When I listen to my system.......

As I listen to SRV, just as an example, there are three musicians working together to create a "performance". How is it that anyone can put tone, sound staging, or anything else with the "sound" before the performance.

Because the engineer worked so hard that allows you to really believe that there are "three" musicians working together "in space" rather than just listening to two speakers placed in a room.

There is much information on our recordings,

And without the right gear set up the right way, you will never realize it all.   And even then, that last bit is the real challenge.

and generally, many of these recordings are just so so with the fidelity.

Unfortunate though it may be.  But I still listen to them.

In fact, why do many listeners only listen to top notch recordings of higher fidelity, of the "sound", rather than appreciate those qualities I look and listen for. Is it because I was a singer / vocalist in my youth? Is it because I was around musicians who shared the joy of "music"? Is it because at a very early age, I was introduced to big band music and eclectic performances by so many, via my dad (he would have been 100 today; happy birthday dad).

Hardly.  I played clarinet in the school band from 5th through 12th grade, backed up the vocal group on organ, and was a piano major my first year of college.  And I played keyboards in rock bands in the lates 60s and early 70s.

From an early age mom listened to "show tunes" and we had a big Magnavox console.

Yes, I consider myself an audiophile, because I spend money on gear and am careful with my dedicated room....my system allows me to hear more of the performance.

As do I, but I don't spend tons of money on gear.  I spend my time making and refining my own speakers and crossovers as well as accessories to make other's products work better.  My speakers were designed and voiced in the room in which they are used, to my taste. I know of no manufacturer that specifically does this.

I went to the Home Entertainment Show and listened to systems of well over 6 figures, and none could image like mine nor did they present as much "realism" of a rock band playing there in the room.

But, it is the "music", the "performance", that matters most to me.

I on the other hand will listen to music where I don't really care for the genre/artist, but listen to how the engineer put it all together.

I especially love finding "Easter Eggs."

Agreed "music" does not have to be live to be music.

But even a live performance performed though any sort of public address system is subject to many of the same "flaws" as a recorded track.

What of the music that is performed simultaneously with background recordings?  Is that "live?"

What of a performer who "loops" a sound byte?

How about the guitar player using an Echoplex where the echo is created through the use of a tape loop?

Claiming a recording IS real music is analogous to saying a photograph of my dog IS my dog (without the fur :-). Really not the same thing at all.

No not at all. It comes down to your definition of music and I choose to agree with Wikipedia’s. I don’t know who’s definition you are using.

From Wikipedia:

Music is the arrangement of sound to create some combination of form, harmony, melody, rhythm, or otherwise expressive content.

Music may be performed using a wide variety of musical instruments, including the human voice. It can also be composed, sequenced, or otherwise produced to be indirectly played mechanically or electronically, such as via a music box, barrel organ, or digital audio workstation software on a computer.

There is nothing to say that the sequence of sounds must be produced "on the fly" and this last paragraph would include recorded music which is indirectly played.