This thread starts with a question in the OP regarding performers whose approach to traditional music is rooted in formal music training, especially lessons in classical music.   Then the thread branches, some of the digressions are more interesting than others.

Recently on a thread about singing, a Mudcat member unburdened themselves (gender-neutral) about their high expectations for the interpretation of the Elizabethan lute song, and an experience decades ago that was a deeply emotional disappointment. That long-ago attendance at a performance of musicians with classical-music background was well described and reminded me of how common that sort of thing was then. You can still find that turning up in places today. There is more variety now, though.

I mean to say, there is actually greater variety in performance practices amongst classically-trained musicians. One reason is that since the end of the Second World War, generations of scholars have probed long and deep into researching performance practices in centuries gone by. There are recordings of European music from the Baroque period, for example, that are setting the trend today in listening and studying, and they have a sound that would have met with a lot of objection exactly one hundred years ago when Baroque music was being played according to Romantic or post-Classical performance practices. An obvious example is string orchestras playing Baroque music, or even earlier music, with as little vibrato as possible. If you're as old as I am, you can recall when nobody classical dared make a sound quite like that.

There have been similar changes, parallel changes, in singing, so you now have classically trained singers who do not sing all repertoire with a full-blown Romantic vibrato, as was so often done early in the 20th century.

That's all I feel like posting just now, but there is a lot of room for friendly positive discussion here.