And processing (EQ) = phasing, and phasing = things sounding more different in different rooms and systems.
Mics inside a drum are more difficult to move. Moving mics to get a good sound without processing is a good thing.
Live mic techniques favor dynamic mics with cardioid patterns to reduce bleed and positional phase. Close mics reduce bleed but have the effect of increased lows and less openness because of the increased transient from proximity.
Studio mic techniques favor more sensitive mics that can pick up soft sounds as well as the dynamic ambiance and punch without sounding harsh. The rumble of the floor as well as the squeaks and rattles of the seat are more evident with large studio condenser mics, but you hear the breathy sounds of very lightly played toms much better.
A mix of both allows studio mics to capture most sounds and also allows the close mics to fill in the transient details, but using lots of mics at different distances makes for phase issues that need to be compensated for and it often loses some air even with good technique. This is because the tailings of a sound will not always be in phase even if the initial transient is.
Ideal live and studio drum sound is too subjective.
When I see a rock show in a giant space, I hear mostly stick slap and fundamental. I wish I heard more overtones.
If I were allowed to experiment in such a situation, I might try using larger drums tightened higher so the overtones would last longer within the transient tone before the residual sustain. Matching the size of the drum with the tension should balance the overtones with the stick smack and the transient round tone and lessen the residual sustain, making for a more articulate, round and much less insipidly clean presentation.
But then, I prefer a noisy drum.