Live vs. recorded

The thing I can't stand with live recordings is the clapping between tracks. It always seeems to be much louder than the track itself. Get rid of it!!! Mind you, I also don't like the sound of tea being poured. Okay, I'm a weirdo!

Weirdo! How can you not like the sound of tea?

Shadorne, Steely Dan is a perfect example of a band trying as hard as possible to play and record straight " on the beat". Jazz ( real jazz anyway) and blues players play a little off or behind the beat which creates a swing or a sense of soul in the music. Some of the current New Orleans folks play "in the cracks" between straight and swing. Playing live lets musicians stray a little bit without some idiot in the control room " correcting" the variances. Also, it may be less likely they will pitch correct the vocals which lets you hear all the nooks and crannies of a real human voice in a real world setting. JMHO - Jim

Many studio recordings are over polished. All the humanity has been scrubbed off them.

Some of them never had any life, they were recorded in different studios at different times by studio musicians who have never met just doing a job.

Some are computer generated.

I have to go on a case by case basis for both live and studio recordings.

I have to ask Tomcy6, what sort of music do you listen to because that's not my experience. Is it with Jazz perhaps?