I confess some bafflement when I encounter the common refrain "live music doesn't soundstage/image." Because for me it sure as hell does.
I've been interested in the comparison of live vs reproduced sound for as long as I can remember and it's become a decades long habit for me to close my eyes at some point whenever I'm listening to live music sources. I take an inventory "how is this similar to and how does this depart from the experience of listening to similar instruments through a sound system?"
Putting aside other concerns, I usually find that live sound sources "image." That is, whether I'm in the presence of a friend or 3 playing instruments, or if I encounter street musicians, or if I'm among a live jazz band, or if I'm at the symphony I ALWAYS perceive imaging/soundstaging/directionality to the sound sources. I mean...we have two hears for a reason and they do quite a good job for picking up the physical orientation of sound sources.
Admittedly when it comes to classical music the degree to which image specificity occurs is going to be influenced by things like the seating position relative to the musicians. I tend to prefer closer seating as I enjoy the more vivid individual instrumental timbres, and the scale of the spread of the orchestra up closer. When I close my eyes I can very easily pinpoint where each section or individual soloist is in the "soundstage."
(And the fact I enjoy closer seating is no doubt why I have less problem than some in regards to close mic'd or spotilt micing in orchestral music).
But I have also many times had seats in other parts of concert halls - mid hall, back hall, balcony. And though, yes, imaging becomes less precise it does not to my ears become some indistinct glom of sound. I can still locate the sections and soloists.
I also agree with those who mention that, to a degree, precise imaging can make up for the lack of visual cues that we get when watching live music, where the sound is more effortlessly mapped to where our visual system has placed the players. In that way, audio imaging is a bit of a fudge toward a sense of realism by getting more of the "gestalt" of the live experience, where we can easily locate the source of sounds. (Though, again, I still find unamplified music to image in of itself).
I personally find imaging adds to the experience of an audio system. It's one of the reasons I want to sit down in the sweet spot in the first place, rather than listen off axis or as background music.
In fact I find imaging for electronic music (which I love) to be just as or more compelling. There's some really fun, crazy stuff that goes on with electronic music in terms of setting up atmospheres, and playing with space and imagines. My current speakers (Thiels) have a particular level of precision and density with imaging and when I play far out electronic music the weird synthetic drums or bleeps, blips or various synth generated sounds seem to magically "appear" in formations around the speakers. This palpable/visual sensation sometimes gives me the feeling like little alien visitors have just descended in to my room to perform for me. I love it.
That said, as I view a sound system as primarily a music-delivery system, soundstaging/imaging in of itself isn't enough to make me enjoy the sound. I really need to hear a beguiling tonal quality with presence and dynamics that allow the music to move me. But so long as those are fulfilled, I really do like great imaging/soundstaging as part of the bargain.
Like many of us with a good sound system, I've played demos for various friends and acquaintances (who were interested). They often look afterward like they've seen a ghost. Recently when I played a portion of Bernard Herrmann's Taxi Driver for a musician friend and he reacted to the apparent "realism" of the listening experience. "It was like I was in the studio watching the musicians perform!" I think the soundstaging and imaging plays an important role in leaving that impression.
