Live vs. recorded

Perhaps you go to a lot of live gigs? It is quite rare that a live album is well recorded, mixed and mastered. When they are, they are a real joy to listen to but I'll still prefer the studio versions when it comes to the listening experience. Having said that, I have around 500 live albums on CD, so I can't dislike them that much!

It depends on the band. Pink Floyd's live gigs, for example, sound pretty much note-for-note as the studio-record counterparts. As the studio versions are better recorded and mastered - it's no contest. The Dead and Allman Brothers obviously are a live (vs studio) act and it's no contest. Live's the only way to go.

Allman bros. live at the Beacon Theatre
the Band "last waltz"
these are not that bad

Aren't most 'live' recordings doctored in the studio after the fact? (well can't do it before eh?).
I have a 'skiffle sessions' cd with Van the Man and Lonnie Donegan that was recorded live, it sounds superb, I do not know if it the real thing warts and all or not.

I much prefer live recordings. The Blu-ray of Tom petty at Soundstage is awesome quality - both video and sound is 10 out of 10.