Originally Posted by upstateguy
This might be a good time to discuss the "Live Event."
I've see operas and classical concerts at Lincoln Center, Rock events in stadiums and small venues around town. None of them could compare with a well done recording.
I recently saw Yo-Yo Ma at Lincoln center. I was sitting in the middle of the auditorium and I couldn't hear finger squeaks, page turning or any cues from the stage and his cello sounded, for lack of a better word, subdued. Stadium concerts are loud, the bass is usually muddy and the highs distant and muffled. I saw Woody Allen and Jonathan Schwartz perform at Micheal's Pub (which is a small venue). Voices were unnatural and Woody's clarinet wasn't clear and distinct during his solo. I remember seeing the Beach Boys at Jones Beach and wishing they could have EQ'd the concert as good as an album. I only wish I could go to a jazz club and hear something like the live club recordings on Ramsey Lewis' Greatest Hits CD.
There may be those who think a live event is reference point, but IMHO "the Live Event" just plain sucks compared to a well mic'd and mastered recording. This might be why our non-audiophile friends are so "wowed" when they listen to a good system.
gotta support your views on this one. amplified 'live' events are normally a sad experience for those who already have a decent system and are used to listening to well reproduced music.
I attend classical concerts in the local National Theatre and have the privilege of sitting of what one could call the 'sweetspot'. It's a great atmosphere and is always nice to see the musicians playing, but from the audio point of view there's no way I would change it for listening to my system. The acoustics aren't great and it's a little too blurred for my taste.
So, yes, it's great to go out, dress up a little, meet other people, go out with the wife afterwards for a pleasant dinner, but the sonic experience is not up to par... and I must say that I don't have an expensive system...