Which is better, live performance or on your system?


Ever go to a live performance and find that when you went home and played a recording of the music played that it sounded better in your system than at the concert?
lakefrontroad
Soundwise, yes more so in an outdoor concert and when multi bands use the stage, hi-fi may be better.
However, within a good concert hall setting and when instruments tend to be more acoustical, live performance far surpass hi-fi. Vocals, especially when good microphone techniques are deployed are the best live.
Small club settings in my opinion often yields the best both sound and visual.
The additional stimulant of live performances is of course the excitement of witnessing the whole visual experience and rapport with the performers.
Good live performances are always my benchmark for hi-fi.
bill: for me, this is a quite rare experience. while i have a 2-channel system many might think (as do i) is quite good, it usually bests live performances only when the acoustics of the live venue are poor, the amplification/speakers are lousy or i can get seats only in the nosebleed section. i've attended too few classical concerts of late but had the good fortune to accompany my older son to many great performances in the last year at several venues. seen dylan, phil lesh and paul simon twice each, csn&y, billy joel and elton john, hugh mesakela, cowboy junkies, john hartford, john prine, neil young & crazy horse, rat dog, string cheese incident, the eagles, david byrne, among others. the only times i've felt compelled to turn on my system when i've gotten home is when i've been to a blues/pop concert at the gothic or the paramount. john hammond was definitely better on cd than he was live. so, too, was odetta, the persuasions and iris dement. in each instance the acoustics were poor where i was sitting/standing. otherwise, i just can't match in my home the ambiance, the gut thumpin' bass, the banks of horns, the between-song patter or the sheer joy of just bein' there. -kelly
When sound is concerned it's my system,(except for classical) but with the tricky point of emotion, live performance wins hands down. It's simply to hard to get what most of us consider good sound out of a live performance. On the other side of that I have trouble getting the true emotional impact so easily found at a live performance out of my stereo.
Does that mean I need To upgrade my system??? Of course it does any excuse helps. But that emotion is the main reason I'll always turn off my better sounding stereo to go to a concert.
Hi all,

What prompted me to start this thread is that I was in San Miguel de Allende (Mexico) for a week and had the opportunity to listen to the Toyko String Quartet perform for two nights. One program was great and the other interesting. What became apparent immediately was that the highs were getting lost in the front third of the ceiling and that the bass was just missing. So, what came through in the 19th row(the rear) was low mids and mids. It was freeky. I enjoyed being out and at a performance and was grateful for the chance to hear anything played well.

And, I really was curious how it would sound at home. I happen to have all the Beethoven and Haydn String Quartets and the Brahms String Sextet in G major, so I played them. My wife, told me that it was much better sound; clearer, more detailed and fuller here at home!

Frankly, the problem is the halls accoustics. But, wow! It's clear that well recorded, excellently played, detailed music here at the fort is my benchmark for live concerts in the future.

Bill E.
Reproduced music will never sound like life music. Reproduced music simply cannot produce the SCALE of life music.