I'm of the opinion that it is impossible to make recorded music sound "live", for the simple reason that it isn't. I can't re-create a concert in my front room, even with music that was recorded live. There isn't enough space, there aren't several hundred(or thousand) people around me, and my speakers can't move enough air. I accepted that fact long ago. And studio recordings can never, EVER sound live. Many times, the band didn't even play a whole SONG together in the studio, much less an entire album. Most studio recordings are a combination of several 'takes', processed to sound a certain way. What you wind up with is an engineer's interpretation of what the producer tells him the band wants it to sound like. They can't know what gear anyone is going to use to play it back through, or how room acoustics will change the nature of the recording. Even if I had all the same equipment they used to master an individual record/cd, my front room has different acoustics than the studio. I probably don't even have the same brand of headphones the engineer used. To say my rig sounds live is just so much self-delusion.
I like music, but it doesn't just happen, it takes gear. The most that I can realistically hope for is that the gear I have chosen is capable of reproducing recorded sound of such fidelity as is pleasing to me. And if my listening session today was any indicator, I have achieved my goal. This doesn't mean I can't make it sound better, whether by tweaking things or adding new gear, just that I can't find enough to complain about to make me want to. Yet...
justjed2: Welcome to AK.
Because I don’t attend live rock concerts, I don’t know what a particular model of electric guitar, associated amp (equipped with particular tubes), and associated speakers sound like. (I’m certain there are people who can identify the sound of specific electronic instruments.) And I’m not sure if there is a “typical” performance venue for rock music in which the sound would be regarded as “natural”. So I don’t have the experience (or interest) to judge whether or not a live rock concert sounds “live” or “natural” when reproduced by a home hi-fi system.
OTOH, I do regularly attend live classical music concerts in a world class symphony hall, and live opera performances in a world class opera house, and therefore I know what natural orchestral instruments sound like when performing in their intended venue. I’m not sure how to interpret your statement that music “doesn't just happen, it takes gear”. By “gear” do you mean the natural (unamplified) human voice (such as in an opera house), and non-electronic musical instruments like a trumpet and viola? Or, by “gear” do you mean electronic equipment? Classical music in its purest form is performed with no electronic equipment. (The use of sound reinforcement or “acoustic enhancement” for classical music performed in a well designed symphony hall or opera house is very controversial – i.e., generally frowned on by purists. In the unusual case where classical music is performed in an outdoor venue, then a PA system must be used, and I wouldn’t characterize the resulting sound as “natural”.) While my memory of how a violin sounds may be imperfect, I don’t think that it’s “self-delusional” to conclude that a good recording of a violin played on a good-hi-fi system sounds “live”.
As I pointed out earlier, I’ve never heard a recording and hi-fi system that could perfectly reproduce the sound of a large scale orchestra in my living room. Therefore, my goal for my hi-fi systems is to deliver an accurate and enjoyable
facsimile of classical music in my listening room, based on what I recall hearing in the symphony hall or opera house. (This goal is easier to achieve for a string quartet than a large scale orchestra.)
Switching gears to studio recordings of pop music, your comments match what I have read elsewhere – i.e., that often pop music is created by producers and engineers by blending together recordings of musicians in different cities at different times. And in some cases sounds are created by electronic synthesizers. And sometimes electronic tools are used to change the sound (sometimes deliberately introducing distortion). And then often the dynamic range is compressed so that the recording can be heard on a car radio or cheap earbuds. With many pop studio recordings there never was a “live performance”, so I think there is less relevance for the concept of a recording sounding “live” or “high fidelity”.
I respect the fact that art is deeply personal and different people like different types of music. With that said, for me the concept of high-fidelity reproduction is more relevant for classical music because I know (based on my imperfect memory) what a live performance sounds like (at least in my local venues).
Our standards for what represents “high fidelity” sound reproduction evolve. (I own several 1930s era TOTL radios that say “High Fidelity” right on the front.) However the benchmark for reproduction of classical music doesn’t change, because we have a pretty good idea of what natural orchestral instruments sound like – bearing in mind that there may be differences in the live sound based on the acoustics of the concert hall where the music was performed.
That’s my 2 cents.
Definitely the music..
Of course one watch by night, one watch by day.. If you get confused listen to the music play! 
