I have often found the "live" sound of acoustic instruments to be
dire!
I went to an ostensibly "Methodist" private school; I say "ostensibly" for there were pupils of all religious stripes... Hindus, Jehovah's Witnesses... as well as atheists.
Anyway, we were required to attend "Chapel" and sing Hymns, accompanied by pipe organ, at the start of each school day. At some point in the 1990's, it was decided to replace the Chapel's organ and for this a high-end digital organ system costing £10,000's was chosen. It was said that it contained two "computers" to calculate its output in real-time--samples were not used. A number of loudspeakers were installed where the pipes had been located, and the lowest octaves were provided by a massive purpose-built horn, running across the entire width of the building, driven by 2x15" drivers!
Suffice it to say, the new replacement "digital organ" system ate the old acoustic pipe organ installation for dinner--a massive improvement in clarity, consistency and the lowest pedals could "rock the house."
Granted, the above is not a high quality recording; but even if it were, there would seem to be no avoiding that the instrument sounds utterly screechy, resonant and "peaky."
On the other hand, yesterday I passed by an excellent trumpet player busking on the London Underground (aka "Tube")--yes, I paid him some cash. It sounded very good to me--though, I can't help but wonder--not knowing anything about the state-of-the-art in brass instrument design--whether application of "waveguide" theory from the loudspeaker world couldn't be used to improve the instrument's sound quality?
The real question, I think, is whether or not one has ever heard a "loudspeaker" system that doesn't give any hint that the transduction of electrical signals into the acoustic domain is happening...
How about electric guitar players--including those who are first-rate musicians--who have gone to considerable efforts to "acquire" the "tone" they seek?
As an aside, I would kindly request
not to use the term "Obsessive-Compulsive
Disorder."
Obsessive-compulsive behaviour or traits (which at their most severe are considered to be a "personality disorder") aren't the same as OCD (an "anxiety disorder")--severe manifestations of which can be utterly deliberating, resulting in the affected person being housebound with a constant litany of obsessive thoughts, manifesting in compulsions and ritualised behaviour.
I realise that anyone reading this might be nodding their head in recognition of such a situation in relation to "audio enthusiasm," and such activities as cable upgrades which yield imagined but non-existent changes to sound are, in a way, conspicuously analogous to endless cleaning activities to remove imagined but non-existent threats to health from "contaminants."
However, though it is currently (annoyingly?) fashionable to talk about "destigmatising" disorders and "improving the understanding" of mental health, all the same, IMO those suffering from serious OCD deserve for the term not to be banned around unthinkingly.
Otherwise... there is much more that could be said on the obsessive-compulsive, religious, perfectionistic and possibly above all the "disgust" aspects here... (a discussion of which may or may not follow in another post...)