I also do not consider myself an audiophile, although I enjoy good music. In addition to the quality of the actual recording and production, one has to consider the audience the label intends to sell their music to. If the intended audience is listening to the music on boom boxes, tiny compact music systems, and average car radios, the mix is probably going to be different than if the audience will be listening with upscale equipment. My opinion is that music destined for this crowd will not be optimum on a hi-fi setup irregardless the quality of the label. I personally think this is what plagues many mainstream rock and pop recordings.

I really doubt there are different masters for a given recording, although the same masters can be remixed differently for different recorded media, and there's also the quality of transferring the data from the master to the final retail media. A former colleague of mine who considered himself an audiophile was a huge fan of Telarc. I have several selections from this label and have been happy with all of them. My musical taste tends toward artists who record their own masters and distribute through less well known labels. I've been very happy with all the music I've acquired from smaller companies. They seem to take care in the production process, and they're likely also aiming at an audience of more sophisticated listeners with above average equipment.

The bottom line, though, is usually who your favorite artists have contracted with to produce their music. It's quite unlikely to find a group or artist on more than one label at any given time. In that case, if you want music from a particular band, symphony, or artist, you'll have to settle for the quality of the recording label they have contracted with.

Happy listening,
Bill