They absolutely mixed it, but the mastering is what was called into question. I thought they stuck with the mastered version in the end, though there were some leveling issues on BTATS and a couple of other places that got cleaned up in the 2015 remaster.
The vocals sound drier than month-old saltine crackers. There are some sloppy edits, and some of the guitar parts sound out of sync with each other. I’m sure there’s more.
Maybe but to my ears it´s as good as it is.
This is though a production choice rather than an error, which is the point I was making, that we try to distinguish between active production choices that we can disagree with, but succeeds at what it's aiming at, (that one is a fine example of one I disagree with), and actual elements not up to standards, rather than label those kind of choices as amateurish, when they are not (but rather a choice we disagree with), and instead call the actual amateur-ish sounding mistakes
They mixed it but they didn't master it. That was rectified with the 2015 remaster. Or rather master, since it was the first time it was mastered
Hmm, we can also look at it this way: yes, it absolutely succeeds - if the goal is for most post-reunion Maiden albums to sound noticeably less good than they potentially could. That's obviously subjective and only my opinion, even if plenty of fans seem to share it.
