I agree that many audiophiles have completely lost touch with what live music sounds like, in any type of venue, and that it is easier for salesmen to sell the details.
However, Nedslions is I think confusing some of his terms. Granted that audiophiles define terms differently, here are a couple of examples.
When "air" is spoken of, this is usually taken to mean the sense of space that exists in a concert hall or club that surrounds the instruments and audience. This sense of fullness you speak of, Nedslions, and the sense of the sound filling a real space, is what most are talking about when they refer to air, and a system you describe that is "too focused" would be lacking in air. So "air" certainly exists in any live performance venue (though not in most recording studios nowadays, which deliberately eliminate as much air as they can, and are usually "too focused"). Think of air as a component of the soundstage. It is also closely related to what many call "imaging," which is the ability to determine exactly where each individual instrument is located within that space.
A big part of the reason that audiophiles have lost the things you speak of is that most everything is digitally recorded in a dead studio space - this "detailed" sound is much easier to recreate than say a live symphony orchestra in a great concert hall. And even orchestras are not recorded nearly as well nowadays in their halls as they were when everything was still done in analog with tubes, as larryken implies. The truly ironic thing is that this so-called "detailed" sound is actually much less detailed, since so much ambient sound, which is so important to the recreation of live music, is taken away.