Musicians in your living room vs. you in the recording hall?

prof:
"We developed directionality in our hearing for a reason, and it really works! (At least mine does, at the concert hall)."


rodman99999: 
I guess, back when it was a survival skill: some wouldn’t have.



Agreed.  Many audiophiles seem simply unprepared to survive a sudden attack from a symphony orchestra!  ;-)

I like jazz by small groups.  If the recording is supposed to be live in a venue, then I want to feel that -- it's fun being transported to a different place.  If the recording is a studio performance, then I prefer to imagine them in my listening room.  I like the latter more.  I often find audience sounds distract from my enjoyment of the music, like someone tinkling a coffee cup at the next table in Jazz at the Pawnshop.  I would rather not hear it.

Depends on the music. Acoustic duos or trios (violin-piano sonata or tenor sax-drums-bass) sound great in small spaces. I think that’s why a lot of people, as they get deeper into audiophile life, get increasingly interested in small-ensemble acoustic music w/vocals: that stuff operates on a scale that can, convincingly be in your room, IRL. Rock and Roll sounds best to me 700 to 1500 seat theaters. I’ve been at a million practices in bedrooms and hosted living room punk shows, of course they don’t sound great. Huge concerts, especially outdoor shows turn a real live band’s sound into what sounds like a CD playing out of a giant Boom-Box...not a fan.

I like to come home after driving around the block pretending to be looking for a parking spot, then pretend to stand in line outside my house...I come in and sit in the corner of my listening room and imagine there’s a loud couple talking behind me, and then put on some music I don’t care about so I can imagine a crappy opening act followed by what I planned to listen to in the first place...then I leave. 

Can I disagree with many here. I am not sure any composer (or few) wrote their music with a view to judging it in a concert hall or "pop" venue. They wrote it as an artistic (hopefully) piece, that was constructed to satisfy their own "minds eye", which of course is quite unique. Don't tell me that Tchaikovsky wrote intricate scores including effects and sounds that 99.99% of the audience would never hear, because he actually thought they would hear them. It is part of his content that is best engaged with within the orchestra itself. I used to play in an orchestra (violin) and was happy to become immersed in what was going on, not sitting in a false position many yards away missing so much of what was going on. Hence I favour surround sound which goes some way to recreating the concept of what the writer wrote.
One of the best concerts I have been to was Dire Straits. Please nobody tell me this was due to  a live "soundstage" presenting the different sound aspects clearly - it was just raw and yet refined music just comin' at ya, which would be impossible to recreate  in the recording of that same event that I have heard. Was the lead guitar coming from stage left or right? Who knows or cares?
But in the privacy of my own home I Iike to  hear what was written in as much detail as possible and immerse myself in the same way I would imagine the writer did at the time of writing.
Another concert which stays in my memory was Roy Orbison, who basically stood on stage, didn't move much at all, but captivated the audience totally. That was basically a single noise source supplemented by subsidiary noises where no soundstage is necessary. 
Again though, at home I want my system to present him in front of me as though he were "live", and Leonard Cohen to growl at me in my living room from a few yard away, which it does. Backing vocals or whatever coming from a different place in the room is essential to add to the dimensions of the music.
So as usual- it all depends on what each person wants to extract from the music. I look for detail written in, others just want a bass beat presumably.