Ironically, that's a recipe for muddiness. Matte papers have a certain range of tones they can represent, if try to force upon them a range of tones in excess of what they can handle, you get an ugly muddy mess.
Open up the shadows, and in particular increase the tonal range (I hesitate to say contrast) in the shadow areas. Separation is what you want in shadow areas for matte papers (and BTW glossy papers as well, but especially matte papers). In fact, separation is what you want everywhere.
Matte papers are about subtlety rather than punch. Could be you would prefer glossy.
Also be sure you've got all the color management stuff right. Classic mistake when going from glossy to matte is to forget to set the proper media type, in addition to the correct profile etc. etc. etc.
Don't know that particular printer and driver, but if it's swapping blacks inexplicably you might be bringing back in a wrong default media type (or even profile) when you reload a new file.
Hi Bill, thanks for posting.
I only resorted to those measures (crunching blacks, boosting contrast) as a last ditch effort to verify whether or not my computer display was WAY outta wack. The manipulation DID result in change but obviously not what I intended.
As for the choice of papers, I agree with assessment of matte vs glossy, however in this particular case I'm kinda stuck: This is a bindery job that requires a certain tactile 'effect' that, in my inexperience, can only be found in a Rag paper. It had to be light enough for the binding and yet heavy enough to withstand a certain amount of 'pawing'. AAAnd on top of all this, the paper had to be double-sided. Whew! The Moab Entrada 190 has fit all those specs...now all i have to do is make it look good!
This has been an expensive yet enriching learning curve.