fleschler and terraplane8bob,
I love the sound of my violin under my ear (fortunately I play well) which I admit isn't applicable to most listeners. There is a vast difference between inches away and even only a few feet away. I used to go to major auctions of violins and try out many violins. I listened to good violinists playing a few feet away. I was shocked when I then tried the same violin under my ear--I could hear many tonal flaws in the violin which I had no idea from listening to them just a few feet away. So for ultimate listening pleasure, only the stage sound will do for me. Sitting at a music stand listening to my partner, his/her precision of execution is way beyond even sitting in the 1st row as a listener. These days I play in a small orchestra connected to a choral group. I hear several types of instruments and choral soloists at very close range. There is no elevated stage, so the line of sight is pure, and there is no problem as in a typical hall where the first few rows have obstructed line of sight. The tonal purity and detail are way beyond what a typical listener in a hall can get. What I value as exciting, crisp tonality, most listeners think it as too bright/thin. What I consider as dull and veiled, they think is just right. That is unfortunate, because they didn't grow up with intimate contact with real instruments. It is a major factor in why most audio manufacturers produce mediocre veiled speakers and euphonic electronics, all designed to produce a facsimile of this laid back sound that most listeners are familiar with.
In addition to the Turnabout LP's of Rachmaninoff Symphonic Dances, the 1950's Mercury Living Presence recordings are some of the few examples of close perspectives that deliver clarity and impact. In mono and stereo, the few main mikes were placed 10 feet over the conductor's head to deliver detail and enough but not too much spatiality which would muddy the sound. My recordings were inspired by the Turnabout and Mercury recordings. I used two Neumann KM184 cardioids near the conductor's head angled 90-110 degrees according to the width of the ensemble, with the diaphragms separated about 10 inches. I got pinpoint imaging and top clarity, better than Mercury because I didn't need additional spaced omnis. My recordings have less depth than commercial recordings. I have found that you cannot have high clarity and lots of depth at the same time. You have to make a choice. Close distance is associated with less depth. Far distance yields more depth but poor clarity. Medium distance gives some clarity and some depth, which is what almost all recording engineers strive for. But it is an unacceptable compromise to me. As an aside, go on vacation to European towns where there is lots of music on the street. Turn the corner, and allow yourself to be pleasantly surprised at new sounds like streetcar bells, random street musicians. You don't say, "oh what depth"--but you marvel at the clarity and sudden impact. I don't care WHERE the sound comes from, but I want to be stunned by the clarity.
In a room, 15-20 feet away is still close enough for good detail and impact. The 1st row in a hall might be 10-15 feet away. But the front of the balcony is at least 100 feet away, and the sound is markedly rolled off in HF. The midrange is veiled from all the multipath time delayed arrival from hall reflections. Terrible sound, like a speaker stuffed with drivers in every direction. A total mess.