Mapleshade Recordings..GREAT or what?


I HAPPEN TO THINK MAPLESHADE CD'S ARE THE GRETEST RECORDINGS AROUND. I HAVE ALMOST WHOLE OF THE CATALOGUE. PRODUCTION QUALITY CAN BE MISS AT TIMES BUT HEAR THAT LIFE LIKE MUSIC AND YOU ARE DRAWN IN TO NO MATTER WHAT. AND YOU GET THE BEST PRICE TOO. THEM AND THE REFERENCE RECORDINGS ARE FEW OF MY FAVOURITES. I HAVE BOUGHT LOT OF OTHER COMMERCIAL JAZZ/CLASSICAL STUFF BUT NOTHING COMES THIS CLOSE. EVEN THE FAVOURABLY REVIEWED ONES. HOW MANY OF YOU AGREES WITH ME. MAY BE THIS POST WILL SPREAD THE WORD AND BUY SOME OF THEIR CD'S.
nilthepill
nanderson: sorry, i don't get your point. are you saying that mapleshades are "good" becuz they can be emperically verified as being "superior recordings" in some way? becuz they are supposedly used by AR to voice their equipment? or what? for someone who distains quanity of words over quality of thought, your post seems more than a little verbose. i've been at this hobby even longer than you. i don't embrace it as a substitute for some other failed part of my life. what's your unfufilled need? your apparent call for civility in responsive posts on threads like this one is belied by the condescending tone of yours. this thread is supposed to be about your thoughts on mapleshade recordings. your meager views on the subject in question are pathetic. if you want to elevate the quality of discussions on these threads, then don't substitute your psuedo-philisophical/scientific mumbo-jumbo for what you lable as audio pub vernacular. BTW, i find virtually all of the mapleshade and ref rec stuff to be well-recorded but really boring. there's lot's of stuff out there just as well recorded, or better so, that i return to over and over. this ain't the case with audiophile favorites declared "important" by stereophile or tas. but, hey, that's just my opinion. if you wanna spend your listening time with the "artists" of these labels, you should by all means do so. you really don't need to justify your tastes by chatting on audiogon. despite what nanderson apparently suggests.
The title of my thread states my thoughts on quality of Mapleshade recordings. My point about mentioning the staggering amount of positive reviews and use world wide was to make the case that their are other completely opposite opinions (by those many pay for their opinions) from the total dismissal of the recordings posted else where. I don't get many of your points but we don't all think alike. I wrote as much as I did about the need for calm discourse because it has long caught my attention a similarity of thought process of those that I have seen since the early 1960s that use their opinions, expressed as absolute facts, on high end audio, cars, wine, etc as a perverse way to make themselves better by putting others down. I hoped that younger people would understand the source of such needs and try to avoid it themselves. Calm discourse is so important in all things. I love high end audio as a source of pleasure and hoped that others would not be turned off from the hobby by those that see a need to catapult themselves in front of others by their self proclaimed knowledge. Forgive me if I don't respond back to this thread but I am going to busy on other things over the next few weeks. Best wishes!
Hi, I just ordered 6 cds to enjoy. Of the two I opened so far "After Glow" and "Making Wopee", I very satified with the recording. High have a high res system (Talon spk, SACD, Bel Canto EVo, Nirvana ic and Silteck spk). They are on par with recordings from Michele Barber and some well recorded SACD but not the best SACD. I would characterize them as natural and fleshed out. Was wondering what are some of the favorite recordings of some memebers who enjoy Mapleshade.
One of the WORST CD's I have ever heard is that Doug McCleod (spelling?) blues CD, Come To Find. Forgive me if I don't have all the details correct, because the sound was so awful that I listened to only one song and then had to turn it off. I often listen to new CD's several times before forming an opinion of the sound and the performance. I tried liking that CD by giving it another chance later, but just couldn't get past the horrible mud and thud. Who cares if a signal is processed or not? If it sounds like crap, they SHOULD have processed it. Do you think that a real symphony orchestra would actually sound good in your living room? Probably not a blues combo, either, then. I don't care what all the critics in the audio press write...I can think for myself and form my own opinions. And I couldn't care less that ARC uses Mapleshade to voice their components, because most of their stuff sounds sterile and artificial anyway. If there are better Mapleshades, I would happily give them a try, if anyone cares to recommend one.
I own 7 Mapleshades and only 2 of them have any merit artistically(IMHO).Sonically they all sound good, but the performance isnt worth listening to.Also, they tend to mislead a little; it sounds like youre buying a new release, but some of this stuff was recorded 10-12 yrs ago.