Do we really know what "Live" music sounds like?

These posts reveal the bias in Audiogon towards classical and acoustic music.  Now, that is not to attack the style of music nor those who love it, but it does reveal the lack of a baseline that serves as a foundation for much of the discussions on Audiogon.

Person A:  "What do you want to eat?"  

Person B:  "Apple Pie."

Person A:  "For dinner?"

Person B:  "Oh, I thought we were talking about dessert."

The point being, there is a huge difference between classical and other forms of acoustic music that is intended primarily to be unamplified and rock/pop/most jazz etc. where the mics, amps, and speakers are PART of of the instrument.

I'm sure different systems do better with one or the other. 

Point being, I don't think there is a singular sound of live music.  It depends on genre.  We each tune our systems to sound best with our chose genres.  At least that seems logical to me. 

The majority of my attendance at concerts is to classical or folk, all acoustic.

The question as to the younger set is well framed though - I wonder how many attend non electrified concerts.

It would be almost unheard of to personally experience 100% non-amplified live music unless one were present at a jazz trio, chamber music quartet rehearsal or a parlour piano recital. Therefore, OMG electronically induced coloration and distortion are in evidence! 

This post will spare me to wrote one.... Anyway it is better said than mine would and he says it all... Thanks to the poster...

A couple problems with this article. 

Unamplified live music is affected by the room. This has just as much or more bearing on the sound then an "amplifier."

Secondly, it depends on your position relative to the instrument or vocalist. As a guitarist, I sit behind the instrument. An acoustic guitar is going to sound different to me than it does to someone who sits in front of me. And if you're sitting off to the side it'll sound different. And if you're sitting in front of an amplified guitar cabinet it's going to sound a lot more like the recording than if you're sitting 50' away because guitar cabinets are close-mic'd. And if I move my head 1" it'll sound different. And on and on.

And do we really want it to sound real? Almost all recordings are post-processed. Why? Because live performances have real or perceived flaws or deficiencies. Or some instruments are too dominant in the live setting and must be dialed back. Or the room doesn't have enough reverb, or too much reverb. Or slap echo. And so on.

And I'll end with our limited acoustic memory. How do we remember what "real" is? A good example is an Anderton's YouTube video called Head or Tread. Rob Chapman, a very experienced musician and guitar company owner, did a blind test of various tube amps, solid-state amps, profilers (computers that mimic an amp) and pedals to determine which was an amp head and which was a pedal. He owns some of these amps and the profiler. He got almost all of them wrong, including the amp he uses at most of his guitar clinics. And again, according to studies, musicians are supposed to have better acoustic memories than the average person.

 Re

I'll find out tonight listening to Chris Potter at the Jazz cafe in Philly