'm not sure your sample track illustrates the principle very convincingly. The "bad mix" simply isn't nearly bad enough. It's actually not bad.
 

On that one i do not agree, i have heard better mixes most of the time
but also some few worse..

you never fix mistakes in a mastering session.
 
i repeat:
never
never
never
never
never
never
never
never
never
 
 
and just to be sure this is clear....................
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
fix it in the mix.

that's correct and i know that, and luckily its not my mix 

I just got the file from my friend,and he asked me politely " can you master it for me ? "
...so i did.

If this had been a paying customer, and i had a name within mixing and mastering
i would point out the problems, and send em back to redo the whole mix.

Two things would may happen then

1. They would have done what i said, and come back with a better mix
2. They would go to someone else, and i would never see them again

some jobs are not worth taking.
 
the best job i ever had, was the one i walked away from.
because it turned into a nightmare for someone else
 

Nothing to see here...