Here's one thing to say for asking about lens selection: You'll always find someone here willing to spend your money for you!
The 55-200mm VR (original) can be had at a tremendous price. It's a cheap way to get into telephoto... among the cheapest. It's a decent optic by most accounts.
VR... no matter what you do, get a lens with VR. It helps keep the focus point on the part of the subject you want in focus. Just remember that soft images will result not only from camera shake but also from subject movement so you'll have to keep shutter speeds up (and ISO up in darker venues) regardless of VR.
As for noise @ high ISO... how did we cope 5 years ago or 25 years ago (pre-digital)? You can do lots with a D3200 & a 55-200mm VR original. If you have a bigger budget and can still afford Kraft Dinner... then go crazy! <I jest>
Having shot concerts, I've used everything from wide angle to super tele, film and digital. 200mm doesn't get one far depending on the venue/ arrangements (access)... but you mention smaller venues. That said, an "all-in-one" wonder-zoom will give you greater flexibility without the need to change lenses. Nikon's 18-140mm VR may not be quite as long but a lens like that will prevent the need to change lenses (assuming you have just one body). It also operates at just f/4.8 @ 50mm so its aperture is only a fraction off the 55-200mm @ the same (similar) focal length. (I have the Sigma 18-250mm OS Macro; I'd even suggest considering a lens like that (f/5.6@ up to 155mm, f/6@185-210 and f/6.3@ only 210mm+).
Regardless, in my experience, doubling focal length IS meaningfully different but the difference between 140 and 200mm... not so much. Between 140 & 250mm @ f/6.3 in variable lighting conditions... mmm, maybe, maybe not. I have no shortage of other lenses (primes, zooms/ Nikon, 3rd party) but, the more I think about it, the more I might recommend the Sigma. YMMV Depends a bit on price (it was around $300 USD recently, maybe less).
Anyway, with the an all-in-one-wonder (18-140 or 18-250, etc.), you could sell the 18-55 and recoup some of the cost of the new lens. A refurb from a reputable seller may be worth considering. (18-140 or 55-200, I would consiider buying a refurb Nikon: although I rarely if ever see them, I would be reluctant to buy a refurb Sigma. My double standard for whatever reason: Maybe I would if I trust the seller)
If you get an all-in-one type lens, it gets you some telephoto reach without breaking the bank. You can then save up for something with MUCH more reach (e.g. Tamron 150-600). They you'd have 18-600mm covered in 2 lenses... at a price-point that was not available to shooters before last year. (you'd just want a 2nd body then to avoid lens changes altogether) All of that said, you could keep the 18-55 and go for the Tamron from the get-go which is f/5 @ 150mm through 200mm. (I'd still like something like the 18-140 to cover the 55-150mm gap, however)
OTOH, if you insist on keeping the 18-55, elsewhere the Tamron 70-300mm VC USD was mentioned: that's a nice alternative to the 55-200mm VR but it's a fair bit more money. I'd seriously consider the 2 lens solution based on the 18-140 but only you know how much that leaves for Kraft Dinner!
f/2.8, f/2, f/1.8, etc.... For variable lighting, a dream team could be the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 and a Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 OS (discontinued IIRC) or 70-200mm f/2.8 VR/ OS/ VRII/ VC blah blah blah). That would still be lacking for recreational telephoto/ bird photography by most people's accounts (mine included), however, but great for low light.
Going back to your question about the 55-200 VR I, it's a relatively inexpensive solution and not a bad one. By my reckoning, 200 vs 300 VR models... I'd opt for the 300mm only if the price was compelling but I think the 200 VR can be had ridiculously inexpensively if you shop and, for birds, 200 or 300 is still kind of short unless you're REALLY lucky or blessed (with either locations or talent) in which case you may continue to lust for more reach.
If it were me, in order to do it just once, I'd get the Nikon 18-140mm VR, sell the 18-55, and, as you can, buy a Tamron 150-600 (and eventually a 2nd body). Lower light lenses like 85mm f/1.8 or 1.4 -- and primes in general -- are great but you can't always zoom with your feet. If the 150-600 is never going to be a consideration, then I might opt for the Sigma 18-250mm OS Macro Sigma and sell the 18-55 or, if keeping the 18-55, add either the 55-200mm VR I or the Tamron 70-300mm VC USD (if the price wasn't too much different), opting for the 55-300mm VR only if the price was really compelling.
Sorry for the stream of consciousness-type reply. No matter which way you go, there are 500 other ways you could have gone and each way has its pros and cons. Regardless, there you have it. I can spend your money for you, too! lol
This is a place for discussion. Let us know what you think.
