One truly missing ingredient in the process is the recording/transfer equipment. Mic's are so variable, as to be frustrating, with some real improvements recently...then there's the question of 'how to position and place' performers.
In an ideal world, they'd simply set up as if performing...but how often do we see this?
In another post a couple of years ago, I sent kuddos to Michael Buble for having the guts as a pop singer, to announce that he recorded the group he sang in front of, in a natural setting--without the extraordinary, measures normally taken--with him in LA, them in New York, etc.
Of late, we're seeing a trend toward this--in the Movie, Love Actually, the little girl singing, 'All I Want For Christmas', in the movie's climax, was singing 'live'. The director even commented that they went to great pains to let her breathing (which was a bit loud), be captured, so people would KNOW that it was her singing.
Then,in Across the Universe, the director, in order to gain the sense of reality, had the performers work with a 'live mic', and pretty much did the same thing.
IMHO, the true missing ingredients are, flat Frequency Response, (the greatest predictor of TONAL ACCURACY something the brain REALLY catches quickly), and possibly the key, DYNAMIC CONTRAST. The brain knows, what the dynamics SHOULD BE...and if we don't hear that, we simply know immediately that its a recording and not real. When we can do this consistantly, we'll be much closer.
IMHO.
Larry
