dissapointing audiophile recording

A LOT of those so called "audiophile" specialty label recordings SUCK!!!!
The have very good, realistic sound.. but what that sound gives, emotionally... SUCKS! big time.
Classical records are not included it this opinion. Most of the audiophile classic are pretty good. Just the so-called Jazz are the WORST!
I'll take a badly recorded great performance, over a well recorded bland performance any day!

I have to agree with you Elizabeth with many of the so called Jazz recordings on Audiophile lables. Just back to the Kenny Rankin Chesky cd listen to him sing "I could write a book" or "Alway" he has no idea what the words mean or even how to a fraise a sentence, or how to caress a lyric.Then you listen to a singer like Arthur Prysock and now you can hear what a brillent singer can do. I would rather many audiophile record companys looking for new talent on the NYC subway platform during rush hour.

Hello, yes, that is correct Elizabeth.
I grade my LPs on four different factors;
1) studio/production, includes engineer and musicians,room, recording technique etc
2) pressing, includes vinyl and the pressing
3 condition, ie groove wear and physical condition
4) music, if you ain't got da groove, you aint got da move. This, though, is the most open for interpetation. Though never any Montovani, Readers Digest "light classical recordings" or Kenny G as these are always out.
A seperate category for "anomilies" such as pre echo, good bass, drums, vocal recording, piano etc; whatever that is found on recordings that can make it of interest to hear on other systems or as your system evolves.

Any LP that is seriously lacking in any of these areas, the LP is worthless.
Bob