"good standard instrument choices for the genre and consistent/coherent composition at least."

That's a fair assessment.

"but it's the same chord progression for the whole song"

Which is bad how exactly? Most songs follow the standard 4 chord progression throughout, I mean, the song is called "the everlasting" and its theme envokes something that literally lasts forever.

"not much structural progression"

It's a downtempo electronica song, that's kinda the point.

"melodies aren't very inspiring and don't stand out"

Oh look, his melody is simplistic and uninspired. The piece "Alpha" by Vangelis has a "simplistic" melody at the start and is lauded as a masterpiece in the electronica/new age world.

"the mix/mastering is overly bassy and too heavily compressed, destroying a lot of the dynamic variation in the track and taking the impact away from the drums"

This is a fair critique, but as you're probably aware, I am, along with 99% of everyone else here, and amateur musician. Mixing and mastering is an entire skill of its own. But I do try to get better at this.

"fadeout ending seems lazy."

I'm at a loss at thinking that you find literally billions of songs in the entire world history to be lazy for their use of fadeout. Again, the theme of this song is that it would last forever, a fadeout holds that idea neatly.

Overall there seems to be some heavy bias here. You yourself stated that you're biased towards good mixing, that's fair since that's kinda what most people need to be good at. But seeing as you were the strictest judge in this competition, your "average" is far less that the rest, and in turn resulted in my track not being judged by its own merit but rather by what you personally thought of its theme, the use of melodies and its structure, which is biased and unfair. If my mix and mastering was LEGENDARY, you'd still only rate my piece above average.

And that is my 2 cents on the matter.

Thank you!

Thank you!