It's my opinion that a mix is never finished. You can think that the mix is finished and put it aside and then come back to the mix in a couple of days and listen. Then it hits you. What was I thinking when I did this. Stupid move. And now we are talking about 0.05% of the mixing fase that we call mastering. Mastering , though good starts me thinking of the cost of mastering whether you do it yourself or send it out is worth the 0.05% of a mix. Most people can't really hear the difference as far as music goes and in my opinion the only thing mastering is good for is to make your mixex sound good on any medium whether it's mp3, casette, cd, in your car or on the worst speakers you can play your mix on. 

I have to agree, as I've already tried to get the mix to sound as good as I can. I don't feel I would be cheating sending it out to a mastering engineer and the work wasn't mine anymore, I also think it helps to see where I'm going wrong and what I should be aiming for. But I totally respect anyone who can do it themselves if it's good.

Cheers
Steve.

Here's a simple track I tried the Landr mastering on, I selected the medium compression setting so it's not the loudest ever.



Cheers
Steve.

Seems I can't post links yet sorry!

Just need

3

More posts

Here you go



Cheers
Steve.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/vcd0k7houjwkh2e/LandR-Precision3-AMD%20HDMI%20Output%20%28AMD%20High%20Defin.wav

This isn't the mastered file they sent back, is it? It's 44.1 / 32-bit. Surely it's the original file, or perhaps the one you mastered yourself?
 
In any event, we'd need both the original unmastered file and the Landr-mastered version to make any meaningful evaluation.