I've often used the analogy of Saving Private Ryan and other similar movies.
In home theater there seems to be an ongoing desire to increase "realism" via increasing dynamic range, volume output.
But no sane person actually would WANT to have a sound system ACTUALLY produce the sound of being in a battle. The sound of being near an explosion going off. The sound of being just outside a fighter jet flying through the sky in a fight with another jet. It would go beyond unpleasant to actually destroying your hearing!
For the same reason, when I put on Van Halen, I don't want the actual impact of a Van Halen concert occurring in my house. I like my hearing, thank you very much!
Instead, what I am going for is a comfortable illusion.
Like watching a movie.
If you pay attention it's easy to see how watching a 2 dimensional image on a big screen with sound departs from reality. But if you don't demand exact reality, but rather seek *some characteristics* of plausibility allowing you to sink in to the illusion, that's all you need. You can simultaneously talk about what aspects of a movie are "more realistic than not" - acting, writing, sets, special effect etc - and thus have reality as a barometer, while not making the demand one sees a perfect reproduction of reality. We don't really *want* a perfect reproduction of reality.
The analogy to listening to music at home isn't perfect, but close enough. If it were possible, it may be desirable by some to have a piano, or cello, singing voice or whatever be perfectly reproduced in their home. But as a general overview, I think the movie analogy is close enough.
I actually don't want the sound of real drum kit in terms of volume and impact every time I put on a piece of music. That would be obnoxious, and even if I had a system that could produce that realistic impact, I'd rarely if ever avail myself of it. I'll already be compromising reality by using an "unrealistic" lower playback level. As is the case with almost everything else I listen to.
What I want, though, are some of the aspects of real sounds that I love: the timbrel qualities of a cello, voice, different parts of a drum kit etc. A similar dynamic "feel," even if in diminished form, of what a drummer and bass player are doing, the micro and macro dynamics that make an acoustic or classical guitar sound like it's being played by a person not a sampler. Where appropriate, a spatial representation that, even if it would fail direct comparison to the real thing, gives me an impression of individual players performing for me. A timbrel and spatial representation of an orchestra that can remind me of the real thing, that gives me some of what I love about orchestral instruments.
That actually extends to electronic music in my case. It's often taken as a shibboleth that unlike acoustic sounds, electronic music has no real-life reference. Often it does in certain ways. If you know the sound of certain guitar amps, you'll recognize that sound when you hear it reproduced.
In a broader sense, as a (sometimes) keyboard player, I've always been struck by the fact that playing almost any keyboard, either using headphones or a decent direct amp, sounds far richer, more nuanced than almost all that ends up in recordings. There are numerous reasons why a keyboard sound will undergo a diminution or shaving away of it's quality or texture once it lands on a finished recording. But it's still something I always notice. And even within that context, I will note that some speaker systems seem to deliver back more of the tonal richness and nuance of keyboard sounds than others.
