This reminds me of the long-time debate in Early Music, about 'authentic' versus 'historically informed' performance.

Part of the argument goes, more or less, that although you can be as 'authentic' as possible using source material of the time, this doesn't necessarily give anthing like the same experience to modern listeners as to those who heard the music when first composed. How the average set of ears hears something depends on their owner's background/expectations/assumptions(/etc) - which has changed over time. Indeed, in some cases, 'authentic' performance can sound downright silly to modern ears: e.g. the staggeringly OTT florid decorations of 'genuine' Rococo performance would sound tasteless and pointless to most of us. Even the most dyed-in-the-wool Early Music practitioner draws a line well before reaching that sort of 'authentic'.

At its best, the 'historically informed' route is to study historic practice not in to follow it slavishly, but to communicate some flavour of the original music to a modern audience. A tricky balance to find, at times.