Chasing a specific pH level without regard to the other chemical interactions in your soil often yields unsatisfying results.

To offer an oversimplified explanation, pH reflects the number of positively-charged hydrogen ions presents on the negatively-charged soil colloid. The more hydrogen ions present, the lower the pH. However, hydrogen is easily displaced by other positively charged elements called cations (cat-eye-ons), primarily calcium, magnesium and potassium and, to a lesser degree, sodium. If your pH is above 7.0 it means that all the hydrogen ions have been displaced by other cations. If we look solely at the pH, we don't know the proportion of cations held on the cation. For, example, a soil with too much magnesium and too much calcium could have a high pH. But a soil with high magnesium and low calcium could have a high pH as well.

As jean mentioned above, soil sulfur would help lower pH. It does this by "freeing-up" space for hydrogen ions. However, it may not be your best choice. In order to lower the pH in an effective way, one needs to look to the soil test to tell us the relative proportion of the cations. For example, if we have high calcium and low magnesium we can balance the calcium by adding magnesium sulfate (epsom salts). The sulfates in the epsom salts will function in much the same way as soil sulfur and help to displace some of the calcium ions. If we have low potassium and high calcium and magnesium, we would use potassium sulfate for the same reason. If all our cations are "high" then we would use soil sulfur.

As kimmsr pointed out, a pH of 7.3 is just above ideal, but shouldn't inhibit you from successful growing. If your soil test indicates relative levels of calcium, magnesium and potassium, and if you care to share the information, I'd be happy to offer additional guidance.

The report also suggests 2-3 pounds of 10-10-10 fertilizer per 100 sqft in early spring to the area. However, I wonder if I will be better off with a fertilizer with higher nitrogen number such as blood meal.

How would you describe your soil? I'm guessing it's fairly heavy with a fair amount of clay and/or organic matter. Does your test mention the "CEC" or the "TEC." This is the cation exchange capacity which is a measure of your soil's ability to adsorb or hold nutrients. It would be helpful to know, but I'm guessing - based on the large amounts reported on your test - that it's greater than 30.

There are various ways of interpreting a soil test and recommending fertilizers. The sufficiency method - which is used by most state-run and university labs - basically asks the question: "Am I going to get additional benefit (e.g. greater yield) by adding "more" of any given nutrient? This is a "feed the plant" approach and does not take into account the long term effects on the soil. Another method, and one that resonates with me, is the base saturation approach. This philosophy is predicated on the relative proportion of the mineral nutrients within the context of the ability of the soil to hold them. This is a "feed the soil" approach which assumes that when the soil is properly balanced all the necessary nutrients will be present and, more importantly, available for use by the plant.

So, for example, sufficiency proponents might say that 400 lbs. (pounds per acre is a factor of 2x ppm) of potassium is more than enough to grow your "next crop" and that adding more will not provide any benefit. On the other hand, base saturation folks might say 400 lbs. is more than enough on a light sandy soil, but is not enough for a heavy clay or muck soil.

I'm not an expert by any means, but I'd say that your lab's 10-10-10 recommendation is sound for your "next crop." If you're looking longer term, you need to build phosphorus and sulfur levels and balance out your cations. From a base saturation standpoint, I'm guessing your calcium and magnesium are somewhat high and your potassium is low. If you have the CEC number on your test, that would be helpful in determining more precisely what and how much to add.

There are a few experts who peruse this forum, so hopefully they'll drop in to add some advice.

Your report didn't mention anything about "Lime" did it, like "high, medium or low"?

My soil is pH 7.4 and grows all veggies just fine but the fruit crops need some special management or they show micro-nutrient deficiencies. The veggies have always been fertilized with urea for their N, urea is an acid forming fertilizer also and will aid in lowering pH if the lime is not too high. I'd be very cautious about adding sulfur without knowing the lime content ahead of time, don't want to crash the pH or burn your subsequent crop.

If I remember correctly, added sulfate will not have an impact on soil pH, it can be present in the soil solution and be available for plant uptake.

My vegetables have done fine in the past except for eggplants which always seem to have a low yield. I read that they really respond to nitrogen fertilizer so I might side dress them with blood meal this year. The only fruits I have are some blackberries and so far they have done well. However, my neighbor has tried unsuccessfully to grow blueberries and he told me the soil is not acidic enough for blueberries.

"Lime" as measured by this soil test, refers to calcium and magnesium.

Ikea: sounds familiar. Eggplant definitely can respond to N levels. How have your plants grown in the past? Eggplant is a good example of a veggie that needs to grow a large "frame" to get good yields, small plant, small yields. In addition, if the plant doesn't get big enough soon enough in the season you can also get reduced total yield for the season. having enough N in the soil early in the season to get the plant growing fast, soon helps get it bigger, sooner so that it is capable of bearing larger fruit sooner and continue to do so longer. the opposite would be a N starved plant early to mid season, it wouldn't be capable of growing anything but small fruit and it would end up with a short production window.

Don't over do the N or you can actually delay flowering in eggplant also.