Is there anything better than live recordings?

@gosta Thanks for suggesting Live at Hull--I didn't even know about this recording!  I've been streaming it and enjoying it.  Without comparing them directly, from my memory the guitar and drums sound better than Leeds;  I think the vocals are mixed too low, but given the state of PAs back then (and how loud the Who played), this might be an accurate portrayal of what the audience heard, and I think it's a more complete concert.  I'm doubtful that either recording captures the low end that well; even though Entwhistle emphasized the treble at this time, I would think his bass would have had more low frequencies than these recordings reflect, a low end better captured on Tommy, for which he was similarly playing a Precision Bass, probably through a 4 x 12 cabinet.

only Studio is real!

live albums r ok, rather see live. 
 

gary,Moore, we want,Moore 

and thin lizzy, UFO, scorps are only a handful of,live albums I will waste my time with

A famous musician once compared studio recording to live performing as building a ship in a bottle vs being in a rowboat on the open sea. 

I'll listen to nearly any quality of live recording if the performance is compelling enough. The studio setting allows for a broader pallet of tools to be used in the creative process. Live performance is art in real time.

Think it that way, two different worlds, one is a love letter the other a hot date.

Melody Gardot, Live in Europe - great example of quality recording (especially vinyl) and artist variation on stage.