You are there vs. They are there

One can have both a more forward sound stage and/or projection of performers into one's listening space yet also maintain depth so there is a sense of the recording venue. I have horns  SET amps and DHT preamps so this inherently more forward ss or sense of performers in room, but at the same time using strategically placed room treatments I've been able to create a center image that also extends behind plane of speakers. I also physically time aligned my mid and tweeter drivers which has greatly enhanced depth of sound stage. I've also experienced systems with less forward sound stage that have been very engaging, don't believe there's any right or wrong, all about preference. 

I think a balanced system does both depending on the recording. The spatial information is embedded in the recording. Some mixes feature vocals or other instruments "in your face" with the rest behind and maybe lead instruments projecting forward. Others create a more homogeneous ambient sound field where everything is in the same space behind the speakers. The system/room should reveal that spatial information to reflect the intent of the artist/producer. 

An example for me is Bonnie Raitt, "Blame it on Me". The vocals sit perfectly in front with the rhythm section projecting behind while the organ projects forward as if you're actually playing it. 

A song like "Thing Called Love" is more homogeneous like you were watching the band on stage. The stage begins at the speakers and spreads behind. 

The room will be a big factor in which one you get 

If anything spatially changes a recording in any way…. the reproduction is flawed.
 

Is it not the goal of a very accurate hi-fi system to project just what is there and add noting more?. Surely any alteration is like colouring or sound processing similar to an AV amp, so not true to the original. 
 

We all know that “sound fields” in home theatre are not real but generated, so it must be best practice to use equipment that play nothing more than intended? Using equipment that adds and subtracts to the ambiance of the sound stage is questionably not true hi-fi.

In some review I remember reading "a good system will being the performers to your room, a great system will take you there."

There is a bit of truth to this, taking you there does require an excellent system, but it also requires that the recording engineer was sensitive to the concept.  

For recordings made by laying down tracks you cannot go there since there is no real "there", since guitars and synthesizers signals are recorded, the first time that there is a sound in a space is when that signal is reproduced by your speakers.

Being able to be taken to the recording space depends on the acoustics of that space; I often listen to archaic liturgical, vocal music, frequently recorded in reverberant churches or cathedrals and there is a clear sense of being in that space.  Similarly chamber music is often recorded in a recital hall and the acoustics of the venue can be heard.

Occasionally naturally recorded orchestral music can do the trick, the old Living Stereo "shaded dogs" in particular, which were often recorded with just two or three microphones, well in front of the orchestra, also give that sense of space.  Lewis Layton and Jack Pfeiffer are revered. More recent recordings, especially DG, have no sense of ambience.

My listening is done in my untreated living room, but I am fortunate in that the speakers are about 10 feet from the back wall which consists of curtained windows and logs; other than the ceiling there is no sheetrock - and the ceiling is broken up by transverse 10" square rough sawn beams.  The room has couches and the floor between the speakers and my listening couch is carpeted so there are no hard flat surfaces to bounce sound at you.

The soundstage, on a good recording, will typically start a couple of feet behind the speakers and extend 8 feet back from there, there is never a sense of the performer(s) being in front of the plane of the speakers.  Width similarly depends on the recording, it might be a foot or two narrower or wider than the speakers.

In summary, my view is that the recording process and playback system usually should aim to take the listener to the recording venue.  Clearly,  issues of disparate sizes of the  recording and listening sites (if nothing else!) make this non-trivial.  If an engineer intends to bring a particular performance (e.g. a soloist) to your space, and achieves that, then that is also a success.