does a stereo system sound like live music ?

Mrtennis, that would depend on your definition of 'better'. Having been into music for the last 45 years, I am less and less sure of what that means. One thing I know is that , in order for me to have the same acoustic experience listening To Lara St. John playing Bach on the Violin whilst being at a live concert, I would need not only to be on stage, but close enough for the proximity to become socially unacceptable in most musical circles, with the added danger of repeatedly experiencing the thrust of her bow in my eyeballs, or her elbow in my solar plexus, depending on orientation.
On the other hand, as pointed out by others, the live experience has an sensorial, social and emotional complexity and personal implications that reach far beyond the simple sonics of the source, and which are not, by definition, reproduceable electronically.
Thus, when I think of the live performance of Carlo Chiarappa Playing Bach's Ciaccona in D minor on his Stradivari under the 16th century portico of Groznjan in Croatia, I know my experience can't be ever repeated nor reproduced. Yet, was it simply the sound of his fiddle, reverberating from the vaulted ceiling which made it unique, or was this combined with Chiarappa's stage presence in checkered shirt-sleeves standing on the worned flagstones, the arched portico itself in the ancient little village square, the youth from both sides of the Iron Curtain congregated there to do and breathe music for three unforgettable weeks, the summer night with its own sounds. Or is it perhaps the longing and the 30-year-old memory of it all?

At the risk of being viewed as a pariah, multichannel does a much better job of replicating a live performance than two channel.

As mentioned above, soundstaging is a figment of imagination that lives only in a stereo system, not the real world, but how many people here obscess about their sounstage, imaging etc. which have nothing to do with reproduction of a concert.

Note, I'm talking about a well-recorded multichannel recording of a live performance, not DSOTM where stuff comes from everywhere.

Try a good multichannel system with a good multichannel recording if you dare. Years ago going to stereo from mono was heresy - notwithstanding the objections here, some time from now, two channel will be a quaint memory, with the same chuckles about the objections.

hi 9rw. it is the opinion of some that sound quality enhances the enjoyment of music. i say that the enjoyment of music has nothing to do with sound quality. it depends upon innner (psychological) qualities which make one receptive to appreciating and enjoying music.

there are plenty of studies, including two from stereophile several yeras ago, to support my position.

i respect your opinion that for you sound is important. but that's your opinion. it has nothing to do with making sense or nonsense.

i think the theme of my posts has been that all experiences are purely subjective, have nothing to do with knowledge and the concept of quality is not absolute.

I remember one reviewer wrote, what digital sources like CD have done to music is borderline criminal and that these sources have failed to reproduce the original recording faithfully, rearranging the music in an artificial way. Furthermore any gear in question and its reproduction of music should be evaluated based on pure musical enjoyment & not the adjectives that most audiophiles use to descibe a satisfactory system. I also believe he prefered mono as opposed to stereo reproduction, no doubt old school & purely analog.

Anyhow, this thread brought to mind an old ad: "Is it Memorex or is it live".

9rw... I wasn't referring to the whole post of Mrtennis when I said that I agreed with his comments. It was just the one sentence which I quoted which really hit me and which I commented on. I haven't really even thought about the totality of his post. It was 4:00 A.M. when I wrote what I did, and my ability and concentration to reflect on the broader content of the post just wasn't there.