I had this discussion with Defro a while back, but I thought I would bring it to a larger audience. Here are my thoughts:

While it is true that an Audiophile CD is recorded much better than regular CDs, am I the only one to wonder... why do they use so many ****ty performers?

For example, I love the Coustic/Sheffield Lab cd, but if I were to be entirely honest, aside from the one classical track -- the rest of the performances are trash.

The focal disks are fairly decent as they do use a lot of "mainstream" and/or "quality" performers like Ricky Lee Jones, etc. However, even they manage to stick in a few oddball tracks here and there.

I know music is personal and that one person's Bach is another's Weird Al; however, you can't tell me that Clair Meow as I call her on the Sheffield Disk is good -- in fact, when I a system is set up properly, the track sounds like a$$.

"there is a cow mooing in spanish harlem", thats what my ears here on that track, brutal production, and and ever worse singer. i still use some personal faves for tuning and put most of the sheffield etc etc stuff aside except for a handfull of tracks that i especially like. i imagine that if the cd producers got amore manistrean performers they would have to spend some thick cake to get them and may make the cost of production to high, im not sure. they wouldnt get rich off cd sales and radio play royalties thats for sure

one mans trash is another mans treasure...Just cause you don't like it means it crapppp!!

There is good recordings that are not done by 'audiophile' labels. Just a few hours ago I was at the hifi shop listining to Jack Johnson's Brushfire Fairy Tales. It is a very detailed recording that can sound incredible on a decent system.

I thought you old guys liked that elevator music [img]graemlins/dunno.gif[/img] ;)

One CD I really like is Cracker, Kerosene Hat. I will bring it with me to Calgary so you can have a listen Dave.

No doubt, both of his albums have awesome production, along with Ben Harper, Beck, Radiohead, Gomez, etc.......

I like the Micheal Jackson double cd, I forget the name but it is recorded awesome. (no Micheal Jaskson jokes please)

HIStory..... excellent production for sure, I heard that they boosted the bass up for most of those recordings too.

I'm talking "audiophile labels", not "small" or "independant" labels -- I'm talking about Chesky and Sheffield with their weird and certainly not wonderful concoctions...

I'm talking about Sara K., Clair Meow (forgot how to spell it), Rebecca Pidgeon, and all the other drek that gets put out in the name of "hi fi"

I mean, in a world of Cassandra Williams, Holy Cole, Diana Krall, Sheila Jordan, etc -- why are we subjected to $40 hi fi cd's that suck a$$?

OutKast's older CDs (Aquemini in particular) had good production quality. Those are the only ones I can think of in that genre, which isn't suprising, as production quality is actually discouraged in favour of "gritty" production.

Guys, this isn't a "what are good cds thread" it is a why do "audiophile cds have to suck thread" -- I was hoping someone could prove me wrong, but as usual no one can.