For some reason, improvisational jazz keeps popping into my mind as I read this thread.
I'm thinking about Charlie Parker recording, say, "Night in Tunisia". Original composition, original work of art. Later, when the song is performed live though, it is approached from a different angle each night. Such is the nature of improvisational jazz. A live rendition might actually become more sought after and more valuable and yet, bear little resemblance to the original.
It seems to me that these are all original pieces of art, each different and maybe none of them the way the artist originally intended. Maybe the original recording just captured a work in progress and each time it is performed gets closer to what Charlie initially was trying to capture. Maybe none of them are perfect, each filled with different imperfections, different tones and colors, different emotions. And even though a transcription of the original recording might be available, it doesn't make that original any more unique or valuable than any of the subsequent performances because the notes on the page aren't the art, it's what comes from Charlie's sax each night, from his soul.
(I don't know. Perhaps I'm just rambling off on a weird tangent but the other posts led me in that direction.
)